MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311500365 · doi:10.2196/40958

Associations of Country-Specific and Sociodemographic Factors With Self-Reported COVID-19–Related Symptoms: Multivariable Analysis of Data From the CoronaCheck Mobile Health Platform

2022· article· en· W4311500365 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elke Humer, Thomas Keil, Carolin Stupp, Winfried Schlee, Manfred Wildner, Peter U. Heuschmann, Michael Winter, Thomas Probst, Rüdiger Pryss

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCOVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsmHealthLogistic regressionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DemographyMedicineGermanPandemicSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Environmental healthGeographyPsychiatryPsychological interventionDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 symptom-monitoring apps provide direct feedback to users about the suspected risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and advice on how to proceed to prevent the spread of the virus. We have developed the CoronaCheck mobile health (mHealth) platform, the first free app that provides easy access to valid information about the risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 in English and German. Previous studies have suggested that the clinical characteristics of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 vary by age, gender, and viral variant; however, potential differences between countries have not been adequately studied. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe the characteristics of the users of the CoronaCheck mHealth platform and to determine country-specific and sociodemographic associations of COVID-19-related symptoms and previous contacts with individuals infected with COVID-19. METHODS: Between April 8, 2020, and February 3, 2022, data on sociodemographic characteristics, symptoms, and reports of previous close contacts with individuals infected with COVID-19 were collected from CoronaCheck users in different countries. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine whether self-reports of COVID-19-related symptoms and recent contact with a person infected with COVID-19 differed between countries (Germany, India, South Africa), gender identities, age groups, education, and calendar year. RESULTS: Most app users (N=23,179) were from Germany (n=8116, 35.0%), India (n=6622, 28.6%), and South Africa (n=3705, 16.0%). Most data were collected in 2020 (n=19,723, 85.1%). In addition, 64% (n=14,842) of the users were male, 52.1% (n=12,077) were ≥30 years old, and 38.6% (n=8953) had an education level of more than 11 years of schooling. Headache, muscle pain, fever, loss of smell, loss of taste, and previous contacts with individuals infected with COVID-19 were reported more frequently by users in India (adjusted odds ratios [aORs] 1.3-8.3, 95% CI 1.2-9.2) and South Africa (aORs 1.1-2.6, 95% CI 1.0-3.0) than those in Germany. Cough, general weakness, sore throat, and shortness of breath were more frequently reported in India (aORs 1.3-2.6, 95% CI 1.2-2.9) compared to Germany. Gender-diverse users reported symptoms and contacts with confirmed COVID-19 cases more often compared to male users. CONCLUSIONS: Patterns of self-reported COVID-19-related symptoms and awareness of a previous contact with individuals infected with COVID-19 seemed to differ between India, South Africa, and Germany, as well as by gender identity in these countries. Viral symptom-collecting apps, such as the CoronaCheck mHealth platform, may be promising tools for pandemics to support appropriate assessments. Future mHealth research on country-specific differences during a pandemic should aim to recruit representative samples.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.087
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and SurveillanceSame topicCOVID-19 Digital Contact TracingFrench-language works237,207