arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2307.03415q-bio.PEq-bio.QM
收藏

疫情时间序列的真实再生数与表观再生数之间的差异

Differences between the true reproduction number and the apparent reproduction number of an epidemic time series

Oliver Eales, Steven Riley

AI总结:

本文定义表观时变再生数 $R_A(t)$,揭示其与真实 $R(t)$ 的差异由卷积函数的均值(时间偏移)和方差(相对失真)决定,并证明感染流行率研究在追踪 $R(t)$ 趋势上偏倚更小且可通过改进方案进一步优化。

摘要:

时变再生数 $R(t)$ 衡量每个传染性个体造成的新感染数量,并且根据定义与感染发生的时间序列密切相关。实际感染的时间很少已知,疫情分析通常依赖于其他结局(如症状出现)的时间序列数据。在根据疫情时间序列估计 $R(t)$ 时,一个常见的隐含假设是 $R(t)$ 与这些下游结局之间的关系和它与感染发生时间序列之间的关系相同。然而,鉴于大多数疫情时间序列并不是感染发生的完美替代指标,这一假设不太可能成立。相反,它们代表的是感染发生与不确定延迟分布的卷积。这里我们定义了表观时变再生数 $R_A(t)$,即从下游疫情时间序列计算得到的再生数,并展示了 $R_A(t)$ 与 $R(t)$ 之间的差异如何取决于卷积函数。卷积函数的均值设定了两个信号之间的时间偏移,而卷积函数的方差则在它们之间引入了相对失真。我们给出了 SARS-CoV-2 大流行期间可获得的疫情时间序列的卷积函数。通过随机抽样研究测量的感染流行率比其他疫情时间序列呈现更少的偏倚。这里我们进一步表明,其卷积函数的均值和方差与基于大规模检测的传统监测所获得的结果相似,并且可以通过更频繁的检测或使用更严格的阳性阈值来降低。感染流行率研究仍然是追踪 $R(t)$ 时间趋势的多功能工具,并且随着其研究方案的进一步改进,在未来的任何疫情或大流行中将具有更大的效用。

英文摘要:

The time-varying reproduction number $R(t)$ measures the number of new infections per infectious individual and is closely correlated with the time series of infection incidence by definition. The timings of actual infections are rarely known, and analysis of epidemics usually relies on time series data for other outcomes such as symptom onset. A common implicit assumption, when estimating $R(t)$ from an epidemic time series, is that $R(t)$ has the same relationship with these downstream outcomes as it does with the time series of incidence. However, this assumption is unlikely to be valid given that most epidemic time series are not perfect proxies of incidence. Rather they represent convolutions of incidence with uncertain delay distributions. Here we define the apparent time-varying reproduction number, $R_A(t)$, the reproduction number calculated from a downstream epidemic time series and demonstrate how differences between $R_A(t)$ and $R(t)$ depend on the convolution function. The mean of the convolution function sets a time offset between the two signals, whilst the variance of the convolution function introduces a relative distortion between them. We present the convolution functions of epidemic time series that were available during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Infection prevalence, measured by random sampling studies, presents fewer biases than other epidemic time series. Here we show that additionally the mean and variance of its convolution function were similar to that obtained from traditional surveillance based on mass-testing and could be reduced using more frequent testing, or by using stricter thresholds for positivity. Infection prevalence studies continue to be a versatile tool for tracking the temporal trends of $R(t)$, and with additional refinements to their study protocol, will be of even greater utility during any future epidemics or pandemics.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