Spatiotemporal dynamics and associated drivers of COVID-19 incidence in Nepal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has been a major global health concern, severely impacting Nepal with thousands of cases and deaths. The patterns of COVID-19 incidence in the country may have varied over time during the pandemic, with geographic factors playing different roles in the early, middle, and later phases of transmission. METHODS: We utilized spatial statistics and GeoDetector methods to analyze district-level variations in COVID-19 incidence across Nepal from January 2020 to December 2022 using laboratory confirmed cases of the disease and a range of physical, biological and socioenvironmental explanatory variables. The analysis focused on identifying spatial patterns, hotspots, and key driving factors contributing to the uneven distribution of COVID-19 cases. RESULTS: We found an uneven distribution of COVID-19 in Nepal, with persistent hotspots in major cities, such as Kathmandu and Pokhara, reaching up to 133 cases per 1000 population. GeoDetector analysis identified the key drivers, including road density (q = 0.59, p < 0.001), ICU bed distribution (q = 0.51, p < 0.001), and population density (q = 0.46, p < 0.001). While natural environmental factors such as temperature, precipitation, and NDVI had low and statistically insignificant independent explanatory power, their interaction with variables such as nighttime light, NDVI, and population density enhanced explanatory strength, highlighting the complex spatial distribution of COVID-19 incidence. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that the Nepalese government implement more targeted and region-specific interventions to address COVID-19 outbreaks, especially in persistent hotspot areas, such as Kathmandu and other emerging cities.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".