有限信息下干预策略有效性的全球COVID-19轨迹实证预测

Kai Lin, C. Joye, N. Giang, A. Richardson
{"title":"有限信息下干预策略有效性的全球COVID-19轨迹实证预测","authors":"Kai Lin, C. Joye, N. Giang, A. Richardson","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3566596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As the novel coronavirus and its associated disease COVID-19 started to rapidly transmit around the world in early 2020, the financial, social and health impacts represented a 1-in-100 year shock, the likes of which had not been observed since the last global pandemic in 1918 and the Great Depression in 1929. A key question for policymakers, medical researchers, and financial market participants was how the disease would propagate in an environment in which it was left unconstrained as compared with preferable alternatives where nation states implemented assertive efforts to mitigate the disease’s adverse effects. Medical researchers seeking to advise governments produced theoretical forecasting models, drawing on the epidemiological literature, which have often been too inflexible and abstract for use by financial markets. For this niche user group, empirical, agile, and intervention-aware forecasting methods are paramount, especially those that can accommodate the subjective judgements of different users. This paper outlines two such empirical forecasting frameworks for the daily confirmed case counts, eventual case counts, and time to peak daily new case counts for major countries. The first framework uses a linear mixed effect model for the case growth rate, accounting for the presence of intervention measures and idiosyncrasies of individual countries. The second framework allows users to forecast the case trends of a target country by substituting in the observed effects of interventions from qualitatively similar countries with customisable calibrations to reflect lower efficacies. Combined, these two frameworks are especially useful in the early days of the outbreak, when the effects of different countries’ imminent interventions have not yet shown up in observed data, but which can be inferred from similar countries further along their intervention path. When first applied and published on March 23, these models projected the peak in daily new COVID-19 case counts for the US and Australia would arrive in early-to-mid April 2020. To the best of our knowledge, this was one of the first early-to-mid April peak projections published globally. Whilst not theoretically founded in the mechanisms of infectious disease, such empirical forecast frameworks offer versatile and parsimonious projections for financial market participants seeking to make decisions under conditions of uncertainty apropos the efficacies of different intervention measures around the world.","PeriodicalId":277095,"journal":{"name":"MedRN: Other Infectious Diseases (Topic)","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Global Empirical Forecasts of COVID-19 Trajectories Under Limited Information on the Efficacy of Intervention Strategies\",\"authors\":\"Kai Lin, C. Joye, N. Giang, A. Richardson\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3566596\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As the novel coronavirus and its associated disease COVID-19 started to rapidly transmit around the world in early 2020, the financial, social and health impacts represented a 1-in-100 year shock, the likes of which had not been observed since the last global pandemic in 1918 and the Great Depression in 1929. A key question for policymakers, medical researchers, and financial market participants was how the disease would propagate in an environment in which it was left unconstrained as compared with preferable alternatives where nation states implemented assertive efforts to mitigate the disease’s adverse effects. Medical researchers seeking to advise governments produced theoretical forecasting models, drawing on the epidemiological literature, which have often been too inflexible and abstract for use by financial markets. For this niche user group, empirical, agile, and intervention-aware forecasting methods are paramount, especially those that can accommodate the subjective judgements of different users. This paper outlines two such empirical forecasting frameworks for the daily confirmed case counts, eventual case counts, and time to peak daily new case counts for major countries. The first framework uses a linear mixed effect model for the case growth rate, accounting for the presence of intervention measures and idiosyncrasies of individual countries. The second framework allows users to forecast the case trends of a target country by substituting in the observed effects of interventions from qualitatively similar countries with customisable calibrations