Abstract This project is funded by the US National Science Foundation (NSF) through their NSF RAPID program under the title “Modeling Corona Spread Using Big Data Analytics.” The project is a joint effort between the Department of Computer & Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at FAU and a research group from LexisNexis Risk Solutions. The novel coronavirus Covid-19 originated in China in early December 2019 and has rapidly spread to many countries around the globe, with the number of confirmed cases increasing every day. Covid-19 is officially a pandemic. It is a novel infection with serious clinical manifestations, including death, and it has reached at least 124 countries and territories. Although the ultimate course and impact of Covid-19 are uncertain, it is not merely possible but likely that the disease will produce enough severe illness to overwhelm the worldwide health care infrastructure. Emerging viral pandemics can place extraordinary and sustained demands on public health and health systems and on providers of essential community services. Modeling the Covid-19 pandemic spread is challenging. But there are data that can be used to project resource demands. Estimates of the reproductive number (R) of SARS-CoV-2 show that at the beginning of the epidemic, each infected person spreads the virus to at least two others, on average (Emanuel et al. in N Engl J Med. 2020, Livingston and Bucher in JAMA 323(14):1335, 2020). A conservatively low estimate is that 5 % of the population could become infected within 3 months. Preliminary data from China and Italy regarding the distribution of case severity and fatality vary widely (Wu and McGoogan in JAMA 323(13):1239–42, 2020). A recent large-scale analysis from China suggests that 80 % of those infected either are asymptomatic or have mild symptoms; a finding that implies that demand for advanced medical services might apply to only 20 % of the total infected. Of patients infected with Covid-19, about 15 % have severe illness and 5 % have critical illness (Emanuel et al. in N Engl J Med. 2020). Overall, mortality ranges from 0.25 % to as high as 3.0 % (Emanuel et al. in N Engl J Med. 2020, Wilson et al. in Emerg Infect Dis 26(6):1339, 2020). Case fatality rates are much higher for vulnerable populations, such as persons over the age of 80 years (> 14 %) and those with coexisting conditions (10 % for those with cardiovascular disease and 7 % for those with diabetes) (Emanuel et al. in N Engl J Med. 2020). Overall, Covid-19 is substantially deadlier than seasonal influenza, which has a mortality of roughly 0.1 %. Public health efforts depend heavily on predicting how diseases such as those caused by Covid-19 spread across the globe. During the early days of a new outbreak, when reliable data are still scarce, researchers turn to mathematical models that can predict where people who could be infected are going and how likely they are to bring the disease with them. These computational methods use known statistical equations that calculate the probability of individuals transmitting the illness. Modern computational power allows these models to quickly incorporate multiple inputs, such as a given disease’s ability to pass from person to person and the movement patterns of potentially infected people traveling by air and land. This process sometimes involves making assumptions about unknown factors, such as an individual’s exact travel pattern. By plugging in different possible versions of each input, however, researchers can update the models as new information becomes available and compare their results to observed patterns for the illness. In this paper we describe the development a model of Corona spread by using innovative big data analytics techniques and tools. We leveraged our experience from research in modeling Ebola spread (Shaw et al. Modeling Ebola Spread and Using HPCC/KEL System. In: Big Data Technologies and Applications 2016 (pp. 347-385). Springer, Cham) to successfully model Corona spread, we will obtain new results, and help in reducing the number of Corona patients. We closely collaborated with LexisNexis, which is a leading US data analytics company and a member of our NSF I/UCRC for Advanced Knowledge Enablement. The lack of a comprehensive view and informative analysis of the status of the pandemic can also cause panic and instability within society. Our work proposes the HPCC Systems Covid-19 tracker, which provides a multi-level view of the pandemic with the informative virus spreading indicators in a timely manner. The system embeds a classical epidemiological model known as SIR and spreading indicators based on causal model. The data solution of the tracker is built on top of the Big Data processing platform HPCC Systems, from ingesting and tracking of various data sources to fast delivery of the data to the public. The HPCC Systems Covid-19 tracker presents the Covid-19 data on a daily, weekly, and cumulative basis up to global-level and down to the county-level. It also provides statistical analysis for each level such as new cases per 100,000 population. The primary analysis such as Contagion Risk and Infection State is based on causal model with a seven-day sliding window. Our work has been released as a publicly available website to the world and attracted a great volume of traffic. The project is open-sourced and available on GitHub. The system was developed on the LexisNexis HPCC Systems, which is briefly described in the paper.
