Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35280115›Full record

ArticleResults in physics2022

Uncertainty quantification in Covid-19 spread: Lockdown effects.

Ana Carpio, Emile Pierret

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Results in physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Decoding uncertainty for clinical decision-making.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025
    Article
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

2 authors.

Ana CarpioDepartamento de Matemática Aplicada, Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain.
Emile PierretCMLA, ENS Paris-Saclay, 91190 Gif-sur-Yvette, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We develop a Bayesian inference framework to quantify uncertainties in epidemiological models. We use SEIJR and SIJR models involving populations of susceptible, exposed, infective, diagnosed, dead and recovered individuals to infer from Covid-19 data rate constants, as well as their variations in response to lockdown measures. To account for confinement, we distinguish two susceptible populations at different risk: confined and unconfined. We show that transmission and recovery rates within them vary in response to facts, and that the diagnose rate is quite low, which leads to large amounts of undiagnosed infective individuals. A key unknown to predict the evolution of the epidemic is the fraction of the population affected by the virus, including asymptomatic subjects. Our study tracks its time evolution with quantified uncertainty from available official data, limited, however, by the data quality. We exemplify the technique with data from Spain, country in which late drastic lockdowns were enforced for months during the first wave of the current pandemic. In late actions and in the absence of other measures, spread is delayed but not stopped unless a large enough fraction of the population is confined until the asymptomatic population is depleted. To some extent, confinement can be replaced by strong distancing through masks in adequate circumstances.

Indexed as

Bayesian inferenceCovid-19Numerical simulationSEIJR modelsUncertainty quantification

Identifiers

PMID35280115
PMCPMC8897887

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.