CoVid-19 Pandemic Trend Modeling and Analysis to Support Resilience Decision-Making.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Duffey RB
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7407614 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
CoVid-19 Pandemic Trend Modeling and Analysis to Support Resilience Decision-Making.
Duffey Romney B RB Zio Enrico E
Biology 20200707 7
Policy decision-making for system resilience to a hazard requires the estimation and prediction of the trends of growth and decline of the impacts of the hazard. With focus on the recent worldwide spread of CoVid-19, we take the infection rate as the relevant metric whose trend of evolution to follow for verifying the effectiveness of the countermeasures applied. By comparison with the theories of growth and recovery in coupled socio-medical systems, we find that the data for many countries show ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Given that individual differences influence virus-mitigating behaviors and the COVID-19 pandemic posed new moral dilemmas for individuals to resolve, across three studies (N = 704), we assessed how masculine honor beliefs (MHB), beliefs in pure good (BPG), evil (BPE), and the dark triad (DT) influence COVID-19 moral decision-making. Specifically, we analyzed moral decision-making at the microlevel (i.e., individual- and familial-level; Study 1), in decisions with (hypothetical) life-or-death consequences (Study 2), and at the macrolevel (i.e., nationwide virus-mitigation efforts; Study 3). In all studies, participants completed the four individual difference scales and rated their pandemic attitudes on Likert-type agreement scales, and resolved various moral dilemmas in Studies 2 and 3. Consistent with our hypotheses, individuals reported more virus-mitigation efforts in order to protect their families than themselves. In terms of hypothetical life-or-death and nationwide decisions, MHB, BPE, and the DT predicted more confidence and social motivations, whereas BPG predicted more distress. This research has implications for moral decision-making at varying degrees of severity during the COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC7847405 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background. The COVID-19 pandemic has popularized computer-based decision-support models, which are commonly used to inform decision making amidst complexity. Understanding what organizational decision makers prefer from these models is needed to inform model development during this and future crises. Methods. We recruited and interviewed decision makers from North Carolina across 9 sectors to understand organizational decision-making processes during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic (N = 44). For this study, we identified and analyzed a subset of responses from interviewees (n = 19) who reported using modeling to inform decision making. We used conventional content analysis to analyze themes from this convenience sample with respect to the source of models and their applications, the value of modeling and recommended applications, and hesitancies toward the use of models. Results. Models were used to compare trends in disease spread across localities, estimate the effects of social distancing policies, and allocate scarce resources, with some interviewees depending on multiple models. Decision makers desired more granular models, capable of projecting disease spread within subpopulations and estimating where local outbreaks could occur, and incorporating a broad set of outcomes, such as social well-being. Hesitancies to the use of modeling included doubts that models could reflect nuances of human behavior, concerns about the quality of data used in models, and the limited amount of modeling specific to the local context. Conclusions. Decision makers perceived modeling as valuable for informing organizational decisions yet described varied ability and willingness to use models for this purpose. These data present an opportunity to educate organizational decision makers on the merits of decision-support modeling and to inform modeling teams on how to build more responsive models that address the needs of organizational decision makers. Highlights Organizations from a diversity of sectors across North Carolina (including public health, education, business, government, religion, and public safety) have used decision-support modeling to inform decision making during COVID-19. Decision makers wish for models to project the spread of disease, especially at the local level (e.g., individual cities and counties), and to help estimate the outcomes of policies. Some organizational decision makers are hesitant to use modeling to inform their decisions, stemming from doubts that models could reflect nuances of human behavior, concerns about the accuracy and precision of data used in models, and the limited amount of modeling available at the local level.
| S-EPMC9340948 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:The number of cases from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic has overwhelmed existing medical facilities and forced clinicians, patients, and families to make pivotal decisions with limited time and information. Main body:While machine learning (ML) methods have been previously used to augment clinical decisions, there is now a demand for "Emergency ML." Throughout the patient care pathway, there are opportunities for ML-supported decisions based on collected vitals, laboratory results, medication orders, and comorbidities. With rapidly growing datasets, there also remain important considerations when developing and validating ML models. Conclusion:This perspective highlights the utility of evidence-based prediction tools in a number of clinical settings, and how similar models can be deployed during the COVID-19 pandemic to guide hospital frontlines and healthcare administrators to make informed decisions about patient care and managing hospital volume.
