Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39418246›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Neural parameter calibration and uncertainty quantification for epidemic forecasting.

Thomas Gaskin, Tim Conrad, Grigorios A Pavliotis, Christof Schütte

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

4 authors.

Thomas GaskinDepartment of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5644-4431
Tim ConradZuse Institute Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5590-5726
Grigorios A PavliotisDepartment of Mathematics, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Christof SchütteZuse Institute Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5232-2683

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The recent COVID-19 pandemic has thrown the importance of accurately forecasting contagion dynamics and learning infection parameters into sharp focus. At the same time, effective policy-making requires knowledge of the uncertainty on such predictions, in order, for instance, to be able to ready hospitals and intensive care units for a worst-case scenario without needlessly wasting resources. In this work, we apply a novel and powerful computational method to the problem of learning probability densities on contagion parameters and providing uncertainty quantification for pandemic projections. Using a neural network, we calibrate an ODE model to data of the spread of COVID-19 in Berlin in 2020, achieving both a significantly more accurate calibration and prediction than Markov-Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC)-based sampling schemes. The uncertainties on our predictions provide meaningful confidence intervals e.g. on infection figures and hospitalisation rates, while training and running the neural scheme takes minutes where MCMC takes hours. We show convergence of our method to the true posterior on a simplified SIR model of epidemics, and also demonstrate our method's learning capabilities on a reduced dataset, where a complex model is learned from a small number of compartments for which data is available.

Indexed as

COVID-19ForecastingNeural Networks, ComputerCalibrationHumansMarkov ChainsMonte Carlo MethodPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Uncertainty

Identifiers

PMID39418246
PMCPMC12007818

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.