Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35037796›Full record

ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2022

Fitting to the UK COVID-19 outbreak, short-term forecasts and estimating the reproductive number.

Matt J Keeling, Louise Dyson, Glen Guyver-Fletcher, Alex Holmes, Malcolm G Semple, ISARIC4C Investigators, Michael J Tildesley, Edward M Hill

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. The impact of school reopening on the spread of COVID-19 in England.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Matt J KeelingThe Zeeman Institute for Systems Biology & Infectious Disease Epidemiology Research, School of Life Sciences and Mathematics Institute, 2707University of Warwick, UK.
Louise DysonThe Zeeman Institute for Systems Biology & Infectious Disease Epidemiology Research, School of Life Sciences and Mathematics Institute, 2707University of Warwick, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9788-4858
Glen Guyver-FletcherThe Zeeman Institute for Systems Biology & Infectious Disease Epidemiology Research, School of Life Sciences and Mathematics Institute, 2707University of Warwick, UK.
Alex HolmesThe Zeeman Institute for Systems Biology & Infectious Disease Epidemiology Research, School of Life Sciences and Mathematics Institute, 2707University of Warwick, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5913-851X
Malcolm G SempleNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections, Institute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, 4591University of Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9700-0418
ISARIC4C Investigators
Michael J TildesleyThe Zeeman Institute for Systems Biology & Infectious Disease Epidemiology Research, School of Life Sciences and Mathematics Institute, 2707University of Warwick, UK.
Edward M HillThe Zeeman Institute for Systems Biology & Infectious Disease Epidemiology Research, School of Life Sciences and Mathematics Institute, 2707University of Warwick, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2992-2004

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/M01116X/1Department of Health 200907Department of Health CO-CIN-01Medical Research Council MC_PC_19025Medical Research Council MC_PC_19059Medical Research Council MR/V009761/1Medical Research Council MR/V038613/1Wellcome Trust 215091/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought to the fore the need for policy makers to receive timely and ongoing scientific guidance in response to this recently emerged human infectious disease. Fitting mathematical models of infectious disease transmission to the available epidemiological data provide a key statistical tool for understanding the many quantities of interest that are not explicit in the underlying epidemiological data streams. Of these, the effective reproduction number, [Formula: see text], has taken on special significance in terms of the general understanding of whether the epidemic is under control ([Formula: see text]). Unfortunately, none of the epidemiological data streams are designed for modelling, hence assimilating information from multiple (often changing) sources of data is a major challenge that is particularly stark in novel disease outbreaks. Here, focusing on the dynamics of the first wave (March-June 2020), we present in some detail the inference scheme employed for calibrating the Warwick COVID-19 model to the available public health data streams, which span hospitalisations, critical care occupancy, mortality and serological testing. We then perform computational simulations, making use of the acquired parameter posterior distributions, to assess how the accuracy of short-term predictions varied over the time course of the outbreak. To conclude, we compare how refinements to data streams and model structure impact estimates of epidemiological measures, including the estimated growth rate and daily incidence.

Indexed as

COVID-19Disease OutbreaksHumansModels, StatisticalPandemicsSARS-CoV-2United KingdomBayesian inferenceCOVID-19epidemiologygrowth rateMarkov chain Monte Carlomathematical modellingreproduction numbersevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2short-term forecasts

Identifiers

PMID35037796
PMCPMC9465059

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.