Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34013282›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2021

Forecasting COVID-19 cases: A comparative analysis between Recurrent and Convolutional Neural Networks.

Khondoker Nazmoon Nabi, Md Toki Tahmid, Abdur Rafi, Muhammad Ehsanul Kader, Md Asif Haider

Open access · greenAbstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Khondoker Nazmoon NabiORCID 0000-0003-2337-0226
Md Toki Tahmid
Abdur Rafi
Muhammad Ehsanul Kader
Md Asif Haider
Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology · BD

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When the entire world is waiting restlessly for a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine that could soon become a reality, numerous countries around the globe are grappling with unprecedented surges of new COVID-19 cases. As the number of new cases is skyrocketing, pandemic fatigue and public apathy towards different intervention strategies are posing new challenges to the government officials to combat the pandemic. Henceforth, it is indispensable for the government officials to understand the future dynamics of COVID-19 flawlessly in order to develop strategic preparedness and resilient response planning. In light of the above circumstances, probable future outbreak scenarios in Brazil, Russia and the United kingdom have been sketched in this study with the help of four deep learning models: long short term memory (LSTM), gated recurrent unit (GRU), convolutional neural network (CNN) and multivariate convolutional neural network (MCNN). In our analysis, CNN algorithm has outperformed other deep learning models in terms of validation accuracy and forecasting consistency. It has been unearthed in our study that CNN can provide robust long term forecasting results in time series analysis due to its capability of essential features learning, distortion invariance and temporal dependence learning. However, the prediction accuracy of LSTM algorithm has been found to be poor as it tries to discover seasonality and periodic intervals from any time series dataset, which were absent in our studied countries. Our study has highlighted the promising validation of using convolutional neural networks instead of recurrent neural networks when it comes to forecasting with very few features and less amount of historical data.

Identifiers

PMID34013282
PMCPMC8132256
OpenAlexW3108128065

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.