| S-EPMC7347420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo describe youth sport participation behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic as reported by parents of youth sport athletes, to examine the association of family demographics with the likelihood of children resuming sports, and to qualitatively report the factors influencing parental decision-making regarding youth sport participation during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA national sample of parents of youth athletes from across the United States (n=236, age: 39.2±8.1 years, 57.2% female) were recruited to complete an online questionnaire by Qualtrics Online Samples (Qualtrics, Provo, UT) using a combination of actively managed, double-opt-in market research panels. The questionnaire focused on changes in child sport participation and family finances as a result of COVID-19 and included both close-ended and open-ended questions.ResultsMost parents (63.1%) reported the time their children spent participating in organized youth sports had decreased because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Three-quarters of parents (75.5%) reported that it was likely that their children would fully resume participating in organized youth sports within the next year. Parents whose financial situation was worsened by COVID-19 were less likely to report that their children would resume sports in the upcoming year. Three domains related to parental decision-making emerged from the open-ended responses: safety, fear, and normalcy.ConclusionsUnderstanding the factors influencing changes in youth sport participation during the pandemic can allow systems to implement strategies for safe participation in youth sport and physical activity among children. Encouraging participation in outdoor sports with appropriate safety precautions such as masking, social distancing, and hygiene may reduce fear of participation among parents.
| S-EPMC9112262 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Brazil was one of the countries most affected during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, in a pre-vaccine era, and mathematical and statistical models were used in decision-making and public policies to mitigate and suppress SARS-CoV-2 dispersion. In this article, we intend to overview the modeling for COVID-19 in Brazil, focusing on the first 18 months of the pandemic. We conducted a scoping review and searched for studies on infectious disease modeling methods in peer-reviewed journals and gray literature, published between January 01, 2020, and June 2, 2021, reporting real-world or scenario-based COVID-19 modeling for Brazil. We included 81 studies, most corresponding to published articles produced in Brazilian institutions. The models were dynamic and deterministic in the majority. The predominant model type was compartmental, but other models were also found. The main modeling objectives were to analyze epidemiological scenarios (testing interventions' effectiveness) and to project short and long-term predictions, while few articles performed economic impact analysis. Estimations of the R0 and transmission rates or projections regarding the course of the epidemic figured as major, especially at the beginning of the crisis. However, several other outputs were forecasted, such as the isolation/quarantine effect on transmission, hospital facilities required, secondary cases caused by infected children, and the economic effects of the pandemic. This study reveals numerous articles with shared objectives and similar methods and data sources. We observed a deficiency in addressing social inequities in the Brazilian context within the utilized models, which may also be expected in several low- and middle-income countries with significant social disparities. We conclude that the models were of great relevance in the pandemic scenario of COVID-19. Nevertheless, efforts could be better planned and executed with improved institutional organization, dialogue among research groups, increased interaction between modelers and epidemiologists, and establishment of a sustainable cooperation network.
| S-EPMC10718415 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Visitation restrictions in hospitals during the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic led to great psychological burden for patients, their relatives and employees. For hospitals, they represent a complex organizational challenge with respect to ethics. The present recommendations are intended to support decision-making at the meso- and microlevels.
| S-EPMC8033547 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly contagious zoonotic pathogen that has exacted heavy public health, social and economic tolls. In February 2020, the World Health Organization acronymed the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 as COVID-19, for coronavirus disease 2019. The number of confirmed COVID-19 infections, which has been detected in at least 103 countries, has reached 1,970,225 worldwide as of April 14, 2020 with 124,544 deaths, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Many cases of COVID-19 resolve quickly. However, the disease, which, like other respiratory pathogens that cause common cold symptoms is believed to be transmitted through respiratory droplets. Infection with COVID-19 can also lead to significant morbidity and death; this is particularly the case for cancer patients. Moreover, because the signs and symptoms of COVID-19 are easily misattributed to the sequelae of cancer itself, such as pulmonary embolism, or its treatment, such as nausea and diarrhea, diagnosis may be delayed or missed. Potential COVID-19 rule out criteria, based on the Wells' criteria for pulmonary embolism, another protean disease entity, are provided as a decision-making aid. This review summarizes the current understanding of the transmission, clinical presentation, diagnosis and differential diagnosis, pathogenesis, rationale to treat the cancer or not, treatment and prevention of COVID-19 with an emphasis on implications in cancer.
