MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3104766934 · doi:10.1016/j.idm.2020.10.012

Age-structured model for COVID-19: Effectiveness of social distancing and contact reduction in Kenya

2020· article· en· W3104766934 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mark Kimathi, Samuel Mwalili, Viona Ojiambo, Duncan Kioi Gathungu

Bibliographic record

VenueInfectious Disease Modelling · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Dairy Commission
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)AsymptomaticTransmission (telecommunications)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakContact tracingPediatricsSocial distanceDemographyEmergency medicineDiseaseSurgeryInternal medicineVirologyOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The disease has spread to almost every country in the world. Kenya reported its first case on 13th of March 2020. From 16th March 2020, the country instituted various social distancing strategies to reduce the transmission and flatten the epidemic curve. These strategies include school closure, dusk-to-dawn curfew, and travel restriction across counties, especially Nairobi, Mombasa and Kwale. An age-structured compartmental model was developed to assess the impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on severity of infections, hospital demands and deaths. Methods: The population is divided into four age-groups and for each age-group there are seven compartments, namely: susceptible , exposed, asymptomatic, mild, severe, critical, death and recovered. The contact matrices between the different ages are integrated into an age-structured deterministic model via the force of infection. This model is represented by ordinary differential equations and solved using Runge–Kutta methods, with suitable model parameters. Simulation results for the unmitigated and mitigated scenarios were depicted, for the different age-groups. Results: The 45% reduction in contacts for 60-days period resulted to between 11.5-13% reduction of infections severity and deaths, while for the 190-days period yielded between 18.8-22.7% reduction. The peak of infections in the 60-days mitigation was higher and happened about 2 months after the relaxation of mitigation as compared to that of the 190-days mitigation, which happened just a month after mitigation were relaxed. Low numbers of cases in children under 15 years was attributed to low susceptibility of persons in this age-group. High numbers of cases are reported in the 15-29 years and 30-59 years age bands since these individuals have wider interaction spheres, and they form a significant percentage of Kenya population. Conclusion: Two mitigation periods, considered in the study, resulted to reductions in severe and critical cases, attack rates, hospital and ICU bed demands, as well as deaths, with the 190-days period giving higher reductions. The study revealed the age-dependency of the key health outputs.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations39
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfectious Disease Modelling→Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→