ArticleScientific reports2023
Dynamic calibration with approximate Bayesian computation for a microsimulation of disease spread.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating mathematical modelling and artificial intelligence to combat emerging viral syndemics: A systematic review.New microbes and new infections · 2026Review
- Forecasting the future of American mass shootings with Bayesian agent-based model calibration.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Global approaches to infectious disease surveillance and modeling.Nature medicine · 2026Review
- Personalizing computational models to construct medical digital twins.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025Article
- Personalizing computational models to construct medical digital twins.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Neural parameter calibration and uncertainty quantification for epidemic forecasting.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The global COVID-19 pandemic brought considerable public and policy attention to the field of infectious disease modelling. A major hurdle that modellers must overcome, particularly when models are used to develop policy, is quantifying the uncertainty in a model's predictions. By including the most recent available data in a model, the quality of its predictions can be improved and uncertainties reduced. This paper adapts an existing, large-scale, individual-based COVID-19 model to explore the benefits of updating the model in pseudo-real time. We use Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC) to dynamically recalibrate the model's parameter values as new data emerge. ABC offers advantages over alternative calibration methods by providing information about the uncertainty associated with particular parameter values and the resulting COVID-19 predictions through posterior distributions. Analysing such distributions is crucial in fully understanding a model and its outputs. We find that forecasts of future disease infection rates are improved substantially by incorporating up-to-date observations and that the uncertainty in forecasts drops considerably in later simulation windows (as the model is provided with additional data). This is an important outcome because the uncertainty in model predictions is often overlooked when models are used in policy.
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.