Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37639427›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2023

Neural network models for influenza forecasting with associated uncertainty using Web search activity trends.

Michael Morris, Peter Hayes, Ingemar J Cox, Vasileios Lampos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

Michael MorrisUniversity College London, Centre for Artificial Intelligence, Department of Computer Science, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0000-5265-9534
Peter HayesUniversity College London, Centre for Artificial Intelligence, Department of Computer Science, London, United Kingdom.
Ingemar J CoxUniversity College London, Centre for Artificial Intelligence, Department of Computer Science, London, United Kingdom.
Vasileios LamposUniversity College London, Centre for Artificial Intelligence, Department of Computer Science, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8555-2063

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Influenza affects millions of people every year. It causes a considerable amount of medical visits and hospitalisations as well as hundreds of thousands of deaths. Forecasting influenza prevalence with good accuracy can significantly help public health agencies to timely react to seasonal or novel strain epidemics. Although significant progress has been made, influenza forecasting remains a challenging modelling task. In this paper, we propose a methodological framework that improves over the state-of-the-art forecasting accuracy of influenza-like illness (ILI) rates in the United States. We achieve this by using Web search activity time series in conjunction with historical ILI rates as observations for training neural network (NN) architectures. The proposed models incorporate Bayesian layers to produce associated uncertainty intervals to their forecast estimates, positioning themselves as legitimate complementary solutions to more conventional approaches. The best performing NN, referred to as the iterative recurrent neural network (IRNN) architecture, reduces mean absolute error by 10.3% and improves skill by 17.1% on average in nowcasting and forecasting tasks across 4 consecutive flu seasons.

Indexed as

EpidemicsInfluenza, HumanBayes TheoremHumansNeural Networks, ComputerUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID37639427
PMCPMC10491400

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.