This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Published on 4.4.2024 in Vol 26 (2024)

Moving Biosurveillance Beyond Coded Data Using AI for Symptom Detection From Physician Notes: Retrospective Cohort Study

Authors of this article:

Author Orcid Image

Original Paper

  • Andrew J McMurry 1, 2 , PhD   ; 
  • Amy R Zipursky 1, 3 , MD, MBI   ; 
  • Alon Geva 1, 4, 5 , MD, MPH   ; 
  • Karen L Olson 1, 2 , PhD   ; 
  • James R Jones 1 , MPhil   ; 
  • Vladimir Ignatov 1 , MFA   ; 
  • Timothy A Miller 1, 2 , PhD   ; 
  • Kenneth D Mandl 1, 2, 6 , MD, MPH  

1 Computational Health Informatics Program, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, United States

2 Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States

3 Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada

4 Division of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, United States

5 Department of Anaesthesia, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States

6 Department of Biomedical Informatics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States

Corresponding Author:

Kenneth D Mandl, MD, MPH

Computational Health Informatics Program

Boston Children's Hospital

Landmark 5506 Mail Stop BCH3187, 401 Park Drive

Boston, MA, 02215

United States

Phone: 1 6173554145

Email: [email protected]

Background: Real-time surveillance of emerging infectious diseases necessitates a dynamically evolving, computable case definition, which frequently incorporates symptom-related criteria. For symptom detection, both population health monitoring platforms and research initiatives primarily depend on structured data extracted from electronic health records.

Objective: This study sought to validate and test an artificial intelligence (AI)–based natural language processing (NLP) pipeline for detecting COVID-19 symptoms from physician notes in pediatric patients. We specifically study patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) who can be sentinel cases in an outbreak.

Methods: Subjects in this retrospective cohort study are patients who are 21 years of age and younger, who presented to a pediatric ED at a large academic children’s hospital between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2022. The ED notes for all patients were processed with an NLP pipeline tuned to detect the mention of 11 COVID-19 symptoms based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria. For a gold standard, 3 subject matter experts labeled 226 ED notes and had strong agreement ( F 1 -score=0.986; positive predictive value [PPV]=0.972; and sensitivity=1.0). F 1 -score, PPV, and sensitivity were used to compare the performance of both NLP and the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) coding to the gold standard chart review. As a formative use case, variations in symptom patterns were measured across SARS-CoV-2 variant eras.

Results: There were 85,678 ED encounters during the study period, including 4% (n=3420) with patients with COVID-19. NLP was more accurate at identifying encounters with patients that had any of the COVID-19 symptoms ( F 1 -score=0.796) than ICD-10 codes ( F 1 -score =0.451). NLP accuracy was higher for positive symptoms (sensitivity=0.930) than ICD-10 (sensitivity=0.300). However, ICD-10 accuracy was higher for negative symptoms (specificity=0.994) than NLP (specificity=0.917). Congestion or runny nose showed the highest accuracy difference (NLP: F 1 -score=0.828 and ICD-10: F 1 -score=0.042). For encounters with patients with COVID-19, prevalence estimates of each NLP symptom differed across variant eras. Patients with COVID-19 were more likely to have each NLP symptom detected than patients without this disease. Effect sizes (odds ratios) varied across pandemic eras.

Conclusions: This study establishes the value of AI-based NLP as a highly effective tool for real-time COVID-19 symptom detection in pediatric patients, outperforming traditional ICD-10 methods. It also reveals the evolving nature of symptom prevalence across different virus variants, underscoring the need for dynamic, technology-driven approaches in infectious disease surveillance.


Real-time emerging infection surveillance requires a case definition that often involves symptomatology. To detect symptoms, population health monitoring systems and research studies tend to largely rely on structured data from electronic health records, including the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes [ 1 ]. However, symptoms are not diagnoses and, therefore, may not be consistently coded, leading to incorrect estimates of the prevalence of COVID-19 symptoms [ 2 ]. Natural language processing (NLP) of unstructured data from electronic health records has proven useful in recognizing COVID-19 symptoms and identifying additional signs and symptoms compared to structured data alone [ 3 , 4 ]. However, surveillance of COVID-19 symptoms is nuanced as symptoms have been shown to differ by variant eras [ 5 , 6 ] and by age, with pediatric patients generally experiencing milder symptoms [ 7 ]. For example, while loss of taste or smell was reported with early COVID-19 variants, it was less commonly reported during the Omicron wave and in younger patients who more frequently experience fever and cough [ 8 - 11 ]. Understanding symptom patterns in children during different COVID-19 variant eras is important. Early in the pandemic, the availability of molecular testing was extremely limited. The less severe course of infection and varying presentations may lead to under testing due to mild symptoms [ 12 ], potentially underestimating pediatric COVID-19 cases. Additionally, relatively asymptomatic children can still transmit the virus. Tailoring interventions based on age-specific manifestations contribute to effective control of virus transmission within communities.

We sought to validate and test an open-source artificial intelligence (AI)–based NLP pipeline that includes a large language model (LLM) to detect COVID-19 symptoms from physician notes. As a formative use case, we sought to illustrate how this pipeline could detect COVID-19 symptoms and differentiate symptom patterns across SARS-CoV-2 variant eras in pediatric patients. We specifically study patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) who can be sentinel cases in an outbreak.

Study Design and Setting

This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients up to 21 years of age presenting to the ED of a large, free-standing, university-affiliated, pediatric hospital between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2022.

Ethical Considerations

The Boston Children’s Hospital Committee on Clinical Investigation performed ethical, privacy, and confidentiality reviews of the study and found it to be exempt from human subjects oversight. A waiver of consent was obtained to cover the targeted extraction and secure review of clinical notes by approved study personnel in protected environments within the hospital firewall.

Study Variables

The main dependent variables were a set of 11 COVID-19 symptoms based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria [ 13 ]—fever or chills, cough, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing, fatigue, muscle or body aches, headache, new loss of taste or smell, sore throat, congestion or runny nose, nausea or vomiting, and diarrhea. We identified these symptoms by both NLP and ICD-10 codes. For the formative use case, the study period was divided into 3 variant eras defined using Massachusetts COVID-19 data from Covariant [ 14 ]. The pre-Delta era was from March 1, 2020, to June 20, 2021; the Delta era was from June 21, 2021, to December 19, 2021; and the Omicron era was from December 20, 2021, onward. A diagnosis of COVID-19 was defined as a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test or the presence of ICD-10 code U07.1 for COVID-19 during the same ED encounter in which symptoms were evaluated.

AI/NLP Pipeline Development

A total of 3 reviewers reached a consensus on a symptom concept dictionary [ 15 ] to capture each of the 11 COVID-19 symptoms. They relied on the Unified Medical Language System [ 16 ], which has a nearly comprehensive list of symptom descriptors [ 17 ], including SNOMED (SNOMED International) coded clinical terms [ 18 ], ICD-10 codes for administrative billing, abbreviations, and common language for patients [ 19 ]. The open-source and free Apache cTAKES (Apache Software Foundation) NLP pipeline was tuned to recognize and extract coded concepts for positive symptom mentions (based on the dictionary) from physician notes [ 20 ]. Apache cTAKES uses a NegEx algorithm which can help address negation [ 20 - 23 ]. To further address negation, we incorporated an LLM, Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers, that was fine-tuned for negation classification on clinical text [ 24 , 25 ].

