MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4308713980 · doi:10.1101/2022.11.08.22282050

Characterizing responsiveness to the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States and Canada using mobility data

2022· preprint· en· W4308713980 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Jean-Paul R. Soucy, David N. Fisman, Derek R. MacFadden, Kevin A. Brown

Notice bibliographique

RevuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Langueen
DomaineMathematics
ThématiqueCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Établissements canadiensOttawa HospitalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDemographyContext (archaeology)PandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Proxy (statistics)Demographic economicsMedicineIncidence (geometry)Psychological interventionGeographyInfectious disease (medical specialty)StatisticsEconomicsDiseaseSociologyMathematics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Mobile phone-derived human mobility data are a proxy for disease transmission risk and have proven useful during the COVID-19 pandemic for forecasting cases and evaluating interventions. We propose a novel metric using mobility data to characterize responsiveness to rising case rates. Methods We examined weekly reported COVID-19 incidence and retail and recreation mobility from Google Community Mobility Reports for 50 U.S. states and nine Canadian provinces from December 2020 to November 2021. For each jurisdiction, we calculated the responsiveness of mobility to COVID-19 incidence when cases were rising. Responsiveness across countries was summarized using subgroup meta-analysis. We also calculated the correlation between the responsiveness metric and the reported COVID-19 death rate during the study period. Findings Responsiveness in Canadian provinces ( β = -1·45; 95% CI: -2·45, -0·44) was approximately five times greater than in U.S. states ( β = -0·30; 95% CI: -0·38, -0·21). Greater responsiveness was moderately correlated with a lower reported COVID-19 death rate during the study period (Spearman’s ρ = 0·51), whereas average mobility was only weakly correlated the COVID-19 death rate (Spearman’s ρ = 0·20). Interpretation Our study used a novel mobility-derived metric to reveal a near-universal phenomenon of reductions in mobility subsequent to rising COVID-19 incidence across 59 states and provinces of the U.S. and Canada, while also highlighting the different public health approaches taken by the two countries. Funding This study received no funding. Research in context Evidence before the study There exists a wide body of literature establishing the usefulness of mobile phone-derived human mobility data for forecasting cases and other metrics during the COVID-19 pandemic. We performed a literature search to identify studies examining the opposite relationship, attempting to quantify the responsiveness of human mobility to changes in COVID-19 incidence. We searched PubMed on October 21, 2022 using the keywords “COVID-19”, “2019-nCoV”, or “SARS-CoV-2” in combination with “responsiveness” and one or more of “mobility”, “distancing”, “lockdown”, and “non-pharmaceutical interventions”. We scanned 46 published studies and found one that used a mobile phone data-derived index to measure the intensity of social distancing in U.S. counties from January 2020 to January 2021. The authors of this study found that an increase in cases in the last 7 days was associated with an increase in the intensity of social distancing, and that this effect was larger during periods of lockdown/shop closures. Added value of the study Our study developed a metric of the responsiveness of mobility to rising case rates for COVID-19 and calculated it for 59 subnational jurisdictions in the United States and Canada. While nearly all jurisdictions displayed some degree of responsiveness, average responsiveness in Canada was nearly five times greater than in the United States. Responsiveness was moderately associated with the reported COVID-19 death rate during the study period, such that jurisdictions with greater responsiveness had lower death rates, and was more strongly associated with death rates than average mobility in a jurisdiction. Implications of all the available evidence Mobile phone-derived human mobility data has proven useful in the context of infectious disease surveillance during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as for forecasting cases and evaluating non-pharmaceutical interventions. In our study, we derived a metric of responsiveness to show that mobility data may be used to track the efficiency of public health responses as the pandemic evolves. This responsiveness metric was also correlated with reported COVID-19 death rates during the study period. Together, these results demonstrate the usefulness of mobility data for making broad characterizations of public health responses across jurisdictions during the COVID-19 pandemic and reinforce the value of mobility data as an infectious disease surveillance tool for answering present and future threats.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,011
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,079
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,160

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0110,026
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,004
Bibliométrie0,0040,007
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,488
Tête enseignante GPT0,463
Écart entre enseignants0,024 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2022
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuemedRxiv→Même sujetCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→Travaux en français237 207→