Infectivity versus fatality of SARS-CoV-2 mutations and influenza
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives Because of the spread of the Omicron variant, many countries have experienced COVID-19 case numbers unseen since the start of the pandemic. We aimed to compare the epidemiological characteristics of Omicron with previous variants and different strains of influenza to provide context for public health responses. Methods We developed transmission models for SARS-CoV-2 variants and influenza, in which transmission, death, and vaccination rates were taken to be time-varying. We fit our model based on publicly available data in South Africa, the United States, and Canada. We used this model to evaluate the relative transmissibility and mortality of Omicron compared with previous variants and influenza. Results We found that Omicron is more transmissible and less fatal than both seasonal and 2009 H1N1 influenza and the Delta variant; these characteristics make Omicron epidemiologically more similar to influenza than it is to Delta. We estimate that as of February 7, 2022, booster doses have prevented 4.29 × 10 7 and 1.14 × 10 6 Omicron infections in the United States and Canada, respectively. Conclusion Our findings indicate that the high infectivity of Omicron will keep COVID-19 endemic, similar to influenza. However, because of Omicron's lower fatality rate, our work suggests that human populations living with SARS-CoV-2 are most likely.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".