Gold Standard

A total of 2 reviewers established a gold standard by manually reviewing physician ED notes. After all notes were labeled by the cTAKES pipeline, a test set of 226 ED notes was loaded into Label Studio [ 26 ], an open-source application for ground truth labeling. These notes were from patients both with and without COVID-19 and were selected to ensure that each of the 11 symptoms was mentioned in at least 30 ED notes. Some notes mentioned more than 1 symptom. Using an annotation guide ( Multimedia Appendix 1 ), 2 reviewers, who were masked from the terms identified by the NLP pipeline for note selection, each labeled 113 notes for mention of the 11 COVID-19 symptoms. As per the guide, only symptoms relevant to the present illness were considered positive mentions. Symptoms were not considered positive mentions if stated as past medical history, family history, social history, or an indication for a medication unrelated to the encounter.

Interrater Reliability

The F 1 -score was used to assess consistency in manual chart review. The F 1 -score is the balance of sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) [ 27 ]. It was computed by comparing the annotations of each of the 2 initial reviewers to those of a third reviewer, who independently labeled a subset (56/226, 25%) of notes annotated by the other reviewers. The choice of F 1 -score as the metric for agreement was informed by the observed high frequency of true negative annotations when they were assigned by chance [ 20 , 27 , 28 ]. Reliability analyses used Python (version 3.10; Python Software Foundation).

AI/NLP and ICD-10 Accuracy

Accuracy measures of the true symptom percentages in the test set for each symptom included F 1 -score, PPV, sensitivity, and specificity [ 29 , 30 ].

Formative Use Case

The impact of pandemic variant era on COVID-19 symptomatology was examined. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize patients presenting to the ED during each pandemic era. The percentage of patients in the ED with symptoms of COVID-19 was assessed in separate analyses for each symptom using chi-square analyses of 3×2 tables (pandemic era × symptom presence or absence) with α set at .05. Post hoc chi-square tests were used to compare each pandemic era with all others using a Bonferroni adjusted α of .017. To assess the effect of pandemic era, COVID-19 status, and the interaction of these variables on whether or not a patient had each symptom, logistic regression was used in separate analyses for each symptom. Bonferroni adjusted confidence limits were used for post hoc analyses. If the interaction term was not significant, the main effects of COVID-19 and variant era were reported. Data were analyzed using SAS (version 9.4; SAS Institute Inc).

Study Population

There were 59,173 unique patients with 85,678 ED encounters during the study period. For each ED encounter, there was 1 final physician ED note that aggregated all ED physician documentation. Characteristics of the entire study cohort and variant-specific cohorts are summarized in Table 1 . A patient could appear in the cohort more than once if they had multiple ED encounters.

a PCR: polymerase chain reaction.

b ICD-10: International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision.

High consistency was demonstrated between reviewer 3, who labeled a subset of notes, and both reviewers 1 and 2, who each labeled half of the notes chosen to establish the gold standard. The F 1 -scores for the 2 reviewers were 0.988 and 0.984, respectively. The PPV was 0.976 and 0.968 and sensitivity was 1.0 for both.

AI or NLP ICD-10 Accuracy

As shown in Table 2 , the F 1 -score for NLP was higher and thus more accurate at identifying encounters in the test set with patients that had any of the COVID-19 symptoms than ICD-10. NLP also had higher F 1 -score for each individual symptom. In addition, NLP sensitivity of true positive symptoms was higher than ICD-10. However, NLP accuracy of true negative symptoms (specificity) was somewhat lower compared to ICD-10.

a NLP: natural language processing.

c F 1 -score: accuracy measure balancing PPV and sensitivity.

d PPV: positive predictive value.

The 2 most prevalent symptoms, cough and fever, had sensitivity scores for NLP that were among the highest of the symptoms, and much higher than those for ICD-10 codes. The greatest discrepancy between NLP and ICD-10 F 1 -scores was for congestion or runny nose. The smallest difference was for diarrhea.

Prevalence of Symptoms Over Time

The percentage of ED encounters with patients with COVID-19 who had symptoms was estimated using the NLP pipeline and ICD-10 codes. As shown in Figure 1 , during each month of the study, the percentage of encounters with no symptoms detected was much lower using NLP compared to ICD-10. Using NLP, the range was from 0% to 19% of encounters (mean 6%, SD 4%), while with ICD-10, the range was 22% to 52% (mean 38%, SD 7%).

The percentage of encounters with patients with COVID-19 who presented with each symptom by month was higher using NLP than ICD-10 ( Multimedia Appendix 2 ). The 2 most common symptoms, cough and fever, are shown in Figures 2 and 3 . On average, cough was identified during 52% (SD 13%) of the encounters each month using NLP, but only 15% (SD 5%) using ICD-10. On average, fever characterized 70% (SD 11%) of encounters using NLP, but 41% (SD 9%) using ICD-10.

ethnography case study compare

Using ICD-10, there were many months where individual symptoms were not detected. Of the 27 study months, loss of taste or smell was not detected using ICD-10 during 24 months, nor were muscle or body aches during 13 months. A total of 3 more symptoms had at least 3 consecutive months where each was not detected using ICD-10. These were congestion or runny nose (9 total months, not all consecutive), sore throat (8 months), and fatigue (7 months). Sporadic months without detection using ICD-10 were observed for headache (5 months), diarrhea (2 months), cough (1 month), and nausea or vomiting (1 month). Using NLP, sporadic months without detection were observed for just 2 symptoms, loss of taste or smell (6 months) and sore throat (2 months).

Prevalence of Symptoms Across Variant Eras

The prevalence estimates of symptoms across variant eras for encounters with patients with COVID-19 differed for each symptom identified by NLP, except for nausea or vomiting and sore throat ( Table 3 ). Post hoc analyses revealed several patterns. New loss of taste or smell was the only symptom that varied across all 3 eras. It was most common in the pre-Delta era, followed by the Delta era, and then the Omicron era. Congestion or runny nose, cough, and fever or chills were more common during the Delta and Omicron era than during the pre-Delta era, but the Delta era did not differ from the Omicron era. Muscle or body aches were more common during the pre-Delta era than both the Delta and Omicron eras, but the Delta era did not differ from the Omicron era. Diarrhea, fatigue, headache, and shortness of breath were more common during the pre-Delta era than the Omicron era but were not different than the Delta era, and the Delta era did not differ from the Omicron era. Nausea or vomiting and sore throat did not differ by variant era. The chi-square results are in Multimedia Appendix 3 .

a,b,c Variant eras with the same superscript across a row did not differ in post hoc analyses.

Symptoms by COVID-19 Status and Variant Era

The interaction of COVID-19 status and variant era on the presence of each symptom is shown in Table 4 . However, because the interaction was not significant for 2 symptoms, fever and chills, and sore throat, the main effects for COVID-19 status are shown for both ( P <.001). The odds ratios (ORs) indicate that patients with COVID-19 were more likely to have each of these 2 symptoms than patients without this disease. These symptoms were also more likely to occur during the Delta and Omicron era than during the pre-Delta era. For the remaining symptoms, the interaction term was significant and the ORs in each variant era are shown in the table. The ORs comparing patients with COVID-19 to those without the disease differed among the variant eras. Several patterns were observed. Patients with COVID-19 were more likely to exhibit each of the symptoms of congestion or runny nose, cough, fatigue, headache, muscle or body aches, new loss of taste or smell, or shortness of breath or difficulty breathing. However, effect sizes (ORs) differed among pandemic eras. For diarrhea, this symptom was more likely for patients with COVID-19 in the pre-Delta and Delta eras, but not during the Omicron era. And nausea was more likely only in the pre-Delta era. Significant ORs ranged in size from 1.3 to 26.7 (mean 4.6, SD 5.3). The logistic regression results are in Multimedia Appendix 4 .

a Odds ratios compare patients with COVID-19 at an ED encounter to patients without the disease.

b CL: Bonferroni adjusted confidence limits in post hoc analyses.

c If the interaction term was significant, the effect of COVID-19 during each variant era is shown. Otherwise, the effect for COVID-19 is shown.

d Type 3 test of the interaction term (variant era × COVID-19) in a logistic regression analysis.

