The Influence of Average Temperature and Relative Humidity on New Cases of COVID-19: Time-Series Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The influence of meteorological factors on the transmission and spread of COVID-19 is of interest and has not been investigated. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the associations between meteorological factors and the daily number of new cases of COVID-19 in 9 Asian cities. METHODS: Pearson correlation and generalized additive modeling (GAM) were performed to assess the relationships between daily new COVID-19 cases and meteorological factors (daily average temperature and relative humidity) with the most updated data currently available. RESULTS: The Pearson correlation showed that daily new confirmed cases of COVID-19 were more correlated with the average temperature than with relative humidity. Daily new confirmed cases were negatively correlated with the average temperature in Beijing (r=-0.565, P<.001), Shanghai (r=-0.47, P<.001), and Guangzhou (r=-0.53, P<.001). In Japan, however, a positive correlation was observed (r=0.416, P<.001). In most of the cities (Shanghai, Guangzhou, Hong Kong, Seoul, Tokyo, and Kuala Lumpur), GAM analysis showed the number of daily new confirmed cases to be positively associated with both average temperature and relative humidity, especially using lagged 3D modeling where the positive influence of temperature on daily new confirmed cases was discerned in 5 cities (exceptions: Beijing, Wuhan, Korea, and Malaysia). Moreover, the sensitivity analysis showed, by incorporating the city grade and public health measures into the model, that higher temperatures can increase daily new case numbers (beta=0.073, Z=11.594, P<.001) in the lagged 3-day model. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that increased temperature yield increases in daily new cases of COVID-19. Hence, large-scale public health measures and expanded regional research are still required until a vaccine becomes widely available and herd immunity is established.
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 | 0.002 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".