MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4229511967 · doi:10.31235/osf.io/tca34

Associations between mobility and socio-economic indicators vary across the timeline of the Covid-19 pandemic

2021· preprint· en· W4229511967 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jed Long, Chang Ren

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTimelinePandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Psychological interventionGeographyEconomic geographyGeographic mobilityDemographic economicsDemographyPsychologyEconomicsMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Covid-19 interventions are greatly affecting patterns of human mobility. Changes in mobility during Covid-19 have differed across socio-economic gradients during the first wave. We use fine-scale network mobility data in Ontario, Canada to study the association between three different mobility measures and four socio-economic indicators throughout the first and second wave of Covid-19 (January to December 2020). We find strong associations between mobility and the socio-economic indicators and that relationships between mobility and other socio-economic indicators vary over time. We further demonstrate that understanding how mobility has changed in response to Covid-19 varies considerably depending on how mobility is measured. Our findings have important implications for understanding how mobility data should be used to study interventions across space and time. Our results support that Covid-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions have resulted in geographically disparate responses to mobility and quantifying mobility changes at fine geographical scales is crucial to understanding the impacts of Covid-19.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.313
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.160 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→