MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412406583 · doi:10.3758/s13428-025-02743-x

Collecting behavioural data across countries during pandemics: Development of the COVID-19 Risk Assessment Tool

2025· article· en· W4412406583 on OpenAlexaff
Gjalt-Jorn Peters, Dominika Kwaśnicka, Gill A. ten Hoor, Rik Crutzen, Tugce Varol, Lisa M. Warner, Mahdi Algargoosh, Eskinder Eshetu Ali, Mudassir Anwar, Sali Rahadi Asih, Zuhal Feryal Baltas, Emma Berry, Kebede Beyene, Katarzyna Campbell, Bruno Moreira Carneiro, Laura Castillo-Eito, Amy Hai Yan Chan, Sabrina Cipolletta, Ann DeSmet, Triana Kesuma Dewi, Alexandra L. Dima, Jorge Encantado, Tracy Epton, João Paulo Figueiredo, Gustavo DalCin Fracaroli, Aurélie Gauchet, Gebremedhin Beedemariam Gebretekle, Pierre Gérain, Cristina Godinho, Lisa Graham‐Wisener, James Green, Jenny M. Groarke, Thomas Gültzow, Elif Basak Guven, Roel C.J. Hermans, Sander Hermsen, Jennifer Inauen, Angelos P. Kassianos, Tatiana Kazantseva, Els Keyaerts, Laura M König, Daniela Lange, Emelien Lauwerier, Yongchan Lie, Andrian Liem, Aleksandra Luszczynska, Marta M. Marques, Hannah C. Moore, Chris Noone, Johanna Nurmi, Ratri Nurwanti, Elif Suna Ozbay, Iga Palacz-Poborczyk, Rebecca Anne Pedruzzi, Louise Poppe, Daniel Powell, Bruna Rinaldi, Alexis Ruffault, Urte Scholz, Ana-Maria Schweitzer, Yasemin Selekoğlu Ok, Medha Shree, Carolina C. Silva, Yasinta Astin Sokang, Mei Tang, Silvia Caterina Maria Tomaino, Samantha van Beurden, Stefan Verweij, Stan Vluggen, Rochelle Watkins, Szilvia Zörgő, Sylvia Roozen

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavior Research Methods · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlueprintPandemicGovernment (linguistics)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Public healthPsychological interventionRisk assessmentWork (physics)PsychologyBusinessPublic relationsComputer scienceEngineeringMedicineComputer securityPolitical scienceNursingInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tools that can be used to collect behavioural data during pandemics are needed to inform policy and practice. The objective of this project was to develop the Your COVID-19 Risk tool in response to the global spread of COVID-19, aiming to promote health behaviour change. We developed an online resource based on key behavioural evidence-based risk factors related to contracting and spreading COVID-19. This tool allows for assessing risk and provides instant support to protect individuals from infection. The Risk Estimation Questions assessed users' location, age, gender, work environment, day-to-day behaviours currently performed, and conditions under which these behaviours would change. Users were also asked to estimate how often they keep their distance from others in public and regularly wash their hands, and the procedures they follow to do so. A multidisciplinary research team of more than 150 international experts developed the tool. Over 60,000 users in more than 150 countries have assessed their risk and provided data. The majority of respondents reported that they almost always keep their distance from others in public places, and most participants reported washing their hands after touching public or shared surfaces or when entering buildings. The tool, data, and results were openly shared to support government and health agencies developing behaviour change interventions. This tool creates a blueprint for similar digital infrastructure that can be replicated and used in future pandemics.

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)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.108
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.108
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.647
GPT teacher head0.719
Teacher spread0.072 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 venueBehavior Research MethodsSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207