SynthesisEpidemiologic reviews2025
Spatial and spatiotemporal machine learning models for COVID-19 dynamics: a review of methodology and reporting practices.
Synthesis in Epidemiologic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
COVID-19 has transitioned from a pandemic to an endemic state, but the emergence of novel variants continues to pose significant public health challenges. In this study, the application of spatial and spatiotemporal machine learning (ML) models in understanding the dynamics of COVID-19 was systematically reviewed, as were contextual local-level comprehensive socio-environmental drivers. A systematic search was conducted across the Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, Emcare (via Ovid), and the World Health Organization COVID-19 databases, and gray literature, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data extraction was conducted according to the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modeling Studies checklist, and study quality was assessed using a validated scoring system. A total of 42 studies met the inclusion criteria. The review Findings indicate that global-scale spatial and spatiotemporal ML models dominate the field. Long-standing standalone factors in the demographic, environmental, and socioeconomic domains are frequently used as local-level drivers. However, the integration of composite indicators, aggregating multiple standalone factors into a single score, is notably lacking. Such composite indicators have the potential to reduce model complexity, improve interpretability, and enhance performance by capturing multidimensional aspects of vulnerability or risk in a more simplified form. This review highlights critical gaps in the current use of spatial and spatiotemporal ML models to understand the spatial epidemiology of COVID-19. Addressing these gaps could significantly enhance the understanding of COVID-19 dynamics and inform the development of effective public health strategies to mitigate future threats.
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.