MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410615599 · doi:10.1101/2025.05.14.25327598

From the COVID-19 Pandemic to the Mental Health of the Philippines: Modelling the Cascade of Disasters using an Influence Diagram

2025· preprint· en· W4410615599 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gabriel Lorenzo I. Santos, Paul James Montecillo, Jesus Emmanuel Sevilleja, Janinalaine Platero, Ma. Teresa Tuason, C. Dominik Güss, Vena Pearl Boñgolan

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersForeign, Commonwealth and Development OfficeInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CascadeDiagramSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakMental healthGeographyVirologyPsychologyMedicineMathematicsEngineeringDiseasePsychiatryStatisticsInfectious disease (medical specialty)Outbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic had not only physical, but also mental effects due to the anxiety of being infected, necessity of community quarantine, and the big shift in lifestyle over the course of the pandemic. In this study, a Bayesian network was constructed and informed using the responses of 1,605 Filipinos to a survey conducted online during August - September 2021. The main objective of this study is to identify the critical factors that caused the cascade of disasters from the COVID-19 pandemic to a lower state of well-being for the community, by observing how it affected the mental health of the Philippine citizens. To achieve this goal, a Bayesian network was used to assess the state of the community, which was then extended into an influence diagram. Along with expert opinion on possible interventions (decision nodes), we can obtain an optimal set of interventions/decision nodes in order to lift the community’s state of mental well-being. The study aims to identify the proper decisions to make if another pandemic were to occur as well as become a framework for future applications of the Bayesian network into practical fields.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.377
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.087 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→