Using Open-Source Intelligence to Detect Early Signals of COVID-19 in China: Descriptive Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in China was first reported to the World Health Organization (WHO) on December 31, 2019, and the first cases were officially identified around December 8, 2019. Although the origin of COVID-19 has not been confirmed, approximately half of the early cases were linked to a seafood market in Wuhan. However, the first two documented patients did not visit the seafood market. News reports, social media, and informal sources may provide information about outbreaks prior to formal notification. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify early signals of pneumonia or severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) in China prior to official recognition of the COVID-19 outbreak in December 2019 using open-source data. METHODS: To capture early reports, we searched an open source epidemic observatory, EpiWatch, for SARI or pneumonia-related illnesses in China from October 1, 2019. The searches were conducted using Google and the Chinese search engine Baidu. RESULTS: There was an increase in reports following the official notification of COVID-19 to the WHO on December 31, 2019, and a report that appeared on December 26, 2019 was retracted. A report of severe pneumonia on November 22, 2019, in Xiangyang was identified, and a potential index patient was retrospectively identified on November 17. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of reports of SARI outbreaks prior to December 31, 2019, with a retracted report on December 26, suggests media censorship, given that formal reports indicate that cases began appearing on December 8. However, the findings also support a relatively recent origin of COVID-19 in November 2019. The case reported on November 22 was transferred to Wuhan approximately one incubation period before the first identified cases on December 8; this case should be further investigated, as only half of the early cases were exposed to the seafood market in Wuhan. Another case of COVID-19 has since been retrospectively identified in Hubei on November 17, 2019, suggesting that the infection was present prior to December.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».