ArticleJournal of healthcare engineering2022
Comparison of Conventional Modeling Techniques with the Neural Network Autoregressive Model (NNAR): Application to COVID-19 Data.
Article in Journal of healthcare engineering, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modeling and Forecasting Dead-on-Arrival in Broilers Using Time Series Methods: A Case Study from Thailand.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Spatial Distribution Analysis and Comparative Forecasting of Dengue Resurgence in the Philippines (2025-2027): A Nationwide Study.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2025Article
- Trends and multi-model prediction of hepatitis B incidence in Xiamen.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2024Article
- Collateral effects of COVID-19 countermeasures on hepatitis E incidence pattern: a case study of china based on time series models.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Pakistan COJournal of environmental and public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to destroy human life around the world. Almost every country throughout the globe suffered from this pandemic, forcing various governments to apply different restrictions to reduce its impact. In this study, we compare different time-series models with the neural network autoregressive model (NNAR). The study used COVID-19 data in Pakistan from February 26, 2020, to February 18, 2022, as a training and testing data set for modeling. Different models were applied and estimated on the training data set, and these models were assessed on the testing data set. Based on the mean absolute scaled error (MAE) and root mean square error (RMSE) for the training and testing data sets, the NNAR model outperformed the autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model and other competing models indicating that the NNAR model is the most appropriate for forecasting. Forecasts from the NNAR model showed that the cumulative confirmed COVID-19 cases will be 1,597,180 and cumulative confirmed COVID-19 deaths will be 32,628 on April 18, 2022. We encourage the Pakistan Government to boost its immunization policy.
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.