Early warning signal reliability varies with COVID-19 waves
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Early warning signals (EWSs) aim to predict changes in complex systems from phenomenological signals in time series data. These signals have recently been shown to precede the emergence of disease outbreaks, offering hope that policymakers can make predictive rather than reactive management decisions. Here, using a novel, sequential analysis in combination with daily COVID-19 case data across 24 countries, we suggest that composite EWSs consisting of variance, autocorrelation and skewness can predict nonlinear case increases, but that the predictive ability of these tools varies between waves based upon the degree of critical slowing down present. Our work suggests that in highly monitored disease time series such as COVID-19, EWSs offer the opportunity for policymakers to improve the accuracy of urgent intervention decisions but best characterize hypothesized critical transitions.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.06.24.21259444: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank…
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.06.24.21259444: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
