Challenges in Tracking the Risk of COVID-19 in Bangladesh: Evaluation of A Novel Method

  1. Md. Enamul Hoque
  2. Md. Shariful Islam
  3. Arnab Sen Sharma
  4. Rashedul Islam
  5. Mohammad Ruhul Amin

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Identifying actual risk zones in a country where the overall test positive rate (TPR) is higher than 5% is crucial to contain the pandemic. However, TPR-based risk zoning methods are debatable since they do not consider the rate of infection in an area and thus, it has been observed to overestimate the risk. Similarly, the rate of infection in an area has been noticed to underestimate the risk of COVID-19 spreading for the zones with higher TPR. In this article, we discuss the shortcomings of currently available risk zoning methods that are followed in the lower-middle-income countries (LMIC), especially in Bangladesh. We then propose to determine a risk zone by combining the rate of infection with TPR and effective reproduction number, R t in a distinct manner from existing methods. We evaluate the efficacy of the proposed method with respect to the mass-movement events and show its application to track the evolution of COVID-19 pandemic by identifying the risk zones over time. Demo website for the visualization of the analysis can be found at: http://erdos.dsm.fordham.edu:3000

CCS CONCEPTS

  • Applied computing → Health informatics .

ACM Reference Format

Md. Enamul Hoque, Md. Shariful Islam, Arnab Sen Sharma, Rashedul Islam, and Mohammad Ruhul Amin. 2021. Challenges in Tracking the Risk of COVID-19 in Bangladesh: Evaluation of A Novel Method. In Proceedings of August 15 (KDD Workshop on Data-driven Humanitarian Mapping, 27th ACM SIGKDD Conference) . ACM, New York, NY, USA, 7 pages.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.08.03.21261567: (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.
    • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    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 10.1101/2021.08.03.21261567v1 on medRxiv