more »
« less
Governing with contagion: Pandemic politics, COVID‐19, and undermining public health in Florida
The United States approached the COVID‐19 pandemic with inconsistent responses that varied by state. In Florida, legislators passed laws contrary to mitigating the pandemic. These laws included banning county and municipal efforts to control the spread of COVID‐19 through mask mandates, social distancing, and prohibiting vaccination mandates during infectious disease epidemics. Moreover, the Legislature simultaneously prioritized policies of social exclusion, passing bills that constrained the rights of transgender individuals, Black Lives Matter protestors, and educators. In this article, I use the perspectives of critical medical anthropology and “governing through contagion” to examine Florida's COVID‐19 response. I argue the COVID‐19 pandemic provided an opportunity for legislators to obfuscate their political power and advance a politics of social division while simultaneously passing policies that undermined human health. I refer to this process as governing
- Award ID(s):
- 1918247
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10478132
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Medical Anthropology Quarterly
- Volume:
- 37
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 0745-5194
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 367-381
- Size(s):
- ["p. 367-381"]
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Capturing the coupled dynamics between individual behavioural decisions that affect disease transmission and the epidemiology of outbreaks is critical to pandemic mitigation strategy. We develop a multiplex network approach to model how adherence to health-protective behaviours that impact COVID-19 spread are shaped by perceived risks and resulting community norms. We focus on three synergistic dynamics governing individual behavioural choices: (i) social construction of concern, (ii) awareness of disease incidence, and (iii) reassurance by lack of disease. We show why policies enacted early or broadly can cause communities to become reassured and therefore unwilling to maintain or adopt actions. Public health policies for which success relies on collective action should therefore exploit the behaviourally receptive phase ; the period between the generation of sufficient concern to foster adoption of novel actions and the relaxation of adherence driven by reassurance fostered by avoidance of negative outcomes over time.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Background This article addresses the urgent need for more evidence-based research using primary data to document how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the health and social wellbeing of disabled individuals. Our study sought to determine if adults with disabilities, and with specific types of disability, were more likely to suffer adverse health and social impacts related to COVID-19 than nondisabled adults in metropolitan Texas, during the first 18 months of the pandemic.
Methods We collected primary data from randomly selected residents in eight Texas metropolitan areas through a bilingual telephone survey in July 2021. Statistical analysis comprised multivariable generalized estimating equations that control for relevant sociodemographic and COVID-related risk factors, and spatial clustering.
Results Disabled survey respondents had been more adversely affected by COVID-19 than nondisabled respondents, in terms of mental and physical health, health care access, living conditions and social life. Significant disparities were also found for almost all COVID-19 impacts when the disabled category was disaggregated by disability type. Respondents experiencing cognitive and independent living difficulties were negatively impacted in all five areas of life examined.
Conclusions Findings emphasize the need to consider a wide range of impacts associated with the COVID-19 pandemic that negatively affect the health and social wellbeing of disabled persons, as well as develop disability-inclusive policies that provide adequate protections.
-
The decisions of whether and how to evacuate during a climate disaster are influenced by a wide range of factors, including emergency messaging, social influences, and sociodemographics. Further complexity is introduced when multiple hazards occur simultaneously, such as a flood evacuation taking place amid a viral pandemic that requires physical distancing. Such multihazard events can necessitate a nuanced navigation of competing decision-making strategies wherein a desire to follow peers is weighed against contagion risks. To better understand these trade-offs, we distributed an online survey during a COVID-19 pandemic surge in July 2020 to 600 individuals in three midwestern and three southern states in the United States with high risk of flooding. In this paper, we estimate a random parameter discrete choice model in both preference space and willingness-to-pay space. The results of our model show that the directionality and magnitude of the influence of peers’ choices of whether and how to evacuate vary widely across respondents. Overall, the decision of whether to evacuate is positively impacted by peer behavior, while the decision of how to evacuate (i.e., ride-type selection) is negatively impacted by peer influence. Furthermore, an increase in flood threat level lessens the magnitude of peer impacts. In terms of the COVID-19 pandemic impacts, respondents who perceive it to be a major health risk are more reluctant to evacuate, but this effect is mitigated by increased flood threat level. These findings have important implications for the design of tailored emergency messaging strategies and the role of shared rides in multihazard evacuations. Specifically, emphasizing or deemphasizing the severity of each threat in a multihazard scenario may assist in: (1) encouraging a reprioritization of competing risk perceptions; and (2) magnifying or neutralizing the impacts of social influence, thereby (3) nudging evacuation decision-making toward a desired outcome.more » « less
-
more » « less
Subnational governments in the United States have taken the lead on many aspects of the response to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Variation in government activity across states offers the opportunity to analyze responses in comparable settings. We study a common and informative activity among state officials—state legislators’ attention to the pandemic on Twitter. We find that legislators’ attention to the pandemic strongly correlates with the number of cases in the legislator’s state, the national count of new deaths, and the number of pandemic‐related public policies passed within the legislator’s state. Furthermore, we find that the degree of responsiveness to pandemic indicators differs significantly across political parties, with Republicans exhibiting weaker responses, on average. Lastly, we find significant differences in the content of tweets about the pandemic by Democratic and Republican legislators, with Democrats focused on health indicators and impacts, and Republicans focused on business impacts and opening the economy.
