Diagnoses DiseaseGHSTNCT03073746
Google Health Search Trial
A study testing Health Search and Standard Search in people with Diagnoses Disease, run by Johns Hopkins University at 2 sites in United States.
Trial summary
There are large differences in knowledge between patients and healthcare providers (i.e. physicians, physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and there is a strong interest on the part of both industry and academia to reduce the gap in knowledge between patients and healthcare providers. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Diagnoses Disease
- What is being tested?
- Health Search and Standard Search
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 300 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 7 Sep 2016to 15 Aug 2017
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adult patient >= 18 years of age
- Presenting for care at urgent care or emergency department
- In search of a diagnosis to explain a new symptom or group of symptoms
Who cannot join
- Not literate, defined as lacking the ability to read and write (self-reported)
- Non-English Speaking (self-reported)
- Not mentally competent to provide consent due to inability to understand relevant information due to deficit in intelligence (e.g. mental retardation), memory (e.g., advanced dementia or significant delirium), or attention span (e.g., Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) or mania) based on prior documentation in medical records or as judged by the researchers)
- Unable to use phone/tablet for any mental or physical impairment (e.g., blind) (self-reported)
- Exacerbation of chronic condition (self-reported)
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
United States2 sites
Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center
Baltimore, Maryland, 21224
Johns Hopkins Hospital
Baltimore, Maryland, 21287
About this study
Official title: Accuracy of Differential Diagnosis From Google Health Search and Impact on Clinical Encounters
There are large differences in knowledge between patients and healthcare providers (i.e. physicians, physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and there is a strong interest on the part of both industry and academia to reduce the gap in knowledge between patients and healthcare providers. Currently, about 1 in 20 searches on Google are health related. Among internet users, 72% reported searching for health information, and among persons who use mobile phones, 31% of cell phone users and 52% of smartphone users have looked up health or medical information. Oftentimes, patients will search on Google or other search engines in order to find health conditions that explain their symptoms prior to visiting their healthcare provider. With the launch of Google's new health search tools for mobile devices (i.e. smartphones, tablets, etc.) it is important to understand how patients use these search platforms and what their effects are on clinical encounters. The main objective of this study is to understand the accuracy of differential diagnoses generated by Google searching; the investigators hypothesize that searching on Google using a tablet or mobile device will be more accurate than not using any search tool, and that the new health search experience will improve accuracy over the standard search platform.
- Conditions
- Diagnoses Disease
- Being tested
- Health Search, Standard Search
- Keywords
- Google, Knowledge Panels, Health Search, Online, Internet, Smartphone, Tablet, Digital, Mobile, Symptoms, Differential diagnosis, Diagnosis, Anxiety
- Medical subject headings
- Disease, Anxiety Disorders
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Health SearchOther
Standard SearchOther
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Health Search | Experimental | Access to Health Knowledge Panels and Symptom Search Tool. Receives: Other: Health Search |
| Standard Search | Experimental | No access to Health Knowledge Panels and Symptom Search Tool, but access to prior version of Google search. Receives: Other: Standard Search |
| No Search | No intervention | No access to Health Knowledge Panels, Symptom Search Tool, prior version of Google search, or mobile device. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Accuracy of patient's pre-visit differential diagnosis after Google searching on a tablet or mobile phone.
Proportion of patient's pre-visit differential diagnosis meeting the criteria of "match" with clinician post-visit differential diagnosis (i.e. Two of the three conditions on the clinician's differential diagnosis were more likely to be present in the patient's pre-visit assessment when a tablet or mobile phone was present).
Measured: Assessing diagnostic accuracy from baseline to up to one hour post-clinical encounter.
Secondary outcomes (1)
Accuracy of differential diagnosis of Health Search vs. Standard Search
Proportion of patient's pre-visit differential diagnosis meeting the criteria of "match" with clinician post-visit differential diagnosis comparing Arm 1 (i.e. Health Search) vs. Arm 2 (i.e. Standard Search).
Measured: Assessing diagnostic accuracy from baseline to up to one hour post-clinical encounter.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 Mar 2017
- Study start7 Sep 2016
- Primary completion9 Aug 2017
- Study completion15 Aug 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Diagnoses DiseaseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Johns Hopkins UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Participants presenting with new symptoms to either an urgent care center or emergency department will be randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to one of three groups. 1. Access to Health Search (i.e. Google's new health search platform for mobile devices; Health Knowledge Panels and Symptom Search Tool); 2. Access to Standard Search (i.e. prior version of Google search); 3. Usual Care. Groups 1 and 2 will use a tablet or mobile phone to search while group 3 will not.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Care provider
- Enrolment
- 300 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Johns Hopkins University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Google LLC.
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Seth S Martin, MD, MHS, Principal investigator, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03073746
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- IRB00088552
- Acronym
- GHST
- Status last verified
- Apr 2019
- First submitted
- 16 Feb 2017
- Last updated
- 16 Apr 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
"Health Fact Sheet." Pew Research Center, Washington D.C. (December 16, 2013). http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/health-fact-sheet/.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 16 Apr 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Accuracy of Differential Diagnosis From Google Health Search and Impact on Clinical Encounters
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03073746
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- GHST / IRB00088552
- Conditions
- Diagnoses Disease
- Keywords
- Google, Knowledge Panels, Health Search, Online, Internet, Smartphone, Tablet, Digital
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 300 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Johns Hopkins UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Google LLC.
