Back

A Novel Method for the Estimation of a Dynamic Effective Reproduction Number (Dynamic-R) in the CoViD-19 Outbreak

Chong, Y. C.

2020-02-25 epidemiology
10.1101/2020.02.22.20023267 medRxiv
Show abstract

The CoViD-19 outbreak has escalated to a pandemic in the last few months. Pharmaceutical solutions based upon virologic studies, at this point, remain inconclusive, with no proven pharmaceutical solution so far. In contrast, this paper looks towards creating more accurate epidemiological models during this phase of viral growth in order to provide better feedback measures to public health officials and agencies, in particular, by providing a responsive, timely model of the R value based on the previous few days results. Such an R value, although bearing less statistical precision due to limited sampling, could allow R to become a more effective, responsive standalone measure of infectious transmission. It demonstrates that the R value can be used as a dynamic, time-dependent indicator without the use of curve-fitting, and also estimates the most recent R-value of the CoViD-19 outbreak to be between 1.32 and 1.35.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 12%
15.3%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 9%
6.8%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Frontiers in Public Health
○ 148 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
6.3%
Similar papers in this journal
4
BMC Infectious Diseases
○ 133 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
5.2%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Infectious Disease Modelling
○ 54 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.4%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering
● 23 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.1%
7
Epidemics
○ 116 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.5%
8
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
○ 129 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.3%
9
Viruses
○ 332 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.8%
50% of probability mass above
10
Mathematical Biosciences
○ 49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.4%
11
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 12%
2.4%
12
Journal of Theoretical Biology
○ 162 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
13
Epidemiology and Infection
◐ 89 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.2%
14
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
◐ 45 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.5%
15
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
16
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
● 235 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
17
Vaccines
○ 198 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
18
PLOS Global Public Health
● 344 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.1%
19
Frontiers in Medicine
○ 120 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
20
Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
21
COVID
○ 14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
22
Mathematics
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
23
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.9%
24
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals
○ 32 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
25
JMIRx Med
◐ 32 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
26
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
○ 128 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
27
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
28
BMC Medicine
○ 176 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
29
Cureus
○ 68 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
30
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
○ 92 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.