MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214640574 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0264455

The basic reproduction number of COVID-19 across Africa

2022· article· en· W4214640574 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarafa A. Iyaniwura, Musa Rabiu, Jummy David, Jude Dzevela Kong

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityFields Institute for Research in Mathematical SciencesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersInternational Development Research CentreStyrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Basic reproduction numberOutbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)SurpriseTransmission (telecommunications)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakDemographyGeographyBiologyMedicineDiseaseComputer scienceInfectious disease (medical specialty)VirologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pandemic of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) took the world by surprise. Following the first outbreak of COVID-19 in December 2019, several models have been developed to study and understand its transmission dynamics. Although the spread of COVID-19 is being slowed down by vaccination and other interventions, there is still a need to have a clear understanding of the evolution of the pandemic across countries, states and communities. To this end, there is a need to have a clearer picture of the initial spread of the disease in different regions. In this project, we used a simple SEIR model and a Bayesian inference framework to estimate the basic reproduction number of COVID-19 across Africa. Our estimates vary between 1.98 (Sudan) and 9.66 (Mauritius), with a median of 3.67 (90% CrI: 3.31-4.12). The estimates provided in this paper will help to inform COVID-19 modeling in the respective countries/regions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.418
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.010 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations28
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207