ArticleEnvironmental research2021
On the usefulness of the bioclimatic correlative models of SARS-CoV-2.
Article in Environmental research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The ecosyndemic framework of the global environmental change and the COVID-19 pandemic.The Science of the total environment · 2023Article
- Review
- Interactions between climate and COVID-19.The Lancet. Planetary health · 2022Review
- Multiplicity Eludes Peer Review: The Case of COVID-19 Research.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper addresses the effects of atmospheric conditions on the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus and its associated disease, COVID-19. For this purpose, we assess the limitations of bioclimatic correlative models to explain the geographic distribution of SARS-CoV-2 in the context of medical geography. Overall, there is a broad consensus that the global distribution of COVID-19 is not random but conditioned by environmental drivers. However, as the COVID-19 distribution becomes global, including tropical climates, the evidence reveals that atmospheric conditions explain, at most, only a limited amount of the space-time dynamics of SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, the usefulness of approaches based on bioclimatic envelopes is in question since the dominant route for the spread of COVID-19 seems to be the anthroposphere's non-stationary environment. In this sense, there is a need to clarify further the role of different transmission routes at multiple scales and outdoor and indoor environments beyond bioclimatic envelopes. At this time, the possible influence of the weather in COVID-19 spread is not sufficient to be taken into account in public health policies. Hence, until reliable bioclimatic envelopes of SARS-CoV-2, if any, are found, caution should be exercised when reporting, as this could have unforeseen consequences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.