MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3113477596 · doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2020-215119

Geo-social gradients in predicted COVID-19 prevalence in Great Britain: results from 1 960 242 users of the COVID-19 Symptoms Study app

2020· article· en· W3113477596 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ruth C. E. Bowyer, Thomas Varsavsky, Ellen J. Thompson, Carole H. Sudre, Maxim B. Freidin, Darioush Yarand, Sajaysurya Ganesh, Joan Capdevila Pujol, Elco Bakker, M. Jorge Cardoso, Richard Davies, Jonathan Wolf, Tim D. Spector, Sébastien Ourselin, Claire J. Steves, Cristina Menni

Bibliographic record

VenueThorax · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean CommissionKing's College LondonCentre For Medical Engineering, King’s College LondonAlzheimer's SocietyChronic Disease Research FoundationEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchAlzheimer SocietyWellcome TrustMedical Research CouncilWellcome
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakMedicineSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)PopulationSocial distanceDemographyVirologyEnvironmental healthPathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the geographical distribution of COVID-19 through the general population is key to the provision of adequate healthcare services. Using self-reported data from 1 960 242 unique users in Great Britain (GB) of the COVID-19 Symptom Study app, we estimated that, concurrent to the GB government sanctioning lockdown, COVID-19 was distributed across GB, with evidence of ‘urban hotspots’. We found a geo-social gradient associated with predicted disease prevalence suggesting urban areas and areas of higher deprivation are most affected. Our results demonstrate use of self-reported symptoms data to provide focus on geographical areas with identified risk factors.

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)0.006
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 score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThoraxSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207