PMC:7224658 / 16609-17707 JSONTXT

{"project":"LitCovid-PubTator","denotations":[{"id":"141","span":{"begin":772,"end":780},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"143","span":{"begin":704,"end":712},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"148","span":{"begin":151,"end":159},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"149","span":{"begin":294,"end":302},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"150","span":{"begin":512,"end":520},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"151","span":{"begin":633,"end":641},"obj":"Disease"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A141","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"141","obj":"MESH:C000657245"},{"id":"A143","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"143","obj":"MESH:C000657245"},{"id":"A148","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"148","obj":"MESH:C000657245"},{"id":"A149","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"149","obj":"MESH:C000657245"},{"id":"A150","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"150","obj":"MESH:C000657245"},{"id":"A151","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"151","obj":"MESH:C000657245"}],"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":"In Table 3 the analyses in Table 2, Figure 4, and Figure 5 have been classified into types for each region, based on whether the trends in traffic and COVID-19 were increasing or decreasing. Incheon was categorized as a region requiring strong control (Type 1), with increasing trends for both COVID-19 spread and traffic. Gyeonggi and Seoul were categorized as regions in the early stages of focused control or requiring control (Type 2), with increasing traffic but a relatively stable trend for new confirmed COVID-19 cases. The other regions were categorized as stable (Type 3), with increasing traffic but decreasing trends for COVID-19 spread.\nTable 3 The level of relationship between traffic and COVID-19 in cities, 2020.\nTrend in 2020 Specific City\nLevel Traffic COVID-19\n1 + + (Danger) Strong control required Incheon\n2 0 (Caution) Control required, or in the early stage of focused control Gyeonggi, Seoul\n3 − (Stable) Under stable control Daegu, Busan, Gwangju, Daejeon, Ulsan, Sejong, Chungbuk, Chungnam, Jeonbuk, Jeonnam, Gyeongbuk, Gyeongnam\n+ = increasing; 0 = same; − = decreasing."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-MONDO","denotations":[{"id":"T52","span":{"begin":151,"end":159},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T53","span":{"begin":294,"end":302},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T54","span":{"begin":512,"end":520},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T55","span":{"begin":633,"end":641},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T56","span":{"begin":704,"end":712},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T57","span":{"begin":772,"end":780},"obj":"Disease"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A52","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T52","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0100096"},{"id":"A53","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T53","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0100096"},{"id":"A54","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T54","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0100096"},{"id":"A55","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T55","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0100096"},{"id":"A56","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T56","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0100096"},{"id":"A57","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T57","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0100096"}],"text":"In Table 3 the analyses in Table 2, Figure 4, and Figure 5 have been classified into types for each region, based on whether the trends in traffic and COVID-19 were increasing or decreasing. Incheon was categorized as a region requiring strong control (Type 1), with increasing trends for both COVID-19 spread and traffic. Gyeonggi and Seoul were categorized as regions in the early stages of focused control or requiring control (Type 2), with increasing traffic but a relatively stable trend for new confirmed COVID-19 cases. The other regions were categorized as stable (Type 3), with increasing traffic but decreasing trends for COVID-19 spread.\nTable 3 The level of relationship between traffic and COVID-19 in cities, 2020.\nTrend in 2020 Specific City\nLevel Traffic COVID-19\n1 + + (Danger) Strong control required Incheon\n2 0 (Caution) Control required, or in the early stage of focused control Gyeonggi, Seoul\n3 − (Stable) Under stable control Daegu, Busan, Gwangju, Daejeon, Ulsan, Sejong, Chungbuk, Chungnam, Jeonbuk, Jeonnam, Gyeongbuk, Gyeongnam\n+ = increasing; 0 = same; − = decreasing."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-CLO","denotations":[{"id":"T66","span":{"begin":218,"end":219},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T67","span":{"begin":393,"end":400},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0009985"},{"id":"T68","span":{"begin":468,"end":469},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T69","span":{"begin":885,"end":892},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0009985"}],"text":"In Table 3 the analyses in Table 2, Figure 4, and Figure 5 have been classified into types for each region, based on whether the trends in traffic and COVID-19 were increasing or decreasing. Incheon was categorized as a region requiring strong control (Type 1), with increasing trends for both COVID-19 spread and traffic. Gyeonggi and Seoul were categorized as regions in the early stages of focused control or requiring control (Type 2), with increasing traffic but a relatively stable trend for new confirmed COVID-19 cases. The other regions were categorized as stable (Type 3), with increasing traffic but decreasing trends for COVID-19 spread.\nTable 3 The level of relationship between traffic and COVID-19 in cities, 2020.\nTrend in 2020 Specific City\nLevel Traffic COVID-19\n1 + + (Danger) Strong control required Incheon\n2 0 (Caution) Control required, or in the early stage of focused control Gyeonggi, Seoul\n3 − (Stable) Under stable control Daegu, Busan, Gwangju, Daejeon, Ulsan, Sejong, Chungbuk, Chungnam, Jeonbuk, Jeonnam, Gyeongbuk, Gyeongnam\n+ = increasing; 0 = same; − = decreasing."}

{"project":"LitCovid-sentences","denotations":[{"id":"T151","span":{"begin":0,"end":190},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T152","span":{"begin":191,"end":322},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T153","span":{"begin":323,"end":527},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T154","span":{"begin":528,"end":649},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T155","span":{"begin":650,"end":729},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T156","span":{"begin":730,"end":757},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T157","span":{"begin":758,"end":780},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T158","span":{"begin":781,"end":827},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T159","span":{"begin":828,"end":916},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T160","span":{"begin":917,"end":1056},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T161","span":{"begin":1057,"end":1098},"obj":"Sentence"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"_base","uri":"http://pubannotation.org/ontology/tao.owl#"}],"text":"In Table 3 the analyses in Table 2, Figure 4, and Figure 5 have been classified into types for each region, based on whether the trends in traffic and COVID-19 were increasing or decreasing. Incheon was categorized as a region requiring strong control (Type 1), with increasing trends for both COVID-19 spread and traffic. Gyeonggi and Seoul were categorized as regions in the early stages of focused control or requiring control (Type 2), with increasing traffic but a relatively stable trend for new confirmed COVID-19 cases. The other regions were categorized as stable (Type 3), with increasing traffic but decreasing trends for COVID-19 spread.\nTable 3 The level of relationship between traffic and COVID-19 in cities, 2020.\nTrend in 2020 Specific City\nLevel Traffic COVID-19\n1 + + (Danger) Strong control required Incheon\n2 0 (Caution) Control required, or in the early stage of focused control Gyeonggi, Seoul\n3 − (Stable) Under stable control Daegu, Busan, Gwangju, Daejeon, Ulsan, Sejong, Chungbuk, Chungnam, Jeonbuk, Jeonnam, Gyeongbuk, Gyeongnam\n+ = increasing; 0 = same; − = decreasing."}