Estimating the relative probability of direct transmission between infectious disease patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Estimating infectious disease parameters such as the serial interval (time between symptom onset in primary and secondary cases) and reproductive number (average number of secondary cases produced by a primary case) are important in understanding infectious disease dynamics. Many estimation methods require linking cases by direct transmission, a difficult task for most diseases. METHODS: Using a subset of cases with detailed genetic and/or contact investigation data to develop a training set of probable transmission events, we build a model to estimate the relative transmission probability for all case-pairs from demographic, spatial and clinical data. Our method is based on naive Bayes, a machine learning classification algorithm which uses the observed frequencies in the training dataset to estimate the probability that a pair is linked given a set of covariates. RESULTS: In simulations, we find that the probabilities estimated using genetic distance between cases to define training transmission events are able to distinguish between truly linked and unlinked pairs with high accuracy (area under the receiver operating curve value of 95%). Additionally, only a subset of the cases, 10-50% depending on sample size, need to have detailed genetic data for our method to perform well. We show how these probabilities can be used to estimate the average effective reproductive number and apply our method to a tuberculosis outbreak in Hamburg, Germany. CONCLUSIONS: Our method is a novel way to infer transmission dynamics in any dataset when only a subset of cases has rich contact investigation and/or genetic data.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.150 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".