Disease Outbreak Detection and Forecasting: A Review of Methods and Data Sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infectious diseases occur when pathogens from other individuals or animals infect a person, causing harm to both individuals and society. Outbreaks of such diseases can pose a significant threat to human health. However, early detection and tracking of these outbreaks have the potential to reduce mortality rates. To address these threats, public health authorities have endeavored to establish comprehensive mechanisms for collecting disease data. Many countries have implemented infectious disease surveillance systems, with epidemic detection as a primary objective. The clinical healthcare system, local/state health agencies, federal agencies, academic/professional groups, and collaborating governmental entities all play pivotal roles within this system. Moreover, search engines and social media platforms can serve as valuable tools for monitoring disease trends. The Internet and social media have become significant platforms where users share information about their preferences and relationships. This real-time information can be harnessed to gauge the influence of ideas and societal opinions, proving highly useful across various domains and research areas, such as marketing campaigns, financial predictions, and public health. This article provides a review of the existing standard methods developed by researchers for detecting outbreaks using time series data. These methods leverage various data sources, including conventional data sources and social media data or Internet data sources. The review particularly concentrates on works published within the timeframe of 2015 to 2022.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".