MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114645350 · doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000126

Adjusting outbreak detection algorithms for surveillance during epidemic and non-epidemic periods

2011· article· en· W2114645350 on OpenAlexaff
Zhiming Li, Shengjie Lai, David L. Buckeridge, Hu Zhang, Yajia Lan, Weizhong Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicData-Driven Disease Surveillance
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutbreakDisease surveillanceIncidence (geometry)Infectious disease (medical specialty)Foot-and-mouth diseaseAlgorithmDiseaseGeographyComputer scienceVirologyMedicineMathematicsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many aberration detection algorithms are used in infectious disease surveillance systems to assist in the early detection of potential outbreaks. In this study, we explored a novel approach to adjusting aberration detection algorithms to account for the impact of seasonality inherent in some surveillance data. By using surveillance data for hand-foot-and-mouth disease in Shandong province, China, we evaluated the use of seasonally-adjusted alerting thresholds with three aberration detection methods (C1, C2, and C3). We found that the optimal thresholds of C1, C2, and C3 varied between the epidemic and non-epidemic seasons of hand-foot-and-mouth disease, and the application of seasonally adjusted thresholds improved the performance of outbreak detection by maintaining the same sensitivity and timeliness while decreasing by nearly half the false alert rate during the non-epidemic season. Our preliminary findings suggest a general approach to improving aberration detection for outbreaks of infectious disease with seasonally variable incidence.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Medical Informatics AssociationSame topicData-Driven Disease SurveillanceFrench-language works237,207