MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361195744 · doi:10.1101/2023.03.27.23287214

Modelling Disease Mitigation at Mass Gatherings: A Case Study of COVID-19 at the 2022 FIFA World Cup

2023· preprint· en· W4361195744 on OpenAlexafffund
Martin Grunnill, Julien Arino, Zachary McCarthy, Nicola Luigi Bragazzi, Laurent Coudeville, Edward W. Thommes, Amine Amiche, Abbas Ghasemi, Lydia Bourouiba, Mohammadali Tofighi, Ali Asgary, Mortaza Baky-Haskuee

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTravel-related health issues
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health ResearchUniversity of GuelphUniversity of ManitobaYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsSanofiNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOutbreakCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)VaccinationPandemicInfectious disease (medical specialty)DiseaseGeographyEnvironmental healthMedicineBusinessDemographyImmunologyVirologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The 2022 FIFA World Cup was the first major multi-continental sporting Mass Gathering Event (MGE) of the post COVID-19 era to allow foreign spectators. Such large-scale MGEs can potentially lead to outbreaks of infectious disease and contribute to the global dissemination of such pathogens. Here we adapt previous work and create a generalisable model framework for assessing the use of disease control strategies at such events, in terms of reducing infections and hospitalisations. This framework utilises a combination of meta-populations based on clusters of people and their vaccination status, Ordinary Differential Equation integration between fixed time events, and Latin Hypercube sampling. We use the FIFA 2022 World Cup as a case study for this framework. Pre-travel screenings of visitors were found to have little effect in reducing COVID-19 infections and hospitalisations. With pre-match screenings of spectators and match staff being more effective. Rapid Antigen (RA) screenings 0.5 days before match day outperformed RT-PCR screenings 1.5 days before match day. A combination of pre-travel RT-PCR and pre-match RA testing proved to be the most successful screening-based regime. However, a policy of ensuring that all visitors had a COVID-19 vaccination (second or booster dose) within a few months before departure proved to be much more efficacious. The State of Qatar abandoned all COVID-19 related travel testing and vaccination requirements over the period of the World Cup. Our work suggests that the State of Qatar may have been correct in abandoning the pre-travel testing of visitors. However, there was a spike in COVID-19 cases and hospitalisations within Qatar over the World Cup. The research outlined here suggests a policy requiring visitors to have had a recent COVID-19 vaccination may have prevented the increase in COVID-19 cases and hospitalisations during the world cup. Author summary Mass Gathering Events (MGEs) can potentially lead to outbreaks of infectious disease and facilitate the dissemination of such pathogens. We have adapted previous work to create a framework for simulating disease transmission and mitigation at such MGEs. We use the 2022 FIFA World Cup as a test case for this framework. A policy of Pre-travel screenings of visitors was found to have little effect in reducing COVID-19 cases and hospitalisations. Pre-match screenings of spectators and match staff was found to be more effective. The most effective policy was to ensure that all visitors had a COVID-19 vaccination (second or booster dose) within a few months before departure. Qatar abandoned all COVID-19 related travel testing and vaccination requirements over the period of the World Cup. Our work suggests that the State of Qatar may have been correct in abandoning the pre-travel testing of visitors. However, there was a spike in COVID-19 cases and hospitalisations within Qatar over the World Cup. Given our findings, we suggest a policy requiring visitors to have had a recent COVID-19 vaccination may have prevented the increase in COVID-19 cases and hospitalisations during the world cup.

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)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicTravel-related health issuesFrench-language works237,207