Socio-economic indicators correlate with daily mobility during the second-wave of the Covid-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-pharmaceutical interventions are being used globally to limit the spread of Covid-19, which are in turn affecting individual mobility patterns. Mobility measures were found to be strongly associated with regional socio-economic indicators during the first wave of the pandemic. Here, we use network mobility data from an ~3.5 million person sample of individuals in Ontario, Canada to study the association between three different individual-mobility measures and four socio-economic indicators throughout the first and second wave of Covid-19 (January to December 2020). We demonstrate that understanding how mobility behaviours have changed in response to Covid-19 varies considerably depending on how mobility is measured. We find a strong positive association between different mobility levels and the economic deprivation index, which demonstrates that inequities in the changes to mobility across economic gradients observed during the initial lockdown have persisted into the later stages of the pandemic. However, the associations between mobility and other socio-economic indicators vary over time. We capture a strong day-of-week pattern of association between socio-economic indicators and mobility levels. Our findings have important implications for understanding if and how mobility data should be used to study the impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on the socio-economic conditions across geographical space, and over time. Our results support that Covid-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions have resulted in geographically disparate responses to mobility behaviour, and quantifying mobility changes at fine geographical scales is crucial to understanding the impacts of Covid-19 on local populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".