Back

Novel indicators for evaluating topological threats to populations from pandemics applied to COVID-19

Adachi, S.

2020-10-25 epidemiology
10.1101/2020.05.29.20116491 medRxiv
Show abstract

BACKGROUNDTo deal with pandemics, evaluating the temporal status of an outbreak is important. However, prevailing standards in this respect are mostly empirical and arbitrary. As an alternative, we focus on a novel approach which configures indicators that evaluate topological threats to populations due to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODSWe extended the current PzDom model to calculate a threshold of the model for accelerated growth, an indicator of growth extent Re(v), covariance Re(s), a topological number E(l), and expected sums of possibly increasing numbers of infected people. We term this the exPzDom model. RESULTSThe indicators in the exPzDom model adhere well to the empirical dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infected people and align appropriately with actual policies instituted by the Japanese government. CONCLUSIONSThe described indicators could be leveraged pursuant of objective evaluation based on mathematics. Further testing of the reliability and robustness of exPzDom model in other pandemic contexts is warranted.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 14%
12.8%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Infectious Disease Modelling
○ 54 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.0%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Frontiers in Public Health
○ 148 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
7.4%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 14%
5.6%
Similar papers in this journal
5
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
5.2%
Similar papers in this journal
6
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.4%
7
Epidemiology and Infection
◐ 89 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.1%
8
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
9
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
50% of probability mass above
10
Epidemics
○ 116 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.1%
11
Journal of Theoretical Biology
○ 162 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
12
Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering
● 23 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
13
Computers in Biology and Medicine
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
14
Quantitative Biology
○ 12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
15
Frontiers in Physics
○ 21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
16
Viruses
○ 332 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
17
Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.4%
18
Heliyon
○ 152 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
19
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals
○ 32 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
20
COVID
○ 14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
21
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
○ 129 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
22
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
● 235 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
23
Biology
○ 45 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
24
Pathogens
○ 56 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
25
Microorganisms
○ 106 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
26
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
◐ 45 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
27
Mathematics
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
28
Transboundary and Emerging Diseases
○ 37 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
29
Nonlinear Dynamics
○ 10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
30
Frontiers in Medicine
○ 120 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%

"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.