Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36527071›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2022

"Won't get fooled again": statistical fault detection in COVID-19 Latin American data.

Dalson Figueiredo Filho, Lucas Silva, Hugo Medeiros

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 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. 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

3 authors.

Dalson Figueiredo FilhoDepartment of Political Science, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.
Lucas SilvaDepartment of Medicine, Universidade Estadual de Ciências da Saúde do Estado de Alagoas, Rua Dr. Jorge de Lima, 113 - Trapiche da Barra, Maceió, Alagoas, 57010-300, Brazil. lucas.silva@academico.uncisal.edu.br.ORCID 0000-0002-5013-6278
Hugo MedeirosDepartment of Political Science, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClaims of inconsistency in epidemiological data have emerged for both developed and developing countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.

methodsIn this paper, we apply first-digit Newcomb-Benford Law (NBL) and Kullback-Leibler Divergence (KLD) to evaluate COVID-19 records reliability in all 20 Latin American countries. We replicate country-level aggregate information from Our World in Data.

resultsWe find that official reports do not follow NBL's theoretical expectations (n = 978; chi-square = 78.95; KS = 4.33, MD = 2.18; mantissa = .54; MAD = .02; DF = 12.75). KLD estimates indicate high divergence among countries, including some outliers.

conclusionsThis paper provides evidence that recorded COVID-19 cases in Latin America do not conform overall to NBL, which is a useful tool for detecting data manipulation. Our study suggests that further investigations should be made into surveillance systems that exhibit higher deviation from the theoretical distribution and divergence from other similar countries.

Indexed as

COVID-19HumansLatin AmericaPandemicsReproducibility of ResultsData reliabilityKullback-Leibler divergenceLatin AmericaNewcomb-Benford lawPublic health surveillance

Identifiers

PMID36527071
PMCPMC9756688

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.