ArticlePLOS global public health2022
Accuracy comparison of ARIMA and XGBoost forecasting models in predicting the incidence of COVID-19 in Bangladesh.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spatiotemporal patterns of climate-sensitive vector-borne diseases in Bangladesh: leveraging machine learning and spatial regression for intervention strategies.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Data-Driven Machine Learning-Based Forecasting of Dengue in Bangladesh: Supporting Digital Health Approaches for Early Warning.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Combination forecasting of COVID-19 in Bangladesh: guiding public health policy through integrated time series, ML, and DL models.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Stroke Mortality in Kazakhstan: Comparison of National Health Records to Global Burden of Disease Study.JACC. Asia · 2025Article
- Knowledge and beliefs about climate change and emerging infectious diseases in bangladesh: implications for one health approach.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2025Article
- Dengue Early Warning System and Outbreak Prediction Tool in Bangladesh Using Interpretable Tree-Based Machine Learning Model.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Machine learning and spatio-temporal analysis of meteorological factors on waterborne diseases in Bangladesh.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
- Spatio-temporal pattern and associate meteorological factors of airborne diseases in Bangladesh using geospatial mapping and spatial regression model.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Combining the dynamic model and deep neural networks to identify the intensity of interventions during COVID-19 pandemic.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Improvement of Time Forecasting Models Using Machine Learning for Future Pandemic Applications Based on COVID-19 Data 2020-2022.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- COVID-19 Patterns in Araraquara, Brazil: A Multimodal Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Developing forecasting model for future pandemic applications based on COVID-19 data 2020-2022.PloS one · 2023Article
- The importance of investing in data, models, experiments, team science, and public trust to help policymakers prepare for the next pandemic.PLOS global public health · 2023Review
- A tree based eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) machine learning model to forecast the annual rice production in Bangladesh.PloS one · 2023Article
- Machine Learning and COVID-19: Lessons from SARS-CoV-2.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023Article
- Role of artificial intelligence-internet of things (AI-IoT) based emerging technologies in the public health response to infectious diseases in Bangladesh.Parasite epidemiology and control · 2022Article
- A data-driven eXtreme gradient boosting machine learning model to predict COVID-19 transmission with meteorological drivers.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate predictive time series modelling is important in public health planning and response during the emergence of a novel pandemic. Therefore, the aims of the study are three-fold: (a) to model the overall trend of COVID-19 confirmed cases and deaths in Bangladesh; (b) to generate a short-term forecast of 8 weeks of COVID-19 cases and deaths; (c) to compare the predictive accuracy of the Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) for precise modelling of non-linear features and seasonal trends of the time series. The data were collected from the onset of the epidemic in Bangladesh from the Directorate General of Health Service (DGHS) and Institute of Epidemiology, Disease Control and Research (IEDCR). The daily confirmed cases and deaths of COVID-19 of 633 days in Bangladesh were divided into several training and test sets. The ARIMA and XGBoost models were established using those training data, and the test sets were used to evaluate each model's ability to forecast and finally averaged all the predictive performances to choose the best model. The predictive accuracy of the models was assessed using the mean absolute error (MAE), mean percentage error (MPE), root mean square error (RMSE) and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE). The findings reveal the existence of a nonlinear trend and weekly seasonality in the dataset. The average error measures of the ARIMA model for both COVID-19 confirmed cases and deaths were lower than XGBoost model. Hence, in our study, the ARIMA model performed better than the XGBoost model in predicting COVID-19 confirmed cases and deaths in Bangladesh. The suggested prediction model might play a critical role in estimating the spread of a novel pandemic in Bangladesh and similar countries.
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.