Back

P0: Progress to zero: A simple metric to measure COVID-19 progress by country/region

Lavista Ferres, J. M.; Etzioni, R. B.; Weeks, W. B.

2020-05-23 epidemiology
10.1101/2020.05.21.20109298 medRxiv
Show abstract

The current COVID-19 pandemic is having a devastating impact on the world. As of May 8th, 2020, more than half of the world is in lockdown, 3.6 million people have been infected, and over 250,000 of them have died. This is the first pandemic in human history that has been tracked on a daily basis across the world. Currently, progress is being tracked by a series of metrics, including new cases, deaths, and the effective reproduction number over time (R(t)), which epidemiologists have emphasized. While it is an important measure, R(t) is not observable and is dependent on the absolute number of active cases; therefore, two geographies could have a similar R(t) but be having very different experiences. Here, we propose a metric to monitor progress on addressing the COVID pandemic that we name "progress to zero" or P0. P0 corresponds to the percentage decline from a previously recorded peak level. The metric ranges from 0% (representing a geography that has not yet peaked) to 100% (representing a geography wherein 0 cases have been recorded for at least seven days). Our metric helps leaders focus on progress to a desired goal, easily can be tracked over time, can quickly identify retreat from progress, and is comparable across geographies regardless of their size.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 9%
18.8%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 2%
13.3%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 5%
7.4%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 30%
4.4%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Science
● 477 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.4%
Similar papers in this journal
6
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 30%
4.1%
50% of probability mass above
7
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.1%
8
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
● 235 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.3%
9
Epidemics
○ 116 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.2%
10
Patterns
○ 78 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
11
Epidemiology and Infection
◐ 89 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
12
Frontiers in Public Health
○ 148 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
13
Nature Human Behaviour
○ 95 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
14
Communications Medicine
○ 113 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
15
Nature Medicine
○ 125 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
16
npj Digital Medicine
○ 118 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
17
PNAS Nexus
◐ 159 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
18
Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses
○ 46 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
19
Emerging Infectious Diseases
● 105 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
20
BMC Public Health
○ 158 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
21
Science Advances
● 1243 papers in training set
Top 28%
1.0%
22
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
◐ 45 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
23
Journal of Medical Internet Research
◐ 87 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
24
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
○ 129 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
25
PLOS Global Public Health
● 344 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%
26
IEEE Access
● 35 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
27
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
● 51 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
28
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
● 68 papers in training set
Top 2%
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.