Principal Findings

We find evidence that AI-based NLP of physician notes is a superior method for capturing patient symptoms for real-time biosurveillance than reliance on traditional approaches using ICD-10. NLP was more sensitive than ICD-10 codes in identifying symptoms and some symptoms could only be detected using NLP. As a form of internal validation, the symptoms identified by the CDC as associated with COVID-19 were more common in patients with than without this disease.

Comparison With Prior Work

The study was also able to capture a nuanced picture of symptom prevalence and odds across different SARS-CoV-2 variant eras. Consistent with previous literature, symptom patterns changed over time as new variants emerged. Variants may present with differences in symptomatology as a result of a number of factors including differences in mutations in spike proteins, receptor binding, and ability to escape host antibodies [ 31 ]. As has been previously reported [ 11 , 32 - 35 ], we found that fever or chills were the most common COVID-19 symptom across the variants. In our cohort, shortness of breath was less common during the Omicron era than during the pre-Delta era. The Omicron variant has less of an ability to replicate in the lungs compared to the bronchi, which may explain why this symptom became less common [ 36 ]. Studies have reported sore throat as a common symptom in the Omicron era, but we did not observe a significant difference across eras [ 8 , 9 ]. It is possible that we did not see a higher percentage of sore throats in the Omicron era because it may be more challenging for pediatric patients to describe this symptom. One study found that sore throat was observed more often in those of 5-20 years of age compared to those of 0-4 years of age [ 8 ]. Similarly, a study reported that sore throat was more common in those greater than or equal to 13 years of age in the Omicron era compared to the Delta era [ 37 ]. In our study cohort, approximately half of the patients were younger than 5 years of age. As children this age may not be able to describe their symptoms well, symptoms that are also signs, such as fever or cough, might be more commonly documented in physician notes than symptoms such as sore throat. New loss of taste or smell was most common in the pre-Delta era, followed by the Delta era and then the Omicron era in this study. This symptom has been reported less commonly in the Omicron era [ 8 , 9 ]. Studies have postulated that patients with the Omicron variant are less likely to present with loss of taste or smell as this variant has less penetration of the mucus layer and therefore, may be less likely to infect the olfactory epithelium [ 38 ].


There were important limitations in our use of NLP. The NLP pipeline was tested with a set of notes where some symptoms were more frequent in the test set (eg, loss of taste or smell) than in the formative use case. This was done to have sufficient data to evaluate the symptom pipeline. The NLP pipeline does not account for vital signs and so fever may not have been detected with the pipeline if it was documented in a patient’s vital signs rather than the clinical text. The cTAKES tool in the pipeline lacks the temporal context to ascertain if the mention of a symptom in a note is a new symptom or a prior symptom. We modified our technique because of this but nevertheless may have overestimated the prevalence of symptoms in our study. Future work will involve filtering by note section so that certain components of a note like past medical history are not included. We used 2 techniques to recognize negation, but some negated symptoms (eg, “patient had no cough”) were still captured as positive symptom mentions leading to a possible overestimation of symptom prevalence. Finally, this NLP pipeline did involve substantial preprocessing. We plan to evaluate the implementation of Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) for this task. GPT-4 was able to extract COVID-19 symptoms in a recent study [ 39 ] and it may limit the need for preprocessing.

Our formative study had some limitations. First, we examined COVID-19 symptoms in patients presenting to a single urban pediatric ED. Patients presenting to outpatient settings, who likely had milder symptoms, were not included and our results may reflect patients with more severe symptoms. And because the setting was a single site, results may not generalize to other EDs. Second, we defined COVID-19 status as positive if a patient had a PCR positive test for COVID-19 or an appropriate ICD-10 code at the ED encounter. Patients who were COVID-19 positive on a test at home or at an outside center may not have been captured by this definition even if they presented to the ED with COVID-19 [ 40 ]. Additionally, symptoms may have differed across variant eras as a result of COVID-19 vaccinations or previous infections rather than variant differences. Literature in adults shows that vaccination is associated with a decrease in systemic symptoms [ 41 ]. The United States Food and Drug Administration authorized the use of the COVID-19 vaccine in October 2021, during the Delta era and prior to the Omicron era, for children 5-11 years of age [ 42 ]. Vaccination rates for pediatric patients vary by age group in Massachusetts, as of April 3, 2023, of those 0-19 years of age, 3% to 57% have received a primary series but have not been boosted, and 3% to 18% have been boosted since September 1, 2022 [ 43 ]. As such, some patients in the Delta and Omicron eras may have been vaccinated or had previous COVID-19 infections [ 44 ].


In an era where rapid and accurate infectious disease surveillance is crucial, this study underscores the transformative potential of AI-based NLP for real-time symptom detection, significantly outperforming traditional methods such as ICD-10 coding. The dynamic adaptability of NLP technology allows for the nuanced capture of evolving symptomatology across different virus variants, offering a more responsive and precise tool kit for biosurveillance efforts. Its integration into existing health care infrastructure could be a game changer, elevating our capabilities to monitor, understand, and ultimately control the spread of emerging infectious diseases.


This study was supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as part of a financial assistance award. The contents are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of, nor an endorsement by CDC, HHS, or the US Government. Support was also obtained from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health Cooperative Agreement (U01TR002623). ARZ was supported by a training grant from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (T32HD040128). Generative artificial intelligence (AI) was not used to design or conduct this study.

Data Availability

All data analyzed during this study for the formative use case are in Multimedia Appendix 5 of this published article.

Authors' Contributions

KDM, AJM, and TAM contributed to the conceptualization. KDM contributed to the funding. AJM, ARZ, AG, and KLO performed the formal analysis. AJM, JRJ, and VI contributed to the software. AJM, ARZ, and KDM contributed to writing original drafts. KLO and AG contributed to writing review and edits.

Conflicts of Interest

TAM is a member of the advisory council for Lavita AI. Others declare no conflicts of interest.

COVID-19 symptoms annotation guide.

Detection of COVID-19 symptoms using NLP and ICD-10 by month for emergency department encounters with patients with COVID-19. ICD-10: International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision; NLP: natural language processing.

The chi-square analysis of COVID-19 symptom prevalence by pandemic variant era for emergency department encounters with patients with COVID-19, symptoms were detected using NLP. NLP: natural language processing.

Logistic regression analysis of the effect of COVID-19 status, pandemic variant era, and their interaction on symptom status for ED encounters, symptoms were detected using NLP. ED: emergency department; NLP: natural language processing.

Data files for the time series figures, the chi-square analysis of symptom prevalence, and the logistic regression analysis of the effects of COVID-19 status and pandemic variant era on symptom status.

