ArticleResults in physics2021
A study on the efficiency of the estimation models of COVID-19.
Article in Results in physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Overcoming bias in estimating epidemiological parameters with realistic history-dependent disease spread dynamics.Nature communications · 2024Article
- The Epidemiological and Economic Impact of COVID-19 in Kazakhstan: An Agent-Based Modeling.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Is It Possible to Predict COVID-19? Stochastic System Dynamic Model of Infection Spread in Kazakhstan.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Evaluating Effects of Dynamic Interventions to Control COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study of Guangdong, China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Application of genetic algorithm combined with improved SEIR model in predicting the epidemic trend of COVID-19, China.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- On the accuracy of ARIMA based prediction of COVID-19 spread.Results in physics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Today, the world is fighting against a dangerous epidemic caused by the novel coronavirus, also known as COVID-19. All have been impacted and countries are trying to recover from the social, economic, and health devastations of COVID-19. Recent epidemiology research has concentrated on using different prediction models to estimate the numbers of infected, recovered, and deceased cases around the world. This study is primarily focused on evaluating two common prediction models: Susceptible - Infected - Recovered (SIR) and Susceptible - Exposed - Infected - Recovered (SEIR). The SIR and SEIR models were compared in estimating the outbreak and identifying the better fitting model for forecasting future spread in Kuwait. Based on the results of the comparison, the SEIR model was selected for predicting COVID-19 infected, recovered, and cumulative cases. The data needed for estimation was collected from official sites of the Kuwait Government between 24 February and 1 December 2020. This study presents estimated values for peak dates and expected eradication of COVID-19 in Kuwait. The proposed estimation model is simulated using the Python Programming language on the collected data. The simulation was performed with various basic reproduction numbers (between 5.2 and 3), the initial exposed population, and the incubation rate. The results show that the SEIR model was better suited than the SIR model for predicting both infection and recovery cases with
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.