Development of a global infectious disease activity database using natural language processing, machine learning, and human expertise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We assessed whether machine learning can be utilized to allow efficient extraction of infectious disease activity information from online media reports. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We curated a data set of labeled media reports (n = 8322) indicating which articles contain updates about disease activity. We trained a classifier on this data set. To validate our system, we used a held out test set and compared our articles to the World Health Organization Disease Outbreak News reports. RESULTS: Our classifier achieved a recall and precision of 88.8% and 86.1%, respectively. The overall surveillance system detected 94% of the outbreaks identified by the WHO covered by online media (89%) and did so 43.4 (IQR: 9.5-61) days earlier on average. DISCUSSION: We constructed a global real-time disease activity database surveilling 114 illnesses and syndromes. We must further assess our system for bias, representativeness, granularity, and accuracy. CONCLUSION: Machine learning, natural language processing, and human expertise can be used to efficiently identify disease activity from digital media reports.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".