ArticlePLoS computational biology2019
Model diagnostics and refinement for phylodynamic models.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Scalable gradients enable Hamiltonian Monte Carlo sampling for phylodynamic inference under episodic birth-death-sampling models.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Scalable gradients enable Hamiltonian Monte Carlo sampling for phylodynamic inference under episodic birth-death-sampling models.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Phylodynamic modelling, which studies the joint dynamics of epidemiological and evolutionary processes, has made significant progress in recent years due to increasingly available genomic data and advances in statistical modelling. These advances have greatly improved our understanding of transmission dynamics of many important pathogens. Nevertheless, there remains a lack of effective, targetted diagnostic tools for systematically detecting model mis-specification. Development of such tools is essential for model criticism, refinement, and calibration. The idea of utilising latent residuals for model assessment has already been exploited in general spatio-temporal epidemiological settings. Specifically, by proposing appropriately designed non-centered, re-parameterizations of a given epidemiological process, one can construct latent residuals with known sampling distributions which can be used to quantify evidence of model mis-specification. In this paper, we extend this idea to formulate a novel model-diagnostic framework for phylodynamic models. Using simulated examples, we show that our framework may effectively detect a particular form of mis-specification in a phylodynamic model, particularly in the event of superspreading. We also exemplify our approach by applying the framework to a dataset describing a local foot-and-mouth (FMD) outbreak in the UK, eliciting strong evidence against the assumption of no within-host-diversity in the outbreak. We further demonstrate that our framework can facilitate model calibration in real-life scenarios, by proposing a within-host-diversity model which appears to offer a better fit to data than one that assumes no within-host-diversity of FMD virus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.