Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30137720›Full record

ArticleInfectious Disease Modelling2017

Time-varying and state-dependent recovery rates in epidemiological models.

Scott Greenhalgh, Troy Day

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infectious Disease Modelling, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

2 authors.

Scott GreenhalghDepartment of Mathematics, Siena College, Loudonville, NY, 12211, USA.
Troy DayDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Queen's University, Jeffery Hall, Kingston, ON, K7L 3N6, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Differential equation models of infectious disease have undergone many theoretical extensions that are invaluable for the evaluation of disease spread. For instance, while one traditionally uses a bilinear term to describe the incidence rate of infection, physically more realistic generalizations exist to account for effects such as the saturation of infection. However, such theoretical extensions of recovery rates in differential equation models have only started to be developed. This is despite the fact that a constant rate often does not provide a good description of the dynamics of recovery and that the recovery rate is arguably as important as the incidence rate in governing the dynamics of a system. We provide a first-principles derivation of state-dependent and time-varying recovery rates in differential equation models of infectious disease. Through this derivation, we demonstrate how to obtain time-varying and state-dependent recovery rates based on the family of Pearson distributions and a power-law distribution, respectively. For recovery rates based on the family of Pearson distributions, we show that uncertainty in skewness, in comparison to other statistical moments, is at least two times more impactful on the sensitivity of predicting an epidemic's peak. In addition, using recovery rates based on a power-law distribution, we provide a procedure to obtain state-dependent recovery rates. For such state-dependent rates, we derive a natural connection between recovery rate parameters with the mean and standard deviation of a power-law distribution, illustrating the impact that standard deviation has on the shape of an epidemic wave.

Indexed as

Differential equationsDuration of infectiousnessInfectious disease modelingIntegral equationsSIR epidemic modelWaiting time distribution

Identifiers

PMID30137720
PMCPMC6001973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.