Back

An approximate Bayesian approach for estimation of the reproduction number under misreported epidemic data

Gressani, O.; Faes, C.; Hens, N.

2021-05-20 epidemiology
10.1101/2021.05.19.21257438 medRxiv
Show abstract

In epidemic models, the effective reproduction number is of central importance to assess the transmission dynamics of an infectious disease and to orient health intervention strategies. Publicly shared data during an outbreak often suffers from two sources of misreporting (underreporting and delay in reporting) that should not be overlooked when estimating epidemiological parameters. The main statistical challenge in models that intrinsically account for a misreporting process lies in the joint estimation of the time-varying reproduction number and the delay/underreporting parameters. Existing Bayesian approaches typically rely on Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithms that are extremely costly from a computational perspective. We propose a much faster alternative based on Laplacian-P-splines (LPS) that combines Bayesian penalized B-splines for flexible and smooth estimation of the time-varying reproduction number and Laplace approximations to selected posterior distributions for fast computation. Assuming a known generation interval distribution, the incidence at a given calendar time is governed by the epidemic renewal equation and the delay structure is specified through a composite link framework. Laplace approximations to the conditional posterior of the spline vector are obtained from analytical versions of the gradient and Hessian of the log-likelihood, implying a drastic speed-up in the computation of posterior estimates. Furthermore, the proposed LPS approach can be used to obtain point estimates and approximate credible intervals for the delay and reporting probabilities. Simulation of epidemics with different combinations for the underreporting rate and delay structure (one-day, two-day and weekend delays) show that the proposed LPS methodology delivers fast and accurate estimates outperforming existing methods that do not take into account underreporting and delay patterns. Finally, LPS is illustrated on two real case studies of epidemic outbreaks.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 1%
18.1%
2
Statistics in Medicine
34 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.0%
3
Epidemics
104 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.2%
4
Infectious Disease Modelling
50 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.2%
5
Frontiers in Physics
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.9%
6
American Journal of Epidemiology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.6%
7
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
8
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 41%
3.5%
9
Journal of Theoretical Biology
144 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.0%
10
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.3%
11
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 56%
1.7%
12
Biometrics
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.6%
13
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.6%
14
Epidemiology and Infection
84 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
15
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.4%
16
Genetic Epidemiology
46 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
17
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.3%
18
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.2%
19
The Annals of Applied Statistics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.9%
20
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
84 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
21
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
34 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
22
Mathematics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
23
Epidemiology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
24
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
126 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
25
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
Quantitative Biology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%
27
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%