A method to estimate the serial interval distribution under partially-sampled data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The serial interval of an infectious disease is an important variable in epidemiology. It is defined as the period of time between the symptom onset times of the infector and infectee in a direct transmission pair. Under partially sampled data, purported infector-infectee pairs may actually be separated by one or more unsampled cases in between. Misunderstanding such pairs as direct transmissions will result in overestimating the length of serial intervals. On the other hand, two cases that are infected by an unseen third case (known as coprimary transmission) may be classified as a direct transmission pair, leading to an underestimation of the serial interval. Here, we introduce a method to jointly estimate the distribution of serial intervals factoring in these two sources of error. We simultaneously estimate the distribution of the number of unsampled intermediate cases between purported infector-infectee pairs, as well as the fraction of such pairs that are coprimary. We also extend our method to situations where each infectee has multiple possible infectors, and show how to factor this additional source of uncertainty into our estimates. We assess our method's performance on simulated data sets and find that our method provides consistent and robust estimates. We also apply our method to data from real-life outbreaks of four infectious diseases and compare our results with published results. With similar accuracy, our method of estimating serial interval distribution provides unique advantages, allowing its application in settings of low sampling rates and large population sizes, such as widespread community transmission tracked by routine public health surveillance.
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 | 0.010 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".