Crowdsourced Perceptions of Human Behavior to Improve Computational Forecasts of US National Incident Cases of COVID-19: Survey Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Past research has shown that various signals associated with human behavior (eg, social media engagement) can benefit computational forecasts of COVID-19. One behavior that has been shown to reduce the spread of infectious agents is compliance with nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). However, the extent to which the public adheres to NPIs is difficult to measure and consequently difficult to incorporate into computational forecasts of infectious diseases. Soliciting judgments from many individuals (ie, crowdsourcing) can lead to surprisingly accurate estimates of both current and future targets of interest. Therefore, asking a crowd to estimate community-level compliance with NPIs may prove to be an accurate and predictive signal of an infectious disease such as COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to show that crowdsourced perceptions of compliance with NPIs can be a fast and reliable signal that can predict the spread of an infectious agent. We showed this by measuring the correlation between crowdsourced perceptions of NPIs and US incident cases of COVID-19 1-4 weeks ahead, and evaluating whether incorporating crowdsourced perceptions improves the predictive performance of a computational forecast of incident cases. METHODS: For 36 weeks from September 2020 to April 2021, we asked 2 crowds 21 questions about their perceptions of community adherence to NPIs and public health guidelines, and collected 10,120 responses. Self-reported state residency was compared to estimates from the US census to determine the representativeness of the crowds. Crowdsourced NPI signals were mapped to 21 mean perceived adherence (MEPA) signals and analyzed descriptively to investigate features, such as how MEPA signals changed over time and whether MEPA time series could be clustered into groups based on response patterns. We investigated whether MEPA signals were associated with incident cases of COVID-19 1-4 weeks ahead by (1) estimating correlations between MEPA and incident cases, and (2) including MEPA into computational forecasts. RESULTS: The crowds were mostly geographically representative of the US population with slight overrepresentation in the Northeast. MEPA signals tended to converge toward moderate levels of compliance throughout the survey period, and an unsupervised analysis revealed signals clustered into 4 groups roughly based on the type of question being asked. Several MEPA signals linearly correlated with incident cases of COVID-19 1-4 weeks ahead at the US national level. Including questions related to social distancing, testing, and limiting large gatherings increased out-of-sample predictive performance for probabilistic forecasts of incident cases of COVID-19 1-3 weeks ahead when compared to a model that was trained on only past incident cases. CONCLUSIONS: Crowdsourced perceptions of nonpharmaceutical adherence may be an important signal to improve forecasts of the trajectory of an infectious agent and increase public health situational awareness.
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 | 0.010 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".