ArticleScientific reports2026
Differentially private federated learning for localized control of infectious disease dynamics.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- MEmilio: a high performance Modular EpideMIcs simuLatIOn software for multi-scale and comparative simulations of infectious disease dynamics.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Differentially private federated learning for localized control of infectious disease dynamics.Scientific reports · 2026Article
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
In times of epidemics, swift reaction is necessary to mitigate epidemic spreading. For this reaction, localized approaches have several advantages, limiting necessary resources and reducing the impact of interventions on a larger scale. However, training a separate machine learning (ML) model on a local scale is often not feasible due to limited available data. Centralizing the data is also challenging because of its high sensitivity and privacy constraints. In this study, we consider a localized strategy based on the German counties and communities managed by the related local health authorities (LHA). For the preservation of privacy to not oppose the availability of detailed situational data, we propose a privacy-preserving forecasting method that can assist public health experts and decision makers. ML methods with federated learning (FL) train a shared model without centralizing raw data. Considering the counties, communities or LHAs as clients and finding a balance between utility and privacy, we study a FL framework with client-level differential privacy (DP). We train a shared multilayer perceptron on sliding windows of recent case counts to forecast the number of cases in the future, while clients exchange only norm-clipped updates and the server aggregates updates with DP noise. We evaluate the approach on COVID-19 data on county-level during two phases: November 2020 and March 2022 (Omicron). As expected, very strict privacy ([Formula: see text]) yields unstable, unusable forecasts. At a moderately strong but still privacy-preserving level ([Formula: see text]), the DP model closely approaches the non-DP model: [Formula: see text] (vs. 0.96) and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) [Formula: see text] in November 2020; [Formula: see text] (vs. 0.90) and MAPE [Formula: see text] in March 2022. Overall, our results support the feasibility of privacy-preserving collaboration among health authorities for local forecasting. In the evaluated COVID-19 phases, client-level DP-FL delivered useful county-level predictions with formal privacy guarantees under the stated threat model. The appropriate privacy budget should nevertheless be re-evaluated for other epidemic phases and applications.
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.