MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384938027 · doi:10.1016/j.epidem.2023.100708

The effective reproductive number: Modeling and prediction with application to the multi-wave Covid-19 pandemic

2023· article· en· W4384938027 on OpenAlexafffund
Razvan G. Romanescu, Songdi Hu, Douglas Nanton, Mahmoud Torabi, Olivier Tremblay-Savard, Md Ashiqul Haque

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaManitoba HealthGeorge & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare Innovation
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Basic reproduction numberEpidemic modelHomogeneousInfectious disease (medical specialty)PopulationHomogeneity (statistics)DiseaseSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakDemographyEconometricsIncidence (geometry)Computer scienceGeographyBiologyMedicineStatisticsVirologyStatistical physicsMathematicsEnvironmental healthPhysicsOutbreakInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classical compartmental models of infectious disease assume that spread occurs through a homogeneous population. This produces poor fits to real data, because individuals vary in their number of epidemiologically-relevant contacts, and hence in their ability to transmit disease. In particular, network theory suggests that super-spreading events tend to happen more often at the beginning of an epidemic, which is inconsistent with the homogeneity assumption. In this paper we argue that a flexible decay shape for the effective reproductive number (Rt) indexed by the susceptible fraction (St) is a theory-informed modeling choice, which better captures the progression of disease incidence over human populations. This, in turn, produces better retrospective fits, as well as more accurate prospective predictions of observed epidemic curves. We extend this framework to fit multi-wave epidemics, and to accommodate public health restrictions on mobility. We demonstrate the performance of this model by doing a prediction study over two years of the SARS-CoV2 pandemic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.271
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.166 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemicsSame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207