MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021112511 · doi:10.1101/2020.04.28.20083758

Estimation of the basic reproduction number, average incubation time, asymptomatic infection rate, and case fatality rate for COVID-19: Meta-analysis and sensitivity analysis

2020· preprint· en· W3021112511 on OpenAlexafffund
Wenqing He, Grace Y. Yi, Yayuan Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsAsymptomaticCase fatality rateConfidence intervalIncubation periodCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineMeta-analysisSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Internal medicineVirologyDiseaseBiologyIncubationInfectious disease (medical specialty)Epidemiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been found to be caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, comprehensive knowledge of COVID-19 remains incomplete and many important features are still unknown. This manuscripts conduct a meta-analysis and a sensitivity study to answer the questions: What is the basic reproduction number? How long is the incubation time of the disease on average? What portion of infections are asymptomatic? And ultimately, what is the case fatality rate? Our studies estimate the basic reproduction number to be 3.15 with the 95% interval (2.41, 3.90), the average incubation time to be 5.08 days with the 95% confidence interval (4.77, 5.39) (in day), the asymptomatic infection rate to be 46% with the 95% confidence interval (18.48%, 73.60%), and the case fatality rate to be 2.72% with 95% confidence interval (1.29%, 4.16%) where asymptomatic infections are accounted for.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.242
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations36
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207