MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401013776 · doi:10.17269/s41997-024-00910-9

Canada’s provincial COVID-19 pandemic modelling efforts: A review of mathematical models and their impacts on the responses

2024· review· en· W4401013776 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Yiqing Xia, Jorge Luis Flores Anato, Caroline Colijn, Naveed Z. Janjua, Mike Irvine, Tyler Williamson, Marie Varughese, Michael Li, Nathaniel Osgood, David J. D. Earn, Beate Sander, Lauren E. Cipriano, Kumar Murty, Fanyu Xiu, Arnaud Godin, David L. Buckeridge, Amy Hurford, Sharmistha Mishra, Mathieu Maheu‐Giroux

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Public Health · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandPublic Health OntarioWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkToronto General HospitalMcMaster UniversityUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Michael's HospitalAlberta HealthBC Centre for Disease ControlMcGill University Health CentreSimon Fraser UniversityMcGill UniversityUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Pandemic2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Public healthRegional scienceMathematical modelGeographyEconometricsComputer scienceManagement scienceEconomicsVirologyMathematicsMedicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)StatisticsOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.637
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.149 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes4
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Public Health→Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→