ArticleBMJ open2023
Novel model prediction time-to-event analysis: data validation and estimation of 200 million cases in the global COVID-19 epidemic.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
objectivesAssessment of recuperation and death times of a population inflicted by an epidemic has only been feasible through studying a sample of individuals via time-to-event analysis, which requires identified participants. Therefore, we aimed to introduce an original model to estimate the average recovery/death times of infected population of contagious diseases without the need to undertake survival analysis and just through the data of unidentified infected, recovered and dead cases.
designCross-sectional study.
settingAn internet source that asserted from official sources of each government. The model includes two techniques-curve fitting and optimisation problems. First, in the curve fitting process, the data of the three classes are simultaneously fitted to functions with defined constraints to derive the average times. In the optimisation problems, data are directly fed to the technique to achieve the average times. Further, the model is applied to the available data of COVID-19 of 200 million people throughout the globe.
resultsThe average times obtained by the two techniques indicated conformity with one another showing p values of 0.69, 0.51, 0.48 and 0.13 with one, two, three and four surges in our timespan, respectively. Two types of irregularity are detectable in the data, significant difference between the infected population and the sum of the recovered and deceased population (discrepancy) and abrupt increase in the cumulative distributions (step). Two indices, discrepancy index (DI) and error of fit index (EI), are developed to quantify these irregularities and correlate them with the conformity of the time averages obtained by the two techniques. The correlations between DI and EI and the quantified conformity of the results were -0.74 and -0.93, respectively.
conclusionThe results of statistical analyses point out that the proposed model is suitable to estimate the average times between recovery and death.
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.