MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Vaccination strategies and transmission of COVID-19: Evidence across advanced countries

2022· article· en· W4206229463 on OpenAlexaff
Dongwoo Kim, Young Jun Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Economics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilHorizon 2020European Research CouncilHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeEuropean Commission
KeywordsVaccinationPandemicMedicineTransmission (telecommunications)Mass vaccinationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthPsychological interventionPopulationDemographyImmunologyDiseaseComputer scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given limited supply of approved vaccines and constrained medical resources, design of a vaccination strategy to control a pandemic is an economic problem. We use time-series and panel methods with real-world country-level data to estimate effects on COVID-19 cases and deaths of two key elements of mass vaccination - time between doses and vaccine type. We find that new infections and deaths are both significantly negatively associated with the fraction of the population vaccinated with at least one dose. Conditional on first-dose coverage, an increased fraction with two doses appears to offer no further reductions in new cases and deaths. For vaccines from China, however, we find significant effects on both health outcomes only after two doses. Our results support a policy of extending the interval between first and second doses of vaccines developed in Europe and the US. As vaccination progresses, population mobility increases, which partially offsets the direct effects of vaccination. This suggests that non-pharmaceutical interventions remain important to contain transmission as vaccination is rolled out.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.357 · 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

Citations39
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Health EconomicsSame topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207