Back

Assessing the impact of a symptom-based mass screening and testing intervention during a novel infectious disease outbreak: The case of COVID-19

Ge, Y.; McKay, B. K.; Sun, S.; Zhang, F.; Handel, A.

2020-02-23 infectious diseases
10.1101/2020.02.20.20025973 medRxiv
Show abstract

A symptom-based mass screening and testing intervention (MSTI) can identify a large fraction of infected individuals during an infectious disease outbreak. China is currently using this strategy for the COVID-19 outbreak. However, MSTI might lead to increased transmission if not properly implemented. We investigate under which conditions MSTI is beneficial.

Matching journals

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

1
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 16%
11.8%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 4%
10.5%
Similar papers in this journal
3
BMC Infectious Diseases
○ 133 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Frontiers in Public Health
○ 148 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.7%
Similar papers in this journal
5
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
○ 129 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.5%
Similar papers in this journal
6
BMC Medicine
○ 176 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.3%
7
Clinical Infectious Diseases
◐ 235 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
3.2%
8
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 11%
2.6%
50% of probability mass above
9
Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses
○ 46 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
10
BMC Public Health
○ 158 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
11
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
○ 73 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.4%
12
Frontiers in Medicine
○ 120 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
13
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 46%
2.1%
14
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
◐ 45 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.9%
15
Infectious Disease Modelling
○ 54 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.9%
16
PNAS Nexus
◐ 159 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
17
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
18
PLOS Medicine
● 110 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
19
Epidemics
○ 116 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
20
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 46%
1.7%
21
Journal of Medical Internet Research
◐ 87 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
22
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
23
The Innovation
○ 13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
24
Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering
● 23 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.1%
25
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 35%
1.1%
26
Communications Medicine
○ 113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
27
International Journal of Epidemiology
◐ 88 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
28
Emerging Infectious Diseases
● 105 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
29
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 42%
0.6%
30
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 13%
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.