Multiple cohort study of hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 in-host infection dynamics: parameter estimates, sensitivity and the eclipse phase profile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Within-host SARS-CoV-2 modelling studies have been published throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. These studies contain highly variable numbers of individuals and capture varying timescales of pathogen dynamics; some studies capture the time of disease onset, the peak viral load and subsequent heterogeneity in clearance dynamics across individuals, while others capture late-time post-peak dynamics. In this study, we curate multiple previously published SARS-CoV-2 viral load data sets, fit these data with a consistent modelling approach, and estimate the variability of in-host parameters including the basic reproduction number, R 0 . We find that fitted dynamics can be highly variable across data sets, and highly variable within data sets, particularly when key components of the dynamic trajectories (e.g. peak viral load) are not represented in the data. Further, we investigated the role of the eclipse phase time distribution in fitting SARS-CoV-2 viral load data. By varying the shape parameter of an Erlang distribution, we demonstrate that models with either no eclipse phase, or with an exponentially-distributed eclipse phase, offer significantly worse fits to these data, whereas models with less dispersion around the mean eclipse time (shape parameter two or more) offered the best fits to the available 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".