MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413116278 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2422335122

Ensemble approaches for short-term dengue fever forecasts: A global evaluation study

2025· article· en· W4413116278 on OpenAlexaff
Shin-Rong J. Wu, Austin G. Meyer, Leonardo Clemente, Lucas M. Stolerman, Fred Lu, Atreyee Majumder, Rudi Verbeeck, Serge Masyn, Mauricio Santillana

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsDengue feverTerm (time)VirologyComputer scienceMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dengue fever, a tropical vector-borne disease, is a leading cause of hospitalization and death in many parts of the world, especially in Asia and Latin America. Where timely dengue surveillance exists, decision-makers can better implement public health measures and allocate resources. Reliable near-term forecasts may help anticipate healthcare demands and promote preparedness. We propose ensemble modeling approaches combining mechanistic, statistical, and machine learning models to forecast dengue cases 1 to 3 mo ahead at the province level across multiple countries. We assess these models' predictive ability out-of-sample and retrospectively in over 180 locations worldwide, including provinces in Brazil, Colombia, Malaysia, Mexico, Thailand, plus Iquitos, Peru, and San Juan, Puerto Rico, during at least 2 to 3 y. We also evaluate ensemble approaches in a real-time, prospective dengue forecasting platform during 2022-2023, considering data availability limitations. Our ensemble modeling leads to an improvement to previous efforts that may help decision-making in the context of large uncertainties. This contrasts with the variable performance of individual component models across locations and time. No single model achieves optimal predictions across all scenarios, but while ensemble models may not always perform best in specific locations, they consistently rank among the top 3 performing models both retrospectively and prospectively.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences→Same topicMosquito-borne diseases and control→French-language works237,207→