Selected article for: "cumulative number and infection fatality"

Author: Tom Britton
Title: Basic estimation-prediction techniques for Covid-19, and a prediction for Stockholm
  • Document date: 2020_4_17
  • ID: 0fmeu4h4_32
    Snippet: Finally the time calibration. For this we set the infection fatality risk to f = 0.3% as a guess. As mentioned above it will not change the time calibration more than a week if the true fatality risk is 0.1% or 1%. The 200 case fatalities by March 31 would hence imply that the number of infected three weeks earlier, March 10, equals 200/0.003 = 67 000. We therefore calibrate March 10 to the relative day t at which the cumulative number of infecte.....
    Document: Finally the time calibration. For this we set the infection fatality risk to f = 0.3% as a guess. As mentioned above it will not change the time calibration more than a week if the true fatality risk is 0.1% or 1%. The 200 case fatalities by March 31 would hence imply that the number of infected three weeks earlier, March 10, equals 200/0.003 = 67 000. We therefore calibrate March 10 to the relative day t at which the cumulative number of infected equals 67 000 (or as close to as possible). This turns out to be on day t = 31 of the epidemic.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • cumulative number and infect number: 1
    • cumulative number and infection set: 1, 2
    • cumulative number and relative day: 1, 2, 3
    • cumulative number and time calibration: 1
    • fatality risk and infection set: 1, 2
    • fatality risk and time calibration: 1, 2, 3
    • fatality risk and true fatality risk: 1