The Effects of Media Reports on Disease Spread and Important Public Health Measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Controlling the spread of influenza to reduce the effects of infection on a population is an important mandate of public health. Mass media reports on an epidemic or pandemic can provide important information to the public, and in turn, can induce positive healthy behaviour practices (i.e., handwashing, social distancing) in the individuals, that will reduce the probability of contracting the disease. Mass media fatigue, however, can dampen these effects. Mathematical models can be used to study the effects of mass media reports on epidemic/pandemic outcomes. In this study we employ a stochastic agent based model to provide a quantification of mass media reports on the variability in important public health measurements. We also include mass media report data compiled by the Global Public Health Intelligence Network, to study the effects of mass media reports in the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. We find that the report rate and the rate at which individuals relax their healthy behaviours (media fatigue) greatly affect the variability in important public health measurements. When the mass media reporting data is included in the model, two peaks of infection result.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.029 | 0.182 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".