Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34731188›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Predicting increases in COVID-19 incidence to identify locations for targeted testing in West Virginia: A machine learning enhanced approach.

Bradley S Price, Maryam Khodaverdi, Adam Halasz, Brian Hendricks, Wesley Kimble, Gordon S Smith, Sally L Hodder

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Gaps in artificial intelligence research for rural health in the United States: a scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Bradley S PriceWest Virginia Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0619-3347
Maryam KhodaverdiWest Virginia Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7559-1656
Adam HalaszSchool of Mathematics and Data Science, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.
Brian HendricksDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.
Wesley KimbleWest Virginia Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3325-3808
Gordon S SmithDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.
Sally L HodderWest Virginia Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.

Funding

West Virginia IDEA-CTRU54GM104942 · NIGMS · WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY · PI Laura F. Gibson · 2012 to 2026
$81.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM104942NIH HHS 5U54 GM104942-04NIH HHS 5U5 GM104942-05S3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic, West Virginia developed an aggressive SARS-CoV-2 testing strategy which included utilizing pop-up mobile testing in locations anticipated to have near-term increases in SARS-CoV-2 infections. This study describes and compares two methods for predicting near-term SARS-CoV-2 incidence in West Virginia counties. The first method, Rt Only, is solely based on producing forecasts for each county using the daily instantaneous reproductive numbers, Rt. The second method, ML+Rt, is a machine learning approach that uses a Long Short-Term Memory network to predict the near-term number of cases for each county using epidemiological statistics such as Rt, county population information, and time series trends including information on major holidays, as well as leveraging statewide COVID-19 trends across counties and county population size. Both approaches used daily county-level SARS-CoV-2 incidence data provided by the West Virginia Department Health and Human Resources beginning April 2020. The methods are compared on the accuracy of near-term SARS-CoV-2 increases predictions by county over 17 weeks from January 1, 2021- April 30, 2021. Both methods performed well (correlation between forecasted number of cases and the actual number of cases week over week is 0.872 for the ML+Rt method and 0.867 for the Rt Only method) but differ in performance at various time points. Over the 17-week assessment period, the ML+Rt method outperforms the Rt Only method in identifying larger spikes. Results show that both methods perform adequately in both rural and non-rural predictions. Finally, a detailed discussion on practical issues regarding implementing forecasting models for public health action based on Rt is provided, and the potential for further development of machine learning methods that are enhanced by Rt.

Indexed as

Machine LearningCOVID-19COVID-19 TestingForecastingHumansIncidenceModels, StatisticalPredictive Value of TestsRural PopulationWest Virginia

Identifiers

PMID34731188
PMCPMC8565789

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.