Modeling COVID-19 Outbreaks in Long-Term Care Facilities Using an Agent-Based Modeling and Simulation Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The elderly, especially those individuals with pre-existing health problems, have been disproportionally at a higher risk during the COVID-19 pandemic. Residents of long-term care facilities have been gravely affected by the pandemic and resident death numbers have been far above those of the general population. To better understand how infectious diseases such as COVID-19 can spread through long-term care facilities, we developed an agent-based simulation tool that uses a contact matrix adapted from previous infection control research in these types of facilities. This matrix accounts for the average distinct daily contacts between seven different agent types that represent the roles of individuals in long-term care facilities. The simulation results were compared to actual COVID-19 outbreaks in some of the long-term care facilities in Ontario, Canada. Our analysis shows that this simulation tool is capable of predicting the number of resident deaths after 50 days with a less than 0.1 variation in death rate. We modeled and predicted the effectiveness of infection control measures by utilizing this simulation tool. We found that to reduce the number of resident deaths, the effectiveness of personal protective equipment must be above 50%. We also found that daily random COVID-19 tests for as low as less than 10% of a long-term care facility's population will reduce the number of resident deaths by over 75%. The results further show that combining several infection control measures will lead to more effective outcomes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".