Abstract
During the COVID-19 pandemic, West Virginia developed an aggressive SARS-CoV-2 testing strategy which included utilizing pop-up mobile testing in locations anticipated to have near-term increases in SARS-CXoV-2 infections. In this study, we describe and compare two methods for predicting near-term SARS-CoV-2 incidence in West Virginia counties. The first method, Rt Only, is solely based on producing forecasts for each county using the daily instantaneous reproductive numbers, Rt. The second method, ML+ Rt, is a machine learning approach that uses a Long Short-Term Memory network to predict the near-term number of cases for each county using epidemiological statistics such as Rt, county population information, and time series trends including information on major holidays, as well as leveraging statewide COVID-19 trends across counties and county population size. Both approaches used daily county-level SARS-CoV-2 incidence data provided by the West Virginia Department Health and Human Resources beginning April 2020. The methods are compared on the accuracy of near-term SARS-CoV-2 increases predictions by county over 17 weeks from January 1, 2021-April 30, 2021. Both methods performed well (correlation between forecasted number of cases and the actual number of cases week over week is 0.872 for the ML+Rt method and 0.867 for the Rt Only method) but differ in performance at various time points. Over the 17-week assessment period, the ML+Rt method outperforms the Rt Only method in identifying larger spikes. We also find that both methods perform adequately in both rural and non-rural predictions. Finally, we provide a detailed discussion on practical issues regarding implementing forecasting models for public health action based on Rt, and the potential for further development of machine learning methods that are enhanced by Rt.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The project described was supported by the National Institute Of General Medical Sciences, 5U54GM104942-04 and 5U54GM104942-05S3. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All authors on the manuscript have agreed for authorship, read and approved the manuscript, and given consent for submission and subsequent publication of the manuscript. IRB approval (protocol number 2004981939) is on record with the West Virginia University Institutional Review Board.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data for this manuscript is protected to ensure privacy. Code will be made available upon final publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