  • Subramanian A, Nirantharakumar K, Hughes S, Myles P, Williams T, Gokhale KM, et al. Symptoms and risk factors for long COVID in non-hospitalized adults. Nat Med. 2022;28(8):1706-1714. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Crabb BT, Lyons A, Bale M, Martin V, Berger B, Mann S, et al. Comparison of International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision codes with electronic medical records among patients with symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(8):e2017703. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Wang J, Abu-El-Rub N, Gray J, Pham HA, Zhou Y, Manion FJ, et al. COVID-19 SignSym: a fast adaptation of a general clinical NLP tool to identify and normalize COVID-19 signs and symptoms to OMOP common data model. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021;28(6):1275-1283. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Malden DE, Tartof SY, Ackerson BK, Hong V, Skarbinski J, Yau V, et al. Natural language processing for improved characterization of COVID-19 symptoms: observational study of 350,000 patients in a large integrated health care system. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2022;8(12):e41529. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Di Chiara C, Boracchini R, Sturniolo G, Barbieri A, Costenaro P, Cozzani S, et al. Clinical features of COVID-19 in Italian outpatient children and adolescents during parental, Delta, and Omicron waves: a prospective, observational, cohort study. Front Pediatr. 2023;11:1193857. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Sumner MW, Xie J, Zemek R, Winston K, Freire G, Burstein B, et al. Comparison of symptoms associated with SARS-CoV-2 variants among children in Canada. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(3):e232328. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Liguoro I, Pilotto C, Bonanni M, Ferrari ME, Pusiol A, Nocerino A, et al. SARS-COV-2 infection in children and newborns: a systematic review. Eur J Pediatr. 2020;179(7):1029-1046. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Menni C, Valdes AM, Polidori L, Antonelli M, Penamakuri S, Nogal A, et al. Symptom prevalence, duration, and risk of hospital admission in individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 during periods of Omicron and Delta variant dominance: a prospective observational study from the ZOE COVID Study. Lancet. 2022;399(10335):1618-1624. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Akaishi T, Kushimoto S, Katori Y, Sugawara N, Egusa H, Igarashi K, et al. COVID-19-related symptoms during the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant surge in Japan. Tohoku J Exp Med. 2022;258(2):103-110. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • García-Vera C, Castejón-Ramírez S, Miranda EL, Abadía RH, Ventura MG, Navarro EB, et al. COVID-19 in children: clinical and epidemiological spectrum in the community. Eur J Pediatr. 2022;181(3):1235-1242. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Viner RM, Ward JL, Hudson LD, Ashe M, Patel SV, Hargreaves D, et al. Systematic review of reviews of symptoms and signs of COVID-19 in children and adolescents. Arch Dis Child. 2021;106:802-807. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • COVID-19 disease in children and adolescents: scientific brief, 29 September 2021. World Health Organization. 2021. URL: https:/​/www.​​publications/​i/​item/​WHO-2019-nCoV-Sci_Brief-Children_and_adolescents-2021.​1?ssp=1&setlang=en&cc=US [accessed 2024-02-28]
  • Symptoms of COVID-19. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2022. URL: [accessed 2024-02-28]
  • Hodcroft E. CoVariants. CoVariants. 2021. URL: [accessed 2024-02-28]
  • Machine-learning-for-medical-language / ctakes-client-py. Github. URL: https:/​/github.​com/​Machine-Learning-for-Medical-Language/​ctakes-client-py/​blob/​main/​ctakesclient/​resources/​covid_symptoms.​bsv [accessed 2024-02-28]
  • Bodenreider O. The Unified Medical Language System (UMLS): integrating biomedical terminology. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32(Database issue):D267-D270. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Köhler S, Gargano M, Matentzoglu N, Carmody LC, Lewis-Smith D, Vasilevsky NA, et al. The human phenotype ontology in 2021. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021;49(D1):D1207-D1217. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • SNOMEDCT_US (SNOMED CT, US edition)—synopsis, UMLS vocabularies. Unified Medical Language System (UMLS). URL: [accessed 2024-02-28]
  • CHV (Consumer Health Vocabulary)—synopsis, UMLS vocabularies. Unified Medical Language System (UMLS). URL: [accessed 2024-02-28]
  • Savova GK, Masanz JJ, Ogren PV, Zheng J, Sohn S, Kipper-Schuler KC, et al. Mayo clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction System (cTAKES): architecture, component evaluation and applications. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2010;17(5):507-513. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Chapman WW, Bridewell W, Hanbury P, Cooper GF, Buchanan BG. A simple algorithm for identifying negated findings and diseases in discharge summaries. J Biomed Inform. 2001;34(5):301-310. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Harkema H, Dowling JN, Thornblade T, Chapman WW. ConText: an algorithm for determining negation, experiencer, and temporal status from clinical reports. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(5):839-851. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Chapman WW, Hillert D, Velupillai S, Kvist M, Skeppstedt M, Chapman BE, et al. Extending the NegEx lexicon for multiple languages. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013;192:677-681. [ FREE Full text ] [ Medline ]
  • Machine-learning-for-medical-language. GitHub. URL: [accessed 2024-02-28]
  • Miller T, Bethard S, Amiri H, Savova G. Unsupervised domain adaptation for clinical negation detection. 2017. Presented at: BioNLP; August 4, 2017;165-170; Vancouver, Canada. URL: [ CrossRef ]
  • Tkachenko M, Malyuk M, Holmanyuk A, Liubimov N. Label studio: data labeling software. GitHub. 2020. URL: [accessed 2024-02-28]
  • Hripcsak G, Rothschild AS. Agreement, the f-measure, and reliability in information retrieval. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005;12(3):296-298. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • McHugh ML. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276-282. [ FREE Full text ] [ Medline ]
  • Habibzadeh F, Habibzadeh P, Yadollahie M. The apparent prevalence, the true prevalence. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2022;32(2):020101. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Monaghan TF, Rahman SN, Agudelo CW, Wein AJ, Lazar JM, Everaert K, et al. Foundational statistical principles in medical research: sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. Medicina (Kaunas). 2021;57(5):503. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Lauring AS, Hodcroft EB. Genetic variants of SARS-CoV-2-what do they mean? JAMA. 2021;325(6):529-531. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Götzinger F, Santiago-García B, Noguera-Julián A, Lanaspa M, Lancella L, Carducci FIC, et al. COVID-19 in children and adolescents in Europe: a multinational, multicentre cohort study. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020;4(9):653-661. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • King JA, Whitten TA, Bakal JA, McAlister FA. Symptoms associated with a positive result for a swab for SARS-CoV-2 infection among children in Alberta. CMAJ. 2021;193(1):E1-E9. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Takács AT, Bukva M, Gavallér G, Kapus K, Rózsa M, Bán-Gagyi B, et al. Epidemiology and clinical features of SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalized children across four waves in Hungary: a retrospective, comparative study from march 2020 to december 2021. Health Sci Rep. 2022;5(6):e937. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Kenney PO, Chang AJ, Krabill L, Hicar MD. Decreased clinical severity of pediatric acute COVID-19 and MIS-C and increase of incidental cases during the Omicron wave in comparison to the Delta wave. Viruses. 2023;15(1):180. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Hui KPY, Ho JCW, Cheung MC, Ng KC, Ching RHH, Lai KL, et al. SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant replication in human bronchus and lung ex vivo. Nature. 2022;603(7902):715-720. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Shoji K, Akiyama T, Tsuzuki S, Matsunaga N, Asai Y, Suzuki S, et al. Clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in hospitalized children during the Omicron variant predominant period. J Infect Chemother. 2022;28(11):1531-1535. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Butowt R, Bilińska K, von Bartheld C. Why does the Omicron variant largely spare olfactory function? implications for the pathogenesis of anosmia in coronavirus disease 2019. J Infect Dis. 2022;226(8):1304-1308. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Wei WI, Leung CLK, Tang A, McNeil EB, Wong SYS, Kwok KO. Extracting symptoms from free-text responses using ChatGPT among COVID-19 cases in Hong Kong. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2024;30(1):142.e1-142.e3. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Wang L, Zipursky AR, Geva A, McMurry AJ, Mandl KD, Miller TA. A computable case definition for patients with SARS-CoV2 testing that occurred outside the hospital. JAMIA Open. 2023;6(3):ooad047. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • Bramante CT, Proper JL, Boulware DR, Karger AB, Murray T, Rao V, et al. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is associated with a lower viral load and likelihood of systemic symptoms. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2022;9(5):ofac066. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
  • FDA authorizes Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use in children 5 through 11 years of age. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2021. URL: https:/​/www.​​news-events/​press-announcements/​fda-authorizes-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-emergency-use-children-5-through-11-years-age [accessed 2024-02-28]
  • Weekly COVID-19 vaccination report (as of April 3, 2023). Massachusetts Department of Public Health. URL: [accessed 2024-02-28]
  • Bhattacharyya RP, Hanage WP. Challenges in inferring intrinsic severity of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(7):e14. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]


Edited by T de Azevedo Cardoso; submitted 06.10.23; peer-reviewed by D Liebovitz; comments to author 09.11.23; revised version received 30.11.23; accepted 27.02.24; published 04.04.24.

