Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText.
Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>
A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences
Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

suck abstract from ncbi


10.1016/j.mjafi.2020.06.001

http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1016/j.mjafi.2020.06.001
suck pdf from google scholar
C7298493!7298493!32836710
unlimited free pdf from europmc32836710    free
PDF from PMC    free
html from PMC    free

suck abstract from ncbi

pmid32836710      Med+J+Armed+Forces+India 2020 ; 76 (4): 377-86
Nephropedia Template TP

gab.com Text

Twit Text FOAVip

Twit Text #

English Wikipedia


  • Predictive models of COVID-19 in India: A rapid review #MMPMID32836710
  • Kotwal A; Yadav AK; Yadav J; Kotwal J; Khune S
  • Med J Armed Forces India 2020[Oct]; 76 (4): 377-86 PMID32836710show ga
  • Background: The mathematical modelling of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has been attempted by a wide range of researchers from the very beginning of cases in India. Initial analysis of available models revealed large variations in scope, assumptions, predictions, course, effect of interventions, effect on health-care services, and so on. Thus, a rapid review was conducted for narrative synthesis and to assess correlation between predicted and actual values of cases in India. Methods: A comprehensive, two-step search strategy was adopted, wherein the databases such as Medline, google scholar, MedRxiv, and BioRxiv were searched. Later, hand searching for the articles and contacting known modelers for unpublished models was resorted. The data from the included studies were extracted by the two investigators independently and checked by third researcher. Results: Based on the literature search, 30 articles were included in this review. As narrative synthesis, data from the studies were summarized in terms of assumptions, model used, predictions, main recommendations, and findings. The Pearson?s correlation coefficient (r) between predicted and actual values (n = 20) was 0.7 (p = 0.002) with R2 = 0.49. For Susceptible, Infected, Recovered (SIR) and its variant models (n = 16) ?r? was 0.65 (p = 0.02). The correlation for long-term predictions could not be assessed due to paucity of information. Conclusion: Review has shown the importance of assumptions and strong correlation between short-term projections but uncertainties for long-term predictions. Thus, short-term predictions may be revised as more and more data become available. The assumptions too need to expand and firm up as the pandemic evolves.
  • ä


  • DeepDyve
  • Pubget Overpricing
  • suck abstract from ncbi

    Linkout box