4.6 Article

Vesicular stomatitis forecasting based on Google Trends

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192141

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFD0501101]
  2. High Performance Computing Center Program of Shanghai University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Vesicular stomatitis (VS) is an important viral disease of livestock. The main feature of VS is irregular blisters that occur on the lips, tongue, oral mucosa, hoof crown and nipple. Humans can also be infected with vesicular stomatitis and develop meningitis. This study analyses 2014 American VS outbreaks in order to accurately predict vesicular stomatitis outbreak trends. Methods American VS outbreaks data were collected from OIE. The data for VS keywords were obtained by inputting 24 disease-related keywords into Google Trends. After calculating the Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients, it was found that there was a relationship between outbreaks and keywords derived from Google Trends. Finally, the predicted model was constructed based on qualitative classification and quantitative regression. Results For the regression model, the Pearson correlation coefficients between the predicted outbreaks and actual outbreaks are 0.953 and 0.948, respectively. For the qualitative classification model, we constructed five classification predictive models and chose the best classification predictive model as the result. The results showed, SN (sensitivity), SP (specificity) and ACC (prediction accuracy) values of the best classification predictive model are 78.52%, 72.5% and 77.14%, respectively. Conclusion This study applied Google search data to construct a qualitative classification model and a quantitative regression model. The results show that the method is effective and that these two models obtain more accurate forecast.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available