COVID-19 transmission and the safety of air travel during the pandemic: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To examine the literature assessing safety of air travel relating to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission from January 2020 to May 2021. The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on air travel and global mobility, and various efforts are being implemented to determine a safe way forward. As the pandemic evolves, so do the challenges that force various stakeholders, including the aviation industry, health authorities, and governments, to reassess and adapt their practices to ensure the safety of travellers. RECENT FINDINGS: The literature was reviewed for multiple aspects of air travel safety during the COVID-19 pandemic. Recurring themes that surfaced included the pivotal role of commercial air travel in the geographic spread of COVID-19, the efficacy of travel restrictions and quarantines, inflight transmission risk and the role of preventive measures, the utility of pre and post flight testing, the development of effective vaccines and subsequent challenges of vaccine passports, and the ongoing threat of novel highly transmissible variants. SUMMARY: Much uncertainty lies ahead within the domains of these findings, and ongoing research, discourse and review will be necessary to navigate and determine the future direction and safety of air travel. Recovery will be slow, necessitating innovative, multipronged and collaborative solutions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".