MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3044165562 · doi:10.1101/2020.07.20.20158527

Impact of lock down relaxation on the COVID-19 epidemic trajectory in Bangladesh

2020· preprint· en· W3044165562 on OpenAlexaff
Shafiun Nahin Shimul, Mofakhar Hussain, Abu Jamil Faisel, Syed Abdul Hamid

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoInstitute of Health Economics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicDemographyPopulationLock (firearm)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)GeographyIncidence (geometry)Government (linguistics)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakStatisticsMedicineMathematicsOutbreakVirologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this projection exercise, we analyzed the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic in Bangladesh and used multiple methods to characterize the epidemic curve. We merged several publicly available data sets for the purpose. Projections using actual Government data as of June 16, 2020 reveals that the epidemic curve for Bangladesh may be different from that of developed countries and quite similar to such curves in countries in the region. This is true, both in terms of incidence of cases (total number of cases per million population) and length of the epidemic (months to peak or flatten the epidemic curve). We find that while Bangladesh went into lockdown early, efforts to maintain lockdown at a national level was relaxed and new cases accelerated; with significant growth happening since lifting of lockdown on May 31. Our estimates indicate prevalence of COVID-19 may be between 200,000 and 600,000 towards end of the year, may take 9 months (270 days) to flatten the epidemic curve, lifting of the lockdown may have increased total cases by 60 to 100% and may have prolonged the epidemic by additional 2-3 months.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.326
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.118 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→