to reflect lower efficacies. Combined, these two frameworks are especially useful in the early days of the outbreak, when the effects of different countries’ imminent interventions have not yet shown up in observed data, but which can be inferred from similar countries further along their intervention path. When first applied and published on March 23, these models projected the peak in daily new COVID-19 case counts for the US and Australia would arrive in early-to-mid April 2020. To the best of our knowledge, this was one of the first early-to-mid April peak projections published globally. Whilst not theoretically founded in the mechanisms of infectious disease, such empirical forecast frameworks offer versatile and parsimonious projections for financial market participants seeking to make decisions under conditions of uncertainty apropos the efficacies of different intervention measures around the world.\",\"PeriodicalId\":277095,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MedRN: Other Infectious Diseases (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MedRN: Other Infectious Diseases (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3566596\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MedRN: Other Infectious Diseases (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3566596","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

随着新型冠状病毒及其相关疾病COVID-19于2020年初开始在全球迅速传播,其对金融、社会和健康的影响是百年一遇的冲击,这是自1918年上一次全球大流行和1929年大萧条以来从未出现过的。政策制定者、医学研究人员和金融市场参与者面临的一个关键问题是,与民族国家采取果断措施减轻疾病不利影响的优选替代方案相比,这种疾病如何在不受限制的环境中传播。寻求向政府提供建议的医学研究人员根据流行病学文献建立了理论预测模型,而这些模型往往过于僵化和抽象,无法为金融市场所用。对于这个利基用户群,经验的、敏捷的和干预意识的预测方法是最重要的,特别是那些能够适应不同用户主观判断的方法。本文概述了主要国家每日确诊病例数、最终病例数和每日新增病例数达到高峰时间的两种经验预测框架。第一个框架使用病例增长率的线性混合效应模型,考虑到干预措施的存在和个别国家的特点。第二个框架允许用户预测目标国家的情况趋势,方法是用可定制的校准来代替从质量相似的国家观察到的干预措施的效果,以反映较低的效率。这两个框架结合在一起,在疫情爆发初期特别有用,当时不同国家即将采取的干预措施的效果尚未在观察到的数据中显示出来,但可以从其干预路径上更远的类似国家推断出来。当这些模型于3月23日首次应用并发布时,它们预测美国和澳大利亚每日新增COVID-19病例数的峰值将在2020年4月初至中旬到来。据我们所知,这是全球发布的首批4月初至4月中旬的峰值预测之一。虽然这种经验预测框架不是传染病机制的理论基础,但它为寻求在不确定条件下就世界各地不同干预措施的效力作出决策的金融市场参与者提供了通用和简洁的预测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Global Empirical Forecasts of COVID-19 Trajectories Under Limited Information on the Efficacy of Intervention Strategies
As the novel coronavirus and its associated disease COVID-19 started to rapidly transmit around the world in early 2020, the financial, social and health impacts represented a 1-in-100 year shock, the likes of which had not been observed since the last global pandemic in 1918 and the Great Depression in 1929. A key question for policymakers, medical researchers, and financial market participants was how the disease would propagate in an environment in which it was left unconstrained as compared with preferable alternatives where nation states implemented assertive efforts to mitigate the disease’s adverse effects. Medical researchers seeking to advise governments produced theoretical forecasting models, drawing on the epidemiological literature, which have often been too inflexible and abstract for use by financial markets. For this niche user group, empirical, agile, and intervention-aware forecasting methods are paramount, especially those that can accommodate the subjective judgements of different users. This paper outlines two such empirical forecasting frameworks for the daily confirmed case counts, eventual case counts, and time to peak daily new case counts for major countries. The first framework uses a linear mixed effect model for the case growth rate, accounting for the presence of intervention measures and idiosyncrasies of individual countries. The second framework allows users to forecast the case trends of a target country by substituting in the observed effects of interventions from qualitatively similar countries with customisable calibrations to reflect lower efficacies. Combined, these two frameworks are especially useful in the early days of the outbreak, when the effects of different countries’ imminent interventions have not yet shown up in observed data, but which can be inferred from similar countries further along their intervention path. When first applied and published on March 23, these models projected the peak in daily new COVID-19 case counts for the US and Australia would arrive in early-to-mid April 2020. To the best of our knowledge, this was one of the first early-to-mid April peak projections published globally. Whilst not theoretically founded in the mechanisms of infectious disease, such empirical forecast frameworks offer versatile and parsimonious projections for financial market participants seeking to make decisions under conditions of uncertainty apropos the efficacies of different intervention measures around the world.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信