- Study start
- 7 Sep 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 9 Aug 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- 15 Aug 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 8 Mar 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
There are large differences in knowledge between patients and healthcare providers (i.e. physicians, physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and there is a strong interest on the part of both industry and academia to reduce the gap in knowledge between patients and healthcare providers. Currently, about 1 in 20 searches on Google are health related. Among internet users, 72% reported searching for health information, and among persons who use mobile phones, 31% of cell phone users and 52% of smartphone users have looked up health or medical information. Oftentimes, patients will search on Google or other search engines in order to find health conditions that explain their symptoms prior to visiting their healthcare provider. With the launch of Google's new health search tools for mobile devices (i.e. smartphones, tablets, etc.) it is important to understand how patients use these search platforms and what their effects are on clinical encounters. The main objective of this study is to understand the accuracy of differential diagnoses generated by Google searching; the investigators hypothesize that searching on Google using a tablet or mobile device will be more accurate than not using any search tool, and that the new health search experience will improve accuracy over the standard search platform.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (care provider)
- Number of arms
- 3
- Model description
- Participants presenting with new symptoms to either an urgent care center or emergency department will be randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to one of three groups. 1. Access to Health Search (i.e. Google's new health search platform for mobile devices; Health Knowledge Panels and Symptom Search Tool); 2. Access to Standard Search (i.e. prior version of Google search); 3. Usual Care. Groups 1 and 2 will use a tablet or mobile phone to search while group 3 will not.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Health Search | Experimental | Other: Health SearchAccess to Health Knowledge Panels and Symptom Search Tool. |
| Standard Search | Experimental | Other: Standard SearchNo access to Health Knowledge Panels and Symptom Search Tool, but access to prior version of Google search. |
| No Search | No intervention | –No access to Health Knowledge Panels, Symptom Search Tool, prior version of Google search, or mobile device. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Adult patient >= 18 years of age
- Presenting for care at urgent care or emergency department
- In search of a diagnosis to explain a new symptom or group of symptoms
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Not literate, defined as lacking the ability to read and write (self-reported)
- Non-English Speaking (self-reported)
- Not mentally competent to provide consent due to inability to understand relevant information due to deficit in intelligence (e.g. mental retardation), memory (e.g., advanced dementia or significant delirium), or attention span (e.g., Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) or mania) based on prior documentation in medical records or as judged by the researchers)
- Unable to use phone/tablet for any mental or physical impairment (e.g., blind) (self-reported)
- Exacerbation of chronic condition (self-reported)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Health Search | Other | Health Search |
| Standard Search | Other | Standard Search |
Primary outcome
Accuracy of patient's pre-visit differential diagnosis after Google searching on a tablet or mobile phone.
Time frame: Assessing diagnostic accuracy from baseline to up to one hour post-clinical encounter.
Proportion of patient's pre-visit differential diagnosis meeting the criteria of "match" with clinician post-visit differential diagnosis (i.e. Two of the three conditions on the clinician's differential diagnosis were more likely to be present in the patient's pre-visit assessment when a tablet or mobile phone was present).
1 secondary outcome
Accuracy of differential diagnosis of Health Search vs. Standard Search
Time frame: Assessing diagnostic accuracy from baseline to up to one hour post-clinical encounter.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 16 Apr 2019.
- Background"Health Fact Sheet." Pew Research Center, Washington D.C. (December 16, 2013). http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/health-fact-sheet/.
Related trials for Diagnoses Disease
Recruiting
MRD Monitoring in Colorectal Cancer Using ctDNA
Colorectal Neoplasms, Colorectal Cancer (Diagnosis)
Not yet recruiting
The Effect of Individualized Nursing Interventions on Glycemic Variability and Self-Management in Type 2 Diabetes
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM)
RecruitingPhase 2
Venetoclax and HMA Treatment of Older and Unfit Adults With FLT3 Mutated Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) (A MyeloMATCH Treatment Trial)
Acute Myeloid Leukemia
Active, not recruiting
Comparison of the Effects of Kinesio Taping and Interval Exercise in Patients Diagnosed With Venous Insufficiency: A Randomised Controlled Trial
Chronic Venous Insufficiency C2 and Below
RecruitingPhase 2
Comparing Different Treatment Lengths for Venetoclax in Older People With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia (A MyeloMATCH Treatment Trial)
Acute Myeloid Leukemia
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Seth S Martin, MD, MHS principal investigator
Johns Hopkins School of Medicine
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Health Search and Standard Search in people with Diagnoses Disease, run by Johns Hopkins University at 2 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 16 Apr 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Accuracy of patient's pre-visit differential diagnosis after Google searching on a tablet or mobile phone. (time frame: Assessing diagnostic accuracy from baseline to up to one hour post-clinical encounter.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03073746, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 16 Apr 2019.