title: Twitter improves influenza forecasting.
abstract: Accurate disease forecasts are imperative when preparing for influenza epidemic outbreaks; nevertheless, these forecasts are often limited by the time required to collect new, accurate data. In this paper, we show that data from the microblogging community Twitter significantly improves influenza forecasting. Most prior influenza forecast models are tested against historical influenza-like illness (ILI) data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). These data are released with a one-week lag and are often initially inaccurate until the CDC revises them weeks later. Since previous studies utilize the final, revised data in evaluation, their evaluations do not properly determine the effectiveness of forecasting. Our experiments using ILI data available at the time of the forecast show that models incorporating data derived from Twitter can reduce forecasting error by 17-30% over a baseline that only uses historical data. For a given level of accuracy, using Twitter data produces forecasts that are two to four weeks ahead of baseline models. Additionally, we find that models using Twitter data are, on average, better predictors of influenza prevalence than are models using data from Google Flu Trends, the leading web data source.
authors: Department of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
authors: Michael J
authors: MJ
authors: Paul
authors: Human Language Technology Center of Excellence, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
authors: Mark
authors: M
authors: Dredze
authors: Engineering Management and Systems Engineering, The George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
authors: David
authors: D
authors: Broniatowski
references: PLoS Curr. 2013 Jun 21;5:null
references: 23873050
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Dec 11;109(50):20425-30
references: 23184969
references: PLoS One. 2013 May 30;8(5):e64323
references: 23750192
references: Am J Prev Med. 2014 Sep;47(3):341-7
references: 24997572
references: Nature. 2009 Feb 19;457(7232):1012-4
references: 19020500
references: PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e56176
references: 23457520
references: Clin Infect Dis. 2008 Dec 1;47(11):1443-8
references: 18954267
references: Science. 2014 Jul 11;345(6193):148
references: 25013052
references: PLoS One. 2010 Nov 29;5(11):e14118
references: 21124761
references: J Med Internet Res. 2014 Oct 20;16(10):e236
references: 25331122
references: Nat Commun. 2013;4:2837
references: 24302074
references: PLoS One. 2013 Dec 09;8(12):e83672
references: 24349542
references: Science. 2014 Mar 14;343(6176):1203-5
references: 24626916
references: PLoS One. 2013 Dec 04;8(12):e82489
references: 24324799
references: PLoS One. 2014 Apr 08;9(4):e94130
references: 24714027
references: J Med Internet Res. 2013 Oct 24;15(10):e237
references: 24158773
references: PLoS One. 2010 Mar 01;5(3):e9450
references: 20209164
references: PLoS Comput Biol. 2011 Oct;7(10):e1002199
references: 22022249
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Oct 12;107(41):17486-90
references: 20876140
references: PLoS Comput Biol. 2014 Apr 24;10(4):e1003583
references: 24762780