MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3102078086 · doi:10.1101/2020.11.17.20233312

Temporal Associations between Community Incidence of COVID-19 and Nursing Home Outbreaks in Ontario, Canada

2020· preprint· en· W3102078086 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kamil Malikov, Qing Huang, Shengli Shi, Nathan M. Stall, Ashleigh R. Tuite, Michael Hillmer

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkSinai Health SystemMinistry of Health and Long Term Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutbreakCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Incidence (geometry)PopulationDemographyNursing homesGeographyMedicineEnvironmental healthNursingDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)Virology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The risk of nursing home COVID-19 outbreaks is strongly associated with the rate of infection in the communities surrounding homes, yet the temporal relationship between rising rates of community COVID-19 infection and the risk threshold for subsequent nursing home COVID-19 outbreaks is not well defined. This population-based cohort study included all COVID-19 cases in Canada’s most populous Province of Ontario between March 1-July 16, 2020. We evaluated the temporal relationship between trends in the number of active community COVID-19 cases and the number of nursing home outbreaks. We found that the average lag time between community cases and nursing home outbreaks was 23 days for Ontario overall, with substantial variability across geographic regions. We also determined thresholds of community incidence of COVID-19 associated with a 75% probability of observing a nursing home outbreak 5, 10 and 15 days into the future. For the province overall, when daily active COVID-19 community cases are 2.30 per 100,000 population, there is a 75% probability of a nursing home outbreak occurring five days later.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207