PMC:7001239 / 10702-11978 JSONTXT

Annnotations TAB JSON ListView MergeView

    LitCovid-PubTator

    {"project":"LitCovid-PubTator","denotations":[{"id":"161","span":{"begin":838,"end":846},"obj":"Disease"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A161","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"161","obj":"MESH:D007239"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"Tax","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/taxonomy/"},{"prefix":"MESH","uri":"https://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/"},{"prefix":"Gene","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/"},{"prefix":"CVCL","uri":"https://web.expasy.org/cellosaurus/CVCL_"}],"text":"The scarcity of available data, especially on case counts by date of disease onset as well as contact tracing, greatly limits the precision of our estimates and does not yet allow for reliable forecasts of epidemic spread. Case counts provided by local authorities in the early stage of an emerging epidemic are notoriously unreliable as reporting rates are unstable and vary with time. This is due to many factors such as the initial lack of proper diagnosis tools, the focus on the more severe cases or the overcrowding of hospitals. We avoided this surveillance bias by relying on an indirect estimate of epidemic size on 18 January, based on cases identified in foreign countries before quarantine measures were implemented on 23 January. This estimated range of epidemic size relies itself on several assumptions, including that all infected individuals who travelled from Wuhan to other countries have been detected [6]. This caveat may lead to an underestimation of transmissibility, especially considering the recent reports about asymptomatic cases [4]. Conversely, our results do not depend on any assumption about the existence of asymptomatic transmission, and only reflect the possible combinations of transmission events that lead to the situation on 18 January."}

    LitCovid-PD-CLO

    {"project":"LitCovid-PD-CLO","denotations":[{"id":"T95","span":{"begin":471,"end":476},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0009985"},{"id":"T96","span":{"begin":625,"end":627},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0050510"},{"id":"T97","span":{"begin":1265,"end":1267},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0050510"}],"text":"The scarcity of available data, especially on case counts by date of disease onset as well as contact tracing, greatly limits the precision of our estimates and does not yet allow for reliable forecasts of epidemic spread. Case counts provided by local authorities in the early stage of an emerging epidemic are notoriously unreliable as reporting rates are unstable and vary with time. This is due to many factors such as the initial lack of proper diagnosis tools, the focus on the more severe cases or the overcrowding of hospitals. We avoided this surveillance bias by relying on an indirect estimate of epidemic size on 18 January, based on cases identified in foreign countries before quarantine measures were implemented on 23 January. This estimated range of epidemic size relies itself on several assumptions, including that all infected individuals who travelled from Wuhan to other countries have been detected [6]. This caveat may lead to an underestimation of transmissibility, especially considering the recent reports about asymptomatic cases [4]. Conversely, our results do not depend on any assumption about the existence of asymptomatic transmission, and only reflect the possible combinations of transmission events that lead to the situation on 18 January."}

    LitCovid-sentences

    {"project":"LitCovid-sentences","denotations":[{"id":"T81","span":{"begin":0,"end":222},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T82","span":{"begin":223,"end":386},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T83","span":{"begin":387,"end":535},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T84","span":{"begin":536,"end":742},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T85","span":{"begin":743,"end":926},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T86","span":{"begin":927,"end":1062},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T87","span":{"begin":1063,"end":1276},"obj":"Sentence"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"_base","uri":"http://pubannotation.org/ontology/tao.owl#"}],"text":"The scarcity of available data, especially on case counts by date of disease onset as well as contact tracing, greatly limits the precision of our estimates and does not yet allow for reliable forecasts of epidemic spread. Case counts provided by local authorities in the early stage of an emerging epidemic are notoriously unreliable as reporting rates are unstable and vary with time. This is due to many factors such as the initial lack of proper diagnosis tools, the focus on the more severe cases or the overcrowding of hospitals. We avoided this surveillance bias by relying on an indirect estimate of epidemic size on 18 January, based on cases identified in foreign countries before quarantine measures were implemented on 23 January. This estimated range of epidemic size relies itself on several assumptions, including that all infected individuals who travelled from Wuhan to other countries have been detected [6]. This caveat may lead to an underestimation of transmissibility, especially considering the recent reports about asymptomatic cases [4]. Conversely, our results do not depend on any assumption about the existence of asymptomatic transmission, and only reflect the possible combinations of transmission events that lead to the situation on 18 January."}

    2_test

    {"project":"2_test","denotations":[{"id":"32019669-31986261-29338358","span":{"begin":1059,"end":1060},"obj":"31986261"}],"text":"The scarcity of available data, especially on case counts by date of disease onset as well as contact tracing, greatly limits the precision of our estimates and does not yet allow for reliable forecasts of epidemic spread. Case counts provided by local authorities in the early stage of an emerging epidemic are notoriously unreliable as reporting rates are unstable and vary with time. This is due to many factors such as the initial lack of proper diagnosis tools, the focus on the more severe cases or the overcrowding of hospitals. We avoided this surveillance bias by relying on an indirect estimate of epidemic size on 18 January, based on cases identified in foreign countries before quarantine measures were implemented on 23 January. This estimated range of epidemic size relies itself on several assumptions, including that all infected individuals who travelled from Wuhan to other countries have been detected [6]. This caveat may lead to an underestimation of transmissibility, especially considering the recent reports about asymptomatic cases [4]. Conversely, our results do not depend on any assumption about the existence of asymptomatic transmission, and only reflect the possible combinations of transmission events that lead to the situation on 18 January."}

    MyTest

    {"project":"MyTest","denotations":[{"id":"32019669-31986261-29338358","span":{"begin":1059,"end":1060},"obj":"31986261"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"_base","uri":"https://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/testbase"},{"prefix":"UniProtKB","uri":"https://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/"},{"prefix":"uniprot","uri":"https://www.uniprot.org/uniprotkb/"}],"text":"The scarcity of available data, especially on case counts by date of disease onset as well as contact tracing, greatly limits the precision of our estimates and does not yet allow for reliable forecasts of epidemic spread. Case counts provided by local authorities in the early stage of an emerging epidemic are notoriously unreliable as reporting rates are unstable and vary with time. This is due to many factors such as the initial lack of proper diagnosis tools, the focus on the more severe cases or the overcrowding of hospitals. We avoided this surveillance bias by relying on an indirect estimate of epidemic size on 18 January, based on cases identified in foreign countries before quarantine measures were implemented on 23 January. This estimated range of epidemic size relies itself on several assumptions, including that all infected individuals who travelled from Wuhan to other countries have been detected [6]. This caveat may lead to an underestimation of transmissibility, especially considering the recent reports about asymptomatic cases [4]. Conversely, our results do not depend on any assumption about the existence of asymptomatic transmission, and only reflect the possible combinations of transmission events that lead to the situation on 18 January."}