Projections for first-wave COVID-19 deaths across the US using social-distancing measures derived from mobile phones

  1. Spencer Woody
  2. Mauricio Tec
  3. Maytal Dahan
  4. Kelly Gaither
  5. Michael Lachmann
  6. Spencer J. Fox
  7. Lauren Ancel Meyers
  8. James Scott
  9. The University of Texas at Austin COVID-19 Modeling Consortium

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

We propose a Bayesian model for projecting first-wave COVID-19 deaths in all 50 U.S. states. Our model’s projections are based on data derived from mobile-phone GPS traces, which allows us to estimate how social-distancing behavior is “flattening the curve” in each state. In a two-week look-ahead test of out-of-sample forecasting accuracy, our model significantly outperforms the widely used model from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), achieving 42% lower prediction error: 13.2 deaths per day average error across all U.S. states, versus 22.8 deaths per day average error for the IHME model. Our model also provides an accurate, if slightly conservative, assessment of forecasting accuracy: in the same look-ahead test, 98% of data points fell within the model’s 95% credible intervals. Our model’s projections are updated daily at https://covid-19.tacc.utexas.edu/projections/ .

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.16.20068163: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    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.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.04.16.20068163 on medRxiv