MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404655593 · doi:10.2196/65439

Consistency of Daily Number of Reported COVID-19 Cases in 191 Countries From 2020 to 2022: Comparative Analysis of 2 Major Data Sources

2024· article· en· W4404655593 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Han Liu, Huiying Zong, Yang Yang, David C. Schwebel, Peishan Ning, Zhenzhen Rao, Li Li, Guoqing Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Consistency (knowledge bases)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakGeographyEnvironmental healthComputer scienceMedicineVirologyWorld Wide WebInfectious disease (medical specialty)Outbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic represents one of the most challenging public health emergencies in recent world history, causing about 7.07 million deaths globally by September 24, 2024. Accurate, timely, and consistent data are critical for early response to situations like the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate consistency of daily reported COVID-19 cases in 191 countries from the Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering (JHU CSSE) and the World Health Organization (WHO) dashboards during 2020-2022. Methods: We retrieved data concerning new daily COVID-19 cases in 191 countries covered by both data sources from January 22, 2020, to December 31, 2022. The ratios of numbers of daily reported cases from the 2 sources were calculated to measure data consistency. We performed simple linear regression to examine significant changes in the ratio of numbers of daily reported cases during the study period. Results: Of 191 WHO member countries, only 60 displayed excellent data consistency in the number of daily reported COVID-19 cases between the WHO and JHU CSSE dashboards (mean ratio 0.9-1.1). Data consistency changed greatly across the 191 countries from 2020 to 2022 and differed across 4 types of countries, categorized by income. Data inconsistency between the 2 data sources generally decreased slightly over time, both for the 191 countries combined and within the 4 types of income-defined countries. The absolute relative difference between the 2 data sources increased in 84 countries, particularly for Malta (R2=0.25), Montenegro (R2=0.30), and the United States (R2=0.29), but it decreased significantly in 40 countries. Conclusions: The inconsistency between the 2 data sources warrants further research. Construction of public health surveillance and data collection systems for public health emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic should be strengthened in the future.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.012
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.325
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designObservational
DomainReproducibility
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance→Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→