Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

["model"] ["bug"] Epi question regarding rate of new infection in SIR model #506

Closed
wyusuf068 opened this issue Apr 7, 2020 · 4 comments
Labels
models Correct/improve the underlying models

Comments

@wyusuf068
Copy link

Summary

I was looking for clarification as to why you have stated in the documentation that the rate of new infection in the SIR model is g=βS−γ as opposed to g=βS.

Additional details

In the SIR model, the number of infected patients is calculated as follows:

It+1 = It + βStIt - γIt in which It is the starting number of infected patients, βStIt is the number of susceptible patients who become infected (i.e. new infections), and γIt is the number of infected patients who become recovered (i.e. new recoveries). To me this means that the rate of new infections is mediated by βS and that γ mediates the rate of new recoveries.

Suggested fix

Using g=βS to estimate rate of new infections, which may have implications in estimating doubling time.

@wyusuf068 wyusuf068 added the models Correct/improve the underlying models label Apr 7, 2020
@DougManuel
Copy link

An issue is γ is inconsistently defined and mislabelled in parts of the documentation. γ is 1/mean infectious period. In the documentation, please provide reference and rationale for "γ: the CDC is recommending 14 days of self-quarantine, we'll use γ=1/14)". γ is not the maximum period of infectivity or period of illness or symptoms.

@DougManuel
Copy link

This issue of γ results in a large impact on projected estimates for larger estimates of social distancing (>60%). As social distancing increases, doubling time increases and β becomes more influenced by γ.

β=(g+γ), therefore β → y, when g → 0 (when double-time [Td] increases). Therefore, the concern will not be seen when validating the model on past observed hospitalizations.

Related, the more commonly-used period of infectivity is 7 days. See issue #492. Changing the period of infectivity does not have a large influence on the β when doubling time is short, but there is a large effect when doubling time decreases.

@wyusuf068 wyusuf068 changed the title ["model"] Epi question regarding rate of new infection in SIR model ["model"] ["bug"] Epi question regarding rate of new infection in SIR model Apr 7, 2020
@jlubken
Copy link
Collaborator

jlubken commented Apr 10, 2020

#533 modifies both the default doubling_time and infectious_days.

@DougManuel
Copy link

The math is correct and the suggested fix doesn't need to be incorporated. This issue can be closed.

The default doubling_time and infectious_days fix is a separate issue has been discussed in issue #492 and elsewhere. The new defaults are an improvement but people would suggest further modifications, as discussed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
models Correct/improve the underlying models
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants