The need for linked genomic surveillance of SARS-CoV-2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genomic surveillance during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been key to the timely identification of virus variants with important public health consequences, such as variants that can transmit among and cause severe disease in both vaccinated or recovered individuals. The rapid emergence of the Omicron variant highlighted the speed with which the extent of a threat must be assessed. Rapid sequencing and public health institutions' openness to sharing sequence data internationally give an unprecedented opportunity to do this; however, assessing the epidemiological and clinical properties of any new variant remains challenging. Here we highlight a "band of four" key data sources that can help to detect viral variants that threaten COVID-19 management: 1) genetic (virus sequence) data; 2) epidemiological and geographic data; 3) clinical and demographic data; and 4) immunization data. We emphasize the benefits that can be achieved by linking data from these sources and by combining data from these sources with virus sequence data. The considerable challenges of making genomic data available and linked with virus and patient attributes must be balanced against major consequences of not doing so, especially if new variants of concern emerge and spread without timely detection and action.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".