Back

Robustly Quantifying Uncertainty in International Avian Influenza A(H5N1) Infection Fatality Ratios

Gada, L.; Afuleni, M. K.; Noble, M.; House, T.; Finnie, T.

2026-04-23 public and global health
10.64898/2026.04.22.26351373 medRxiv
Show abstract

Knowing the mortality rates associated with infection by a pathogen is essential for effective preparedness and response. Here, harnessing the flexibility of a Bayesian approach, we produce an estimate of the Infection Fatality Ratio (IFR) for A(H5N1) conditional on explicit assumptions, and quantify the uncertainty thereof. We also apply the method to first-wave COVID-19 data up to March 2020, demonstrating the estimates that could be obtained were the model available then. Our analysis uses World Development Indicators (WDI) from the World Bank, the A(H5N1) WHO confirmed cases and deaths tracker by country (2003-2024), and COVID-19 cases and deaths data from John Hopkins University (January and February 2020). Since infectious disease dynamics are typically influenced by local socio-economic factors rather than political borders, individual countries are placed within clusters of countries sharing similar WDIs relevant to respiratory viral diseases, with clusters derived by performing Hierarchical Clustering. To estimate the IFR, we fit a Negative Binomial Bayesian Hierarchical Model for A(H5N1) and COVID-19 separately. We explicitly modelled key unobserved parameters with informative priors from expert opinion and literature. By modelling underreporting, our analysis suggests lower fatality (15.3%) compared to WHO's Case Fatality Ratio estimate (54%) on lab-confirmed cases. However, credible intervals are wide ([0.5%, 64.2%] 95% CrI). Therefore, good preparedness for a potential A(H5N1) pandemic implies adopting scenario planning under our central estimate, as well as for IFRs as high as 70%. Our approach also returns a COVID-19 IFR estimate of 2.8% with [2.5%, 3.1%] 95% CrI which is consistent with literature.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 1%
17.3%
2
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 19%
10.0%
3
Epidemics
104 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.3%
4
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 8%
8.3%
5
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 14%
6.3%
50% of probability mass above
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 36%
3.9%
7
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 32%
3.9%
8
American Journal of Epidemiology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.5%
9
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.7%
10
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.6%
11
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
12
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
13
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
14
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.5%
15
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
16
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
17
Statistics in Medicine
34 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
18
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.1%
19
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
20
Journal of Theoretical Biology
144 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
21
Emerging Infectious Diseases
103 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
22
Patterns
70 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
23
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
24
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 32%
0.7%
25
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%
26
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 21%
0.6%
27
Nature Genetics
240 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.6%
28
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 38%
0.6%