ArticlePLoS computational biology2022
A computationally tractable birth-death model that combines phylogenetic and epidemiological data.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Estimating epidemic dynamics with genomic and time series data.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025Article
- The EpiFusion Analysis Framework for joint phylodynamic and epidemiological analysis of outbreak characteristics.F1000Research · 2025Article
- Pan-genomics: Insight into the Functional Genome, Applications, Advancements, and Challenges.Current genomics · 2025Review
- EpiFusion: Joint inference of the effective reproduction number by integrating phylodynamic and epidemiological modelling with particle filtering.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Human Pangenomics: Promises and Challenges of a Distributed Genomic Reference.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- The Occurrence Birth-Death Process for Combined-Evidence Analysis in Macroevolution and Epidemiology.Systematic biology · 2022Article
- Statistical Challenges in Tracking the Evolution of SARS-CoV-2.Statistical science : a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics · 2022Article
- Epidemiological inference from pathogen genomes: A review of phylodynamic models and applications.Virus evolution · 2022Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Inferring the dynamics of pathogen transmission during an outbreak is an important problem in infectious disease epidemiology. In mathematical epidemiology, estimates are often informed by time series of confirmed cases, while in phylodynamics genetic sequences of the pathogen, sampled through time, are the primary data source. Each type of data provides different, and potentially complementary, insight. Recent studies have recognised that combining data sources can improve estimates of the transmission rate and the number of infected individuals. However, inference methods are typically highly specialised and field-specific and are either computationally prohibitive or require intensive simulation, limiting their real-time utility. We present a novel birth-death phylogenetic model and derive a tractable analytic approximation of its likelihood, the computational complexity of which is linear in the size of the dataset. This approach combines epidemiological and phylodynamic data to produce estimates of key parameters of transmission dynamics and the unobserved prevalence. Using simulated data, we show (a) that the approximation agrees well with existing methods, (b) validate the claim of linear complexity and (c) explore robustness to model misspecification. This approximation facilitates inference on large datasets, which is increasingly important as large genomic sequence datasets become commonplace.
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.