Back

Estimating the effective reproduction number of the 2019-nCoV in China

Cao, Z.; Zhang, Q.; Lu, X.; Pfeiffer, D.; Jia, Z.; Song, H.; Zeng, D. D.

2020-01-29 infectious diseases
10.1101/2020.01.27.20018952 medRxiv
Show abstract

We estimate the effective reproduction number for 2019-nCoV based on the daily reported cases from China CDC. The results indicate that 2019-nCoV has a higher effective reproduction number than SARS with a comparable fatality rate. Article Summary LineThis modeling study indicates that 2019-nCoV has a higher effective reproduction number than SARS with a comparable fatality rate.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 10%
18.4%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Frontiers in Public Health
○ 148 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.7%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering
● 23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.4%
Similar papers in this journal
4
The Innovation
○ 13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.1%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Infectious Disease Modelling
○ 54 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.8%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Infectious Diseases of Poverty
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
7
Medicine
○ 31 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.0%
8
Annals of Translational Medicine
○ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
9
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.2%
10
Frontiers in Medicine
○ 120 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.8%
11
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 38%
2.6%
12
BMC Infectious Diseases
○ 133 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
13
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
◐ 45 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.4%
14
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals
○ 32 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
15
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
○ 129 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
16
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.1%
17
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 17%
1.1%
18
BMJ Open
● 601 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.1%
19
Journal of Medical Virology
○ 140 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
20
Healthcare
○ 17 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.0%
21
Epidemics
○ 116 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
Vaccines
○ 198 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
23
Journal of Travel Medicine
◐ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
24
Science
● 477 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%
25
The Lancet Public Health
○ 20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
26
Quantitative Biology
○ 12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.6%
27
International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%
28
Nonlinear Dynamics
○ 10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
29
Journal of Public Health
◐ 24 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
30
PLOS Global Public Health
● 344 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.