| S-EPMC7438345 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic affected healthcare systems worldwide. Predictive models developed by Artificial Intelligence (AI) and based on timely, centralized and standardized real world patient data could improve management of COVID-19 to achieve better clinical outcomes. The objectives of this manuscript are to describe the structure and technologies used to construct a COVID-19 Data Mart architecture and to present how a large hospital has tackled the challenge of supporting daily management of COVID-19 pandemic emergency, by creating a strong retrospective knowledge base, a real time environment and integrated information dashboard for daily practice and early identification of critical condition at patient level. This framework is also used as an informative, continuously enriched data lake, which is a base for several on-going predictive studies.MethodsThe information technology framework for clinical practice and research was described. It was developed using SAS Institute software analytics tool and SAS® Vyia® environment and Open-Source environment R ® and Python ® for fast prototyping and modeling. The included variables and the source extraction procedures were presented.ResultsThe Data Mart covers a retrospective cohort of 5528 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. People who died were older, had more comorbidities, reported more frequently dyspnea at onset, had higher d-dimer, C-reactive protein and urea nitrogen. The dashboard was developed to support the management of COVID-19 patients at three levels: hospital, single ward and individual care level.InterpretationThe COVID-19 Data Mart based on integration of a large collection of clinical data and an AI-based integrated framework has been developed, based on a set of automated procedures for data mining and retrieval, transformation and integration, and has been embedded in the clinical practice to help managing daily care. Benefits from the availability of a Data Mart include the opportunity to build predictive models with a machine learning approach to identify undescribed clinical phenotypes and to foster hospital networks. A real-time updated dashboard built from the Data Mart may represent a valid tool for a better knowledge of epidemiological and clinical features of COVID-19, especially when multiple waves are observed, as well as for epidemic and pandemic events of the same nature (e. g. with critical clinical conditions leading to severe pulmonary inflammation). Therefore, we believe the approach presented in this paper may find several applications in comparable situations even at region or state levels. Finally, models predicting the course of future waves or new pandemics could largely benefit from network of DataMarts.
| S-EPMC8800500 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDecision-makers impose COVID-19 mitigations based on public health indicators such as reported cases, which are sensitive to fluctuations in supply and demand for diagnostic testing, and hospital admissions, which lag infections by up to two weeks. Imposing mitigations too early has unnecessary economic costs while imposing too late leads to uncontrolled epidemics with unnecessary cases and deaths. Sentinel surveillance of recently-symptomatic individuals in outpatient testing sites may overcome biases and lags in conventional indicators, but the minimal outpatient sentinel surveillance system needed for reliable trend estimation remains unknown.MethodsWe used a stochastic, compartmental transmission model to evaluate the performance of various surveillance indicators at reliably triggering an alarm in response to, but not before, a step increase in transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The surveillance indicators included hospital admissions, hospital occupancy, and sentinel cases with varying levels of sampling effort capturing 5, 10, 20, 50, or 100% of incident mild cases. We tested 3 levels of transmission increase, 3 population sizes, and conditions of either simultaneous transmission increase or lagged increase in the older population. We compared the indicators' performance at triggering alarm soon after, but not prior, to the transmission increase.ResultsCompared to surveillance based on hospital admissions, outpatient sentinel surveillance that captured at least 20% of incident mild cases could trigger an alarm 2 to 5 days earlier for a mild increase in transmission and 6 days earlier for a moderate or strong increase. Sentinel surveillance triggered fewer false alarms and averted more deaths per day spent in mitigation. When transmission increase in older populations lagged the increase in younger populations by 14 days, sentinel surveillance extended its lead time over hospital admissions by an additional 2 days.ConclusionsSentinel surveillance of mild symptomatic cases can provide more timely and reliable information on changes in transmission to inform decision-makers in an epidemic like COVID-19.
| S-EPMC10158704 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe lack of evidence-based recommendations for therapeutic decisions during the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic creates a unique scenario of clinical decision making which is worth to analyze. We aim to identify the drivers of therapeutic aggressiveness during the first weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis cross-sectional worldwide survey (conducted April 12 to 19, 2020) was aimed at physicians who managed patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Treatment preferences were collected in five different clinical scenarios. We used multilevel mixed-effects ordered logistic regression to identify variables that were associated with the use of more aggressive therapies.FindingsThe survey was completed by 852 physicians from 44 different specialties and 29 countries. The heterogeneity of therapeutic decisions increased as the clinical scenario worsened. Factors associated with aggressive therapeutic decisions were higher self-perceived expertise (high vs. null, OR 1.95, 95%CI 1.31-2.89), perceived quality of COVID-19 publications (high vs. null, OR 1.92, 95%CI 1.17-3.16), and female sex (OR 1.17, 95%CI 1.02-1.33). Conversely, Infectious Diseases specialty, Latin American and North American origin, lower confidence in the treatments chosen, and having published articles indexed in PubMed as the first-author were associated with the use of less aggressive therapies.InterpretationOur study provides insight into the drivers of the decision-making process during a new and extreme health emergency. Different factors including the perceived expertise and quality of publications, gender, geographic origin, medical specialty and implication in medical research influenced this process. The clinical severity attenuated the physician's tolerance for uncertainty.FundingNo funding was required.
| S-EPMC7480231 | biostudies-literature