Back

A privacy-preserving Bayesian network model for personalised COVID19 risk assessment and contact tracing

Fenton, N.; McLachlan, S.; Lucas, P.; Dube, K.; Hitman, G.; Osman, M.; Kyrimi, E.; Neil, M.

2021-01-05 health informatics
10.1101/2020.07.15.20154286 medRxiv
Show abstract

Concerns about the practicality and effectiveness of using Contact Tracing Apps (CTA) to reduce the spread of COVID19 have been well documented and, in the UK, led to the abandonment of the NHS CTA shortly after its release in May 2020. One of the key non-technical obstacles to widespread adoption of CTA has been concerns about privacy. We present a causal probabilistic model (a Bayesian network) that provides the basis for a practical CTA solution that does not compromise privacy. Users of the model can provide as much or little personal information as they wish about relevant risk factors, symptoms, and recent social interactions. The model then provides them feedback about the likelihood of the presence of asymptotic, mild or severe COVID19 (past, present and projected). When the model is embedded in a smartphone app, it can be used to detect new outbreaks in a monitored population and identify outbreak locations as early as possible. For this purpose, the only data needed to be centrally collected is the probability the user has COVID19 and the GPS location.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 20%
8.8%
Similar papers in this journal
2
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
○ 43 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.8%
Similar papers in this journal
3
JAMIA Open
◐ 42 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.2%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
○ 20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.4%
Similar papers in this journal
5
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 7%
5.1%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Journal of Medical Internet Research
◐ 87 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.3%
7
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 23%
4.3%
8
Frontiers in Digital Health
○ 24 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.2%
9
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.2%
10
International Journal of Medical Informatics
○ 26 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.7%
50% of probability mass above
11
Frontiers in Public Health
○ 148 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.6%
12
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
◐ 45 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.4%
13
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
14
PLOS Digital Health
● 106 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
15
Frontiers in Psychiatry
○ 87 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.4%
16
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
○ 47 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
17
Computers in Biology and Medicine
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
18
Expert Systems with Applications
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
19
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 20%
1.7%
20
JMIR Medical Informatics
◐ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
21
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
◐ 71 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
22
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
23
Patterns
○ 78 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
24
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
● 37 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.1%
25
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
○ 17 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
26
Mathematics
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
27
Medical Decision Making
○ 12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
28
Informatics in Medicine Unlocked
○ 22 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
29
Mathematical Biosciences
○ 49 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
30
Life
○ 29 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%

"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.