Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36819658›Full record

ArticleFutures2023

SEIR models in the light of Critical Realism - A critique of exaggerated claims about the effectiveness of Covid 19 vaccinations.

Rainer J Klement, Harald Walach

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Futures, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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.

Rainer J KlementDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Leopoldina Hospital, Schweinfurt, Germany.
Harald WalachNext Society Institute, Kazimieras Simonavicius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a recent modeling study Watson et al. (Lancet Infect Dis 2022;3099:1-10) claim that Covid-19 vaccinations have helped to prevent roughly 14-20 million deaths in 2021. This conclusion is based on an epidemiological susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) model trained on partially simulated data and yielding a reproduction number distribution which was then applied to a counterfactual scenario in which the efficacy of vaccinations was removed. Drawing on the meta-theory of Critical Realism, we point out several caveats of this model and caution against believing in its predictions. We argue that the absence of vaccinations would have significantly changed the causal tendencies of the system being modelled, yielding a different reproduction number than obtained from training the model on actually observed data. Furthermore, the model omits many important causal factors. Therefore this model, similar to many previous SEIR models, has oversimplified the complex interplay between biomedical, social and cultural dimensions of health and should not be used to guide public health policy. In order to predict the future in epidemic situations more accurately, continuously optimized dynamic causal models which can include the not directly tangible, yet real causal mechanisms affecting public health appear to be a promising alternative to SEIR-type models.

Indexed as

Covid-19 deathsCritical realismDynamic causal modelsEpidemiology and public healthSARS-CoV-2SEIR epidemic model

Identifiers

PMID36819658
PMCPMC9922436

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.