MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392375686 · doi:10.3390/ijerph21030295

A Survey of the Use of Modeling, Simulation, Visualization, and Mapping in Public Health Emergency Operations Centers during the COVID-19 Pandemic

2024· article· en· W4392375686 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ali Asgary, Mahbod Aarabi, Shelly Dixit, He Wen, Mariah Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaResponse Biomedical (Canada)York University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicVisualizationInteroperabilityPublic healthWork (physics)Adaptation (eye)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Data visualizationHealth careComputer scienceData scienceEngineeringPolitical scienceMedicineWorld Wide WebPsychologyNursingData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly changed life and work patterns and reshaped the healthcare industry and public health strategies. It posed considerable challenges to public health emergency operations centers (PHEOCs). In this period, digital technologies such as modeling, simulation, visualization, and mapping (MSVM) emerged as vital tools in these centers. Despite their perceived importance, the potential and adaptation of digital tools in PHEOCs remain underexplored. This study investigated the application of MSVM in the PHEOCs during the pandemic in Canada using a questionnaire survey. The results show that digital tools, particularly visualization and mapping, are frequently used in PHEOCs. However, critical gaps, including data management issues, technical and capacity issues, and limitations in the policy-making sphere, still hinder the effective use of these tools. Key areas identified in this study for future investigation include collaboration, interoperability, and various supports for information sharing and capacity building.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.485
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.054 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207