Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32501370›Full record

ArticleChaos, solitons, and fractals2020

Short-term forecasting COVID-19 cumulative confirmed cases: Perspectives for Brazil.

Matheus Henrique Dal Molin Ribeiro, Ramon Gomes da Silva, Viviana Cocco Mariani, Leandro Dos Santos Coelho

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chaos, solitons, and fractals, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 164 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
164citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

164 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

104 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Matheus Henrique Dal Molin RibeiroIndustrial & Systems Engineering Graduate Program (PPGEPS), Pontifical Catholic University of Parana (PUCPR) 1155, Rua Imaculada Conceicao, Curitiba, PR, 80215-901 Brazil.
Ramon Gomes da SilvaIndustrial & Systems Engineering Graduate Program (PPGEPS), Pontifical Catholic University of Parana (PUCPR) 1155, Rua Imaculada Conceicao, Curitiba, PR, 80215-901 Brazil.
Viviana Cocco MarianiMechanical Engineering Graduate Program (PPGEM), Pontifical Catholic University of Parana (PUCPR) 1155, Rua Imaculada Conceicao, Curitiba, PR, 80215-901 Brazil.
Leandro Dos Santos CoelhoIndustrial & Systems Engineering Graduate Program (PPGEPS), Pontifical Catholic University of Parana (PUCPR) 1155, Rua Imaculada Conceicao, Curitiba, PR, 80215-901 Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The new Coronavirus (COVID-19) is an emerging disease responsible for infecting millions of people since the first notification until nowadays. Developing efficient short-term forecasting models allow forecasting the number of future cases. In this context, it is possible to develop strategic planning in the public health system to avoid deaths. In this paper, autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA), cubist regression (CUBIST), random forest (RF), ridge regression (RIDGE), support vector regression (SVR), and stacking-ensemble learning are evaluated in the task of time series forecasting with one, three, and six-days ahead the COVID-19 cumulative confirmed cases in ten Brazilian states with a high daily incidence. In the stacking-ensemble learning approach, the CUBIST regression, RF, RIDGE, and SVR models are adopted as base-learners and Gaussian process (GP) as meta-learner. The models' effectiveness is evaluated based on the improvement index, mean absolute error, and symmetric mean absolute percentage error criteria. In most of the cases, the SVR and stacking-ensemble learning reach a better performance regarding adopted criteria than compared models. In general, the developed models can generate accurate forecasting, achieving errors in a range of 0.87%-3.51%, 1.02%-5.63%, and 0.95%-6.90% in one, three, and six-days-ahead, respectively. The ranking of models, from the best to the worst regarding accuracy, in all scenarios is SVR, stacking-ensemble learning, ARIMA, CUBIST, RIDGE, and RF models. The use of evaluated models is recommended to forecasting and monitor the ongoing growth of COVID-19 cases, once these models can assist the managers in the decision-making support systems.

Indexed as

ARIMACOVID-19Decision-makingForecastingMachine learningTime-series

Identifiers

PMID32501370
PMCPMC7252162

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.