Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29883444›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2018

Anticipating epidemic transitions with imperfect data.

Tobias S Brett, Eamon B O'Dea, Éric Marty, Paige B Miller, Andrew W Park, John M Drake, Pejman Rohani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Early warning signals of infectious disease transitions: a review.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Tobias S BrettOdum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0906-441X
Eamon B O'DeaOdum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, United States of America.
Éric MartyOdum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-8618-7280
Paige B MillerOdum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, United States of America.
Andrew W ParkOdum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, United States of America.
John M DrakeOdum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4646-1235
Pejman RohaniOdum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7221-3801

Funding

Forecasting tipping points in emerging and re-emerging infectious diseasesU01GM110744 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA · PI DRAKE, JOHN M, EPUREANU, BOGDAN · 2014 to 2018
$3.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS U01 GM110744NIH HHS U01GM110744
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epidemic transitions are an important feature of infectious disease systems. As the transmissibility of a pathogen increases, the dynamics of disease spread shifts from limited stuttering chains of transmission to potentially large scale outbreaks. One proposed method to anticipate this transition are early-warning signals (EWS), summary statistics which undergo characteristic changes as the transition is approached. Although theoretically predicted, their mathematical basis does not take into account the nature of epidemiological data, which are typically aggregated into periodic case reports and subject to reporting error. The viability of EWS for epidemic transitions therefore remains uncertain. Here we demonstrate that most EWS can predict emergence even when calculated from imperfect data. We quantify performance using the area under the curve (AUC) statistic, a measure of how well an EWS distinguishes between numerical simulations of an emerging disease and one which is stationary. Values of the AUC statistic are compared across a range of different reporting scenarios. We find that different EWS respond to imperfect data differently. The mean, variance and first differenced variance all perform well unless reporting error is highly overdispersed. The autocorrelation, autocovariance and decay time perform well provided that the aggregation period of the data is larger than the serial interval and reporting error is not highly overdispersed. The coefficient of variation, skewness and kurtosis are found to be unreliable indicators of emergence. Overall, we find that seven of ten EWS considered perform well for most realistic reporting scenarios. We conclude that imperfect epidemiological data is not a barrier to using EWS for many potentially emerging diseases.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalArea Under CurveCluster AnalysisComputational BiologyComputer SimulationDatabases, FactualEpidemicsHumans

Identifiers

PMID29883444
PMCPMC6010299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.