MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

SPATIAL MODELLING OF COVID-19 INCIDENCE RATE IN CANADA

2022· article· en· W4282033852 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sarah Narges Fatholahi, Chenguang Pan, Lanying Wang, J. Li

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrdinary least squaresCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicGeographyEconometricsIncidence (geometry)Regression analysisOutbreakUnemploymentStatisticsEpidemiologySpatial variabilitySpatial analysisLagSpatial epidemiologyDemographyEnvironmental healthDiseaseMedicineMathematicsEconomic growthComputer scienceEconomicsInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The COVID-19 was first declared by World Health Organization (WHO) as global pandemic on March 11th 2020. While most of COVID-related studies have focused on epidemiological perspective, the spatial analysis of disease outbreak is also important to provide perceptions of transmission rates. Therefore, this paper attempts to identify the potential factors contributing to the COVID-19 incidence rate at provincial-level in Canada. Three statistical regression models, ordinary least squares (OLS), spatial error model, and spatial lag model (SLM) were applied to 14 independent variables including socio-demographic, economic, weather, health and facilities related factors. The results indicated that three factors including median income, diabetes and unemployment significantly affected the COVID-19 rates in Canada. Among three global models, the SLM performed the best to explain the key variables and spatial variability of disease incidence with a R2 value of 61%. However, in this study, the application of local regression models such as geographically weighted regression (GWR) and multiscale GWR (MGWR) have not been considered and this could be a scope for the future research.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences→Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→