Lots of serology happening around the world, so I thought