©Andrew J McMurry, Amy R Zipursky, Alon Geva, Karen L Olson, James R Jones, Vladimir Ignatov, Timothy A Miller, Kenneth D Mandl. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (, 04.04.2024.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.


A case study for negotiations.

ethnography case study compare

Level: Proficiency (C2)

Type of English: Business English

Tags: sales and negotiation contracts and agreements analysing case studies 18+ years old Proficiency Business course Article based Vocabulary lesson Situation based Video talk

Publication date: 03/11/2024

This lesson takes as a case study for negotiations in one of the most important deals in the entertainment industry: the acquisition of big chunk of the Fox empire by Disney. Students will compare what they know about the deal, then watch a short video about it. They then go on to read an article with more details about the timeline of the acquisition, extracting from it valuable lessons about the tactics of negotiation. They also see some business idioms that come from sports, and end by roleplaying the meeting that closed the famous deal.

by Edward Alden

Be the first to share your thoughts on this lesson

Leave a Comment

Student worksheet

Teacher lesson plan

Save lesson to


This comprehensive course plan covers the full range of language needs – listening, role play, vocabulary development.

Worksheets in English for Business course plan

ethnography case study compare

Type of English: Business English Level: Proficiency (C2)

ethnography case study compare

Type of English: Business English Level: Mixed levels

ethnography case study compare

Make your lessons unforgettable

Did you know that your students can review the target language from our worksheets with our Expemo flashcard app? To let your student know, just enter their email address below (multiple emails can be separated with a comma).

Print Preview

U.s. department of energy - energy efficiency and renewable energy, alternative fuels data center.

  • Printable Version
  • Electricity Basics
  • Benefits & Considerations
  • Availability
  • Conversions
  • Maintenance & Safety
  • School Bus Education
  • For Consumers
  • Laws & Incentives

Emissions from Electric Vehicles

All-electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), and hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) typically produce lower tailpipe emissions than conventional vehicles do, and zero tailpipe emissions when running only on electricity. Tailpipe emissions are only one factor in considering a vehicle's life cycle emissions; gasoline and electricity fuel pathways also have upstream emissions to consider, which include extracting, refining, producing, and transporting the fuel. Estimating cradle-to-grave emissions must account for both fuel-cycle emissions (also known as "well to wheels") and vehicle-cycle emissions (material and vehicle production as well as end of life). The combined emissions from vehicle and fuel production through vehicle decommissioning (i.e., recycling or scrapping) are referred to as life cycle or cradle-to-grave emissions.

Electricity Sources and Fuel-Cycle Emissions

All-electric vehicles and PHEVs running only on electricity have zero tailpipe emissions, but electricity production, such as power plants, may generate emissions. In geographic areas that use relatively low-polluting energy sources for electricity generation, all-electric vehicles and PHEVs typically have an especially large life cycle emissions advantage over similar conventional vehicles running on gasoline or diesel. In areas with higher-emissions electricity, all-electric vehicles and PHEVs may not demonstrate as strong a life cycle emissions benefit.

Direct, Well-to-Wheel, and Cradle-to-Grave Emissions

Vehicle emissions can be divided into two general categories: air pollutants, which contribute to smog, haze, and health problems; and greenhouse gases (GHGs), such as carbon dioxide and methane. Both categories of emissions can be evaluated on a tailpipe basis, a well-to-wheel basis, and a cradle-to-grave basis.

Conventional vehicles with an internal combustion engine (ICE) produce direct emissions through the tailpipe, as well as through evaporation from the vehicle's fuel system and during the fueling process. Conversely, all-electric vehicles produce zero direct emissions. PHEVs produce zero direct emissions when they are in all-electric mode, but they can produce evaporative emissions. When using the ICE, PHEVs produce tailpipe emissions. However, their direct emissions are typically lower than those of comparable conventional vehicles.

Well-to-wheel emissions include all emissions related to fuel production, processing, distribution, and use. In the case of gasoline, emissions are produced while extracting petroleum from the earth, refining it, distributing the fuel to stations, and burning it in vehicles. In the case of electricity, most electric power plants produce emissions, and there are additional emissions associated with the extraction, processing, and distribution of the primary energy sources they use for electricity production.

Cradle-to-grave emissions include all emissions considered on a well-to-wheel basis as well as vehicle-cycle emissions associated with vehicle and battery manufacturing, recycling , and disposal.

Related Reports

Learn more about electric-drive vehicle emissions in two reports:

  • Cradle-to-Grave Lifecycle Analysis of U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle-Fuel Pathways: A Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Economic Assessment of Current (2020) and Future (2030-2035) Technologies
  • Emissions Associated with Electric Vehicle Charging: Impact of Electricity Generation Mix, Charging Infrastructure Availability, and Vehicle Type

ethnography case study compare

This study delves into the intricacies of power relations and social capital within the Red Cross Village in Daanbantayan, Cebu, in the aftermath of Super Typhoon Haiyan in 2013. Applying an ethnographic approach and employing Foucault's theory of diffuse power relations, the research explores the complex interplay between diverse stakeholders in shaping housing insecurity and community resilience. Key findings reveal the destabilizing effect of a tenuous usufruct agreement on land conflict and disaster governance, highlighting the criticality of secure land tenure to resilience. Shifting political affiliations, everyday marginalization, and an uneven distribution of authority expose strains on community cohesion and disparities in resource access. Despite these challenges, villagers demonstrate agency through everyday acts of resistance, challenging dominant narratives and redefining perceptions of disaster victims. These insights point to the necessity of addressing the interplay between power relations in conjunction with fostering social capital, secure land tenure, fair resource access, and meaningful community participation to effectively build resilient post-disaster communities. The study also reveals the inadequacy of merely providing physical housing without considering the socio-political dynamics that underpin community cohesion and resilience. Future research directions recommended include comparative case studies across various post-disaster communities, large-scale ethnographic projects, participatory methods, and detailed social network analysis. Such efforts would provide a comprehensive understanding of the role of power relations and social capital in shaping post-disaster resilience and offer valuable insights for policymakers to balance urgency with empowerment in their approach to 'building back better.'

Examining Power Relations and Social Capital in Post-Disaster Housing: An Ethnographic Case Study of Red Cross Village

Layugan, maycarol, scheda scheda dc.

The text of this website © Università degli studi di Padova. Full Text are published under a non-exclusive license . Metadata are under a CC0 License


Conferma cancellazione.

Sei sicuro che questo prodotto debba essere cancellato?


Complete the form below and one of our experts will contact you within 24 hours or less. For immediate assistance contact us or chat now .

We promise not to sell, trade or use your email for spam. View our Privacy Policy .

Hyper-V vs VMware: What’s the difference and which should you choose?

October 10, 2023


Hyper-V and VMware are both technologies that allow businesses and organizations to use a single computer or server for multiple applications and use cases. From the time it was released to the public till now, it has been in heavy use by many companies and individuals.

These technologies are both called server virtualization technologies and are a major part of IT and networking.

So, if you don’t know anything about these technologies or are confused about choosing the best one for your business, don’t worry. In this tutorial, we will cover what they are both used for and which one is better for your specific use case.

What is Server Virtualization?

If VMware and Hyper-V don’t ring a bell in your mind, you might be wondering what is server virtualization technology. But if you already have prior knowledge then you are free to skip this part.

Server virtualization is the practice of using virtualization software to partition a physical server into multiple isolated virtual environments, often referred to as a container. It allows you to run multiple virtual machines at a time.

Each container operates with its own distinct operating system also known as guest OS. These containers are completely isolated from each other, meaning that no virtual server can access the data from the other server. This is possible by making virtual disks for each VM (virtual machine).

A Hypervisor is the real technology that enables the creation of a virtual machine and it sits between the hardware and the virtual machines.

Server virtualization is just a term used to describe the process of making virtual machines. However, the hypervisor is the real technology that is behind this process.

In the picture below you see a diagram of a hypervisor. Some hypervisors are installed on a host OS, which is called a Type-2 hypervisor. Others are installed directly on the hardware, which is called Type-1.

A diagram showing hypervisor

Benefits of Server Virtualization

The benefits of server virtualization are that it:

  • Gets rid of extra IT costs and energy consumption
  • Decreases the number of physical servers your company must have on its premises
  • Creates an independent user environment
  • Improves resource utilization
  • Allows for dynamic resource allocation
  • Offers improved resource prioritization

Learn more about Hyperconverged IaaS on the ServerMania Cloud .


This is the first type of server virtualization solution that is popular in the industry. VMware offers a range of virtualization solutions, with VMware-vSphere being their flagship product.

VMware VSphere is a cloud virtualization platform that is available for on-premise and cloud use. It uses VMware ESXi as its hypervisor.

VMware VSphere includes several components:

  • VMware ESXi: VMware ESXi (formerly known as VMware ESX) is a Type-1 hypervisor that runs directly on bare metal (hardware) and does not require any Operating System. It is used in VSphere as a hypervisor and is responsible for running virtual machines and managing hardware such as memory, CPU, etc.
  • VMware vCenter Server: This is a centralized management tool. It allows you to manage virtual machines or multiple ESXi hypervisors from a single interface.

Note! A complete guide to the VMware features comparison can be found here .

VMware VSphere System Requirements

Below are the system requirements of VMware ESXi hypervisor version 7.0.

  • At least two CPU cores.
  • Multi-core of 64-bit x86 processors.
  • Requires the NX/XD bit to be enabled for the CPU in the BIOS.
  • VMware VSphere requires a minimum of 8 GB of physical RAM to run virtual machines. But it is always recommended to increase it for better performance.
  • VMware ESXi could run almost all the major operating systems including Windows server, Mac OS server, and various kinds of Linux distributions.
  • Requires a boot disk of at least 32 GB of persistent storage such as HDD, SSD, or NVMe

Note! VMware also offers a  hardware compatibility tool , which will help determine if your hardware can run VMware.

VMware Pricing

VMware pricing depends upon many different factors including license type, edition, and resources.

  • Pricing typically depends on the number of CPUs or sockets in your physical servers. You’ll need to purchase licenses for each CPU.
  • VMware also offers subscription-based licensing for vSphere, which provides more flexibility and may include access to additional features and services.

Below you can see a picture of VSphere editions:

VMware editions

Hyper-V is a Type-1 Microsoft virtualization solution, designed for both Windows Server environments and Windows 10. In the new versions, it has also added support for the Linux operating system as well. Hyper-V could also be used on-premises or in the cloud using Microsoft Azure services.

Hyper-V System Requirements

Regardless of the specific Hyper-V features you plan to use, your system must meet these general requirements:

  • A 64-bit processor with second-level address translation (SLAT) is necessary. This is needed to install the Hyper-V virtualization components, like the Windows hypervisor.
  • VM Monitor Mode extensions are required.
  • You should plan for at least 4 GB of RAM, although more memory is recommended.
  • Virtualization support must be turned on in the BIOS or UEFI, including hardware-assisted virtualization (available in processors with Intel VT or AMD-V technology) and hardware-enforced Data Execution Prevention (DEP).

Hyper-V Pricing

Microsoft Hyper-V offers a range of editions with different pricing, spanning from $24.95 to $199 USD.

To determine the most suitable edition for your needs, explore the details and additional information about the product on their official website.

This will help you make an informed decision regarding which edition aligns best with your requirements. The available packages are mentioned below with their referring prices:

  • Developer: $24.95 USD per month
  • Bronze: $49 USD per month
  • Silver: $89 USD per month
  • Gold: $135 USD per month
  • Platinum: $199 USD per month

Both VMware and Hyper-V have their pros and cons, so we’ve compared them below to help highlight the key differences.

Comparison in Pricing

The pricing for VMware and Hyper-V both depend on the resources you tend to use and the requirements of your business.

In essence, Hyper-V is considered to be an affordable alternative to VMware because VMware has various services that add to the overall cost of this solution.

Feature Comparison

To simplify the comparison of Hyper-V vs VMware, we have put together the following table:

In Summary: Should You Choose Hyper-V or VMware?

When faced with the decision of choosing between Hyper-V and VMware, it becomes evident that your selection should be intricately tied to your specific hardware requirements and the overarching objectives of your business. The choice between these virtualization solutions is not a one-size-fits-all scenario; rather, it’s a nuanced decision that necessitates a thorough evaluation of several critical factors.

First and foremost, affordability plays a pivotal role in your decision-making process. Assessing your budget constraints and aligning them with the cost of licensing, hardware compatibility, and ongoing maintenance is imperative. It’s essential to strike a balance between your financial resources and the capabilities offered by each platform.

Furthermore, consider the essential features required to meet your operational needs. Does your business demand advanced features like seamless container migration, memory management tools for example VMware memory management techniques, or superior support for specific guest operating systems?

By carefully evaluating your essential feature set, you can ensure that the chosen virtualization solution aligns seamlessly with your business requirements. Additionally, take scalability into account, as your virtualization platform should have the capacity to grow alongside your evolving needs. Ultimately, the decision between Hyper-V and VMware should be a well-informed one, driven by a comprehensive understanding of your organization’s unique hardware, budget, feature, and scalability demands.

In this guide, we’ve explained the difference between Hyper-V and VMware and have given you a better understanding of what they are used for.

If you would like to learn more about Hyper-V, take a look at Hyper-V Networking: what are the different switches used for? We also recommend taking a look at our Knowledge Base  to see our latest articles and tutorial videos to help you with cloud server hosting and setup.

Need even more advice or would you like a custom quote? Book a server consultation with one of our experts. We will assist you in identifying the most suitable solutions for you or your business.

About the author

some picture

Milad Karimyar

Crafting Digital Excellence

Milad is a seasoned Software Architect with a passion for crafting digital solutions that push the boundaries of innovation. With a keen eye for detail and a wealth of experience, Milad has established himself as a trailblazer in the world of software architecture.

ethnography case study compare

Contact [email protected] to get help

Our experts will contact you soon

ethnography case study compare

We promise not to sell,trade or use your email for spam. View our Privacy Policy

HPE MyAccount

Your HPE MyAccount provides you with:

  • Single sign-on to the HPE ecosystem
  • Personalized recommendations
  • Test drives and other trials
  • And many more exclusive benefits

HPE Ecosystem

Hpe greenlake.

  • Cloud Consoles
  • Cloud Services
  • Data Services
  • Compute Ops Management
  • Aruba Central
  • HPE GreenLake Administration
  • Manage Account
  • Manage Devices
  • HPE Resources
  • Support Center
  • Financial Services
  • Communities

Your open and secure edge-to-cloud platform that powers data-first modernization

Control and harness data across edge to cloud.

A single source of truth from data to make smart decisions and recommendations to customers.

Create your AI advantage by unlocking the full potential of your data.

Hybrid cloud, just the way you need it.

Only the right level of security will do.

  • Product types
  • Solutions by topic

Accelerate your data-first modernization with the HPE GreenLake edge-to-cloud platform, which brings the cloud to wherever your apps and data live.

  • Supercomputing
  • HPE Cray Supercomputing
  • HPE ProLiant Compute
  • HPE Alletra Storage
  • HPE Aruba Networking
  • HPE Ezmeral Software
  • HPE Services
  • HPE GreenLake for Networking
  • HPE GreenLake for Block Storage
  • HPE GreenLake for Private Cloud Enterprise
  • HPE GreenLake for Compute Ops Management
  • HPE GreenLake for Disaster Recovery
  • HPE GreenLake for Backup and Recovery
  • Learn about HPE
  • Corporate social responsibility
  • HPE education services
  • FREE on-demand developer workshops
  • FREE on-demand technical courses
  • Customer success stories
  • Reference architectures
  • Quick specs
  • What is edge to cloud?
  • HPE GreenLake FAQ
  • HPE GreenLake Central user guide

HPE SimpliVity

Step into the future with an intelligent, hyper-efficient HCI solution that’s optimized for your edge, VDI, and general virtualization workloads.

We've reimagined what your HCI can be

Picture a hyperconverged architecture that’s evolved beyond software-defined to AI-driven — and delivers self-managing, self-optimizing, and self-healing infrastructure. By adding the machine learning predictive analytics of HPE InfoSight to our hyperconverged platform, we’ve ushered in the era of intelligent HCI.

cost savings Forrester%20Total%20Economic%20Impact%20of%20HPE%20SimpliVity%20report

vs. traditional infrastructure

data efficiency, guaranteed

across storage and backup

specialists required

enjoy a simple consumer experience

Not your ordinary HCI

With simplicity that’s powered by HPE InfoSight, the most advanced AI for infrastructure, HPE SimpliVity is ideal for edge, ROBO, VDI, and general virtualization use cases. VM-centric management and mobility, built-in backup and DR, and game-changing data efficiency combine in a hyperconverged architecture that’s optimized from data center to edge.

Drive app modernization with containers

Accelerate your adoption of agile, cloud-native, containerized apps. With HPE SimpliVity, there’s no need for separate systems to power VMs and containers: the Container Storage Interface (CSI) Driver for Kubernetes enables you to easily run everything on a single platform — without additional infrastructure.

Get the most efficient, all-in-one HCI

Take advantage of HPE SimpliVity’s unrivaled efficiency — with HA across just two nodes and enterprise-grade data services and security built-in.

Consume HPE SimpliVity on demand

Leverage the flexibility and ease of use of industry-leading hyperconverged — but in a consumption-based model that delivers exactly the IT you need, when you need it. HPE SimpliVity is now available as a service through HPE GreenLake.

Enable intelligently simple management

Accelerate time to market and bring an end to IT fire-fighting. Software-defined automation simplifies and speeds day 0 and 1, while artificial intelligence predicts and prevents problems to optimize day 2 and beyond.

Enjoy 90% capacity savings, guaranteed

The hyper efficiency baked into HPE SimpliVity improves application performance, frees up storage, and accelerates local and remote backup and restore functions. We guarantee a 90% capacity savings across storage and backup combined — and you enjoy 10:1 data efficiency.

Remain online and recoverable — always

Leverage built-in backup and disaster recovery to ensure business continuity. HPE SimpliVity’s speed and efficiency enable recovery of a 1 TB VM in 60 seconds. Now you can deploy and consolidate workloads on HPE SimpliVity.

Drive savings for edge and ROBO workloads

HPE SimpliVity’s efficient data services, centralized management, and comprehensive data protection and disaster recovery deliver savings of up to 66% versus traditional three-tier, cloud, or other HCI infrastructure.

Our customers

TSPL chose the HPE hyperconverged infrastructure to revamp and streamline its IT operations by consolidating its legacy server and storage environment.

Federation University Australia

Federation University Australia transforms the efficiency and agility of its IT infrastructure to accelerate digital innovation for 25,000 students across four campuses.

Fino Payments Bank

Fino Payments Bank is set to transform the lives of India’s rural population and power the country’s next great economic leap with smart, efficient IT infrastructure management.

Unichem Laboratories Ltd.

Unichem Laboratories Ltd. is lowering the cost and extending the availability of life-saving treatments by accelerating discovery, development, and production.

Chase Center

The Golden State Warriors built Chase Center to exceed fan expectations with a technology foundation that enables choice, control, and safety. Chase Center is a new breed of venue.

Power and protect your virtualized infrastructure

Simplify the VM experience by delivering true hyperconvergence at scale — from edge to data center — with efficiency, resiliency, density, and simplicity.

Reduce capacity requirements with operational efficiency

Operational efficiency reduces capacity requirements and improves application speed and performance. Always-on, inline deduplication and compression only needs to happen once, delivering 90% capacity savings across primary storage and backup – guaranteed! Key features include:

  • Data efficiency - Always-on, at inception, inline deduplication and compression guarantees 90% capacity savings across primary storage and backup saving costs
  • Application performance - Achieve improved performance from all-flash storage, tiered caching, and always-on, inline dedupe and compression
  • Operational efficiency - Operational efficiency frees up 91% of IT organizations’ time to focus on new projects

Achieve resiliency and high availability

Achieve high availability with just 2 nodes. HPE SimpliVity tolerates simultaneous drive failures without data loss, and built-in data protection and disaster recovery features help keep data safe. Key features include:

  • High availability - High availability tolerates simultaneous drive failures without data loss and achieves high availability with a minimum of 2 nodes
  • Backup - Full logical VM backups with policy-based automation and near zero overhead
  • Restore - Guaranteed 60-second restore of 1 TB VM
  • Disaster recovery - Automated, multi-site, rapid disaster recovery reduces the risk of data loss and costly business downtime

Leverage high-density resource pools

Flexible, consolidated resource pools are cost effective building blocks for a variety of workloads. The award-winning HPE SimpliVity 2600 provides space-constrained environments with high-density, enterprise grade features and functionality. Key features include:

  • Collapse the stack into one solution - Flexible resource pools of compute, storage, and composable fabric networking collapsed into one solution
  • Scale - Simple, parallel node deployment to scale out from small to large VM environments in small, 2U increments
  • Consolidation and cost savings - Simplify and save: one solution, one refresh cycle, one generalist needed to manage the whole stack

Simplify management with a single interface

Simple and automated operations eliminate the need for specialized IT skills. VM administrators manage the entire IT stack from a single, familiar interface. Back up, clone, or restore a VM in 3 clicks, guaranteed, using policy-based, VM-centric management. Key features include:

  • VM-centric management - Policy-based, global VM-centric management with automation, visibility, intelligence
  • VM agility - VM creation, backup, replication, and recovery with right-click operations from familiar interface
  • VM mobility - Moves VMs quickly and globally from one site to another
  • Simple management from one interface - No LUNS, shares, or volumes to manage. Through a single interface, you have a global view into data centers as well as remote and branch offices

HPE a Gartner Magic Quadrant Leader 14 years in a row

Gartner® again names HPE a Leader in the 2023 Magic Quadrant™ for Primary Storage.

Hyperconverged technology partners

Explore the hpe simplivity portfolio.

HPE SimpliVity 380 gives IT organizations the agility and economics of the cloud with the control and governance of on-premises IT and HPE GreenLake for Private Cloud Business Edition integration. It delivers a powerhouse hyperconverged solution optimized to support the world’s most efficient and resilient data centers. This solution dramatically simplifies IT by combining infrastructure and advanced data services for virtualized workloads on a single device.

Do you need a dense platform with built-in security and flexibility that addresses key applications which need performance, availability along with ease of management? HPE SimpliVity 325 provides HCI choice with our 3rd Generation  AMD EPYC™ single CPU processor platform including all-flash storage. Highly dense, the solution is a 1U enclosure that scales in 1U increments and is ideal for remote office or space-constrained locations.

Featured products

Hpe storeonce backup appliances.

Secure your data wherever it lives. Leverage intelligent storage to transform your hybrid cloud data protection with greater simplicity, higher performance, and built-in ransomware protection — all at a lower cost than traditional solutions.

HPE GreenLake for Virtual Desktop Infrastructure

Empower your remote workforce with secure, scalable virtual desktop infrastructure, delivered as a service.

HPE Alletra dHCI

Built to streamline your infrastructure via data-first modernization, HPE’s disaggregated HCI for mixed workloads at scale unlocks IT agility while ensuring apps are always-on and always-fast.

Adopting hyperconvergence and adapting to the new realities in retail

Accelerate your data-driven transformation with simplivity, hpe simplivity 380 product documentation, technical specifications, advanced data services.

  • Built-in resiliency, backup, and disaster recovery for data protection
  • Always-on deduplication and compression for reduced capacity utilization by up to 10X — guaranteed

Flexible federation strategy

  • Scale up to 16 nodes/cluster and 96 nodes/federation
  • Mix clusters within the same federation — for example, HPE SimpliVity 380 at the core data center and HPE SimpliVity 325 or 380 at the edge

Simple, intelligent management

  • Global, VM-centric management and mobility, plus artificial intelligence by HPE InfoSight

Simplify your environment with HPE SimpliVity 380

  • Storage-intensive workloads
  • Multiple all-flash configuration options (XS, S, M, L, and XL)
  • Backup and archive node with hybrid flash storage
  • Hardware-accelerated or software-optimized for always-on deduplication and compression

Extend your options with HPE SimpliVity 325

  • Small ROBO and edge use cases
  • Highly dense, 1U, single AMD processor node with high core count
  • Full HPE SimpliVity functionality

Optimize your data center footprint with HPE SimpliVity 325

  • General purpose virtualization, edge, and VDI workloads
  • Space-constrained environments that need a high-density server form factor
  • Software-optimized for always-on deduplication and compression


  1. Difference Between Case Study and Ethnography

    ethnography case study compare

  2. Types of Qualitative Research:Narrative, Phenomenology, Grounded Theory

    ethnography case study compare

  3. 15 Great Ethnography Examples (2024)

    ethnography case study compare

  4. Difference Between Grounded Theory and Ethnography

    ethnography case study compare

  5. Compare And Contrast Case Study And Phenomenological Research Designs

    ethnography case study compare

  6. ethnography-infographic

    ethnography case study compare


  1. Study? compare #tedandpet #study

  2. Week 3: Lecture 6. Case Studies: Research Question & Applying Ethnography

  3. Ethnography case study

  4. Lecture No. 22, BRM, Research Design-2 Research Strategies

  5. MPC-005, BLOCK-4, UNIT-1#IGNOU-#MAPC 1st Year

  6. Examples of ethnography studies


  1. Agreements 'in the wild': Standards and alignment in machine learning

    This study aims to understand how machine learning scientists create a benchmark dataset as a socio-technical knowledge object. Through an ethnographic case study of a dataset created by a large corporate-academic group, I investigate the work involved in designing, assembling and transporting the dataset within the machine learning community.

  2. Ethnography

    Ethnography is a branch of anthropology and the systematic study of individual cultures.Ethnography explores cultural phenomena from the point of view of the subject of the study. Ethnography is also a type of social research that involves examining the behavior of the participants in a given social situation and understanding the group members' own interpretation of such behavior.

  3. Research Protocol: A Transdisciplinary Multi-Case Study Research Design

    Consistent with case study research process (Yin, 2014, pp. 3-25; Baskarada, 2014; Sangaramoorthy & Kroeger, 2020), iterative progress reviews and sense-making with project partners and stakeholders will assist in verifying the accuracy of the case study and validating the analysis of findings through the introduction of diverse perspectives ...

  4. Journal of Medical Internet Research

    Background: Real-time surveillance of emerging infectious diseases necessitates a dynamically evolving, computable case definition, which frequently incorporates symptom-related criteria. For symptom detection, both population health monitoring platforms and research initiatives primarily depend on structured data extracted from electronic health records.

  5. Development of expertise through co-creation in networks: An

    To reach the research objective, I have conducted an ethnographic case study of three individual studies and the synthesis part. Adopting ethnography as a research approach allows for building a contextual and detailed understanding of expertise in professional services. The individual studies focus on developing an executive learning community ...

  6. A case study for negotiations: ESL/EFL Lesson Plan and Worksheet

    Publication date: 03/11/2024. This lesson takes as a case study for negotiations in one of the most important deals in the entertainment industry: the acquisition of big chunk of the Fox empire by Disney. Students will compare what they know about the deal, then watch a short video about it.

  7. Comorbidity of behavioral problems and parental acceptance-rejection in

    The group with chest discomfort scored highly in hostility and aggression in the PARQ. In comparison to the other groups, the vasovagal syncope and chest pain group demonstrated higher scores in undifferentiated rejection and total score. ... In a case-control study, the Parental Acceptance-Rejection Questionnaire and Parental version of ...

  8. Emissions from Electric Vehicles

    In the case of gasoline, emissions are produced while extracting petroleum from the earth, refining it, distributing the fuel to stations, and burning it in vehicles. In the case of electricity, most electric power plants produce emissions, and there are additional emissions associated with the extraction, processing, and distribution of the ...

  9. Sustainability

    The case study and comparative analysis were conducted on shelters situated in two urban areas, old and new, in Kunming City, China, namely Wuhua District and Chenggong District. ... Wenyi Liu, Yu Lin, Benyong Wei, and Yaohui Liu. 2024. "The Evaluation and Comparison of Resilience for Shelters in Old and New Urban Districts: A Case Study in ...

  10. Examining Power Relations and Social Capital in Post-Disaster Housing

    Future research directions recommended include comparative case studies across various post-disaster communities, large-scale ethnographic projects, participatory methods, and detailed social network analysis. Such efforts would provide a comprehensive understanding of the role of power relations and social capital in shaping post-disaster ...

  11. Case Study Assignment midterm

    Case Study Assignment. I compare the process of selecting case data to film editing; many wonderful scenes in case drafts end up, sacrificed to brevity or coherence of pattern, on the "cutting room floor," but the researcher-writer sees them all. Louis B. Barnes (1994) Overview An important part of this course involves the preparation of a ...

  12. Accounting vs finance: Which should you study?

    Average starting salary in the US for undergraduate accounting graduates ( 2019 figures ): US$57,511. Average postgraduate starting salary in the US: $69,605. 129 th in PayScale's ranking of Majors by Salary Potential. Average starting salary in the US for finance majors (2019 figures): $58,464.

  13. Hyper-V vs VMware: A Complete Comparison

    Hyper-V supports Windows, Linux, and FreeBSD operating systems. VMware supports Windows, Linux, Unix and macOS operating systems. Hyper-V's pricing depends on the number of cores on the host and may be preferred by smaller companies. VMware charges per processor and its pricing structure might appeal to larger organizations.

  14. Time within Two Dates

    Notice that in this case you start by specifying the date of joining in the formula. Let us compare the results The figure that follows compares the output of the various approaches discussed so far. Method 4: Using DATEDIF function When you type DATEDIF as you would do with any other formulas, this formula doesn't show a prompt

  15. [Video] Marcin Nazaruk on LinkedIn: Based on the BP's case study I

    Based on the BP's case study I compare the outcomes of the "old" vs "new" Just Culture process showing how a very similar non-compliance behaviour could be…

  16. HPE SimpliVity Hyperconverged HCI Solution

    HPE SimpliVity. 380 series. HPE SimpliVity 380 gives IT organizations the agility and economics of the cloud with the control and governance of on-premises IT and HPE GreenLake for Private Cloud Business Edition integration. It delivers a powerhouse hyperconverged solution optimized to support the world's most efficient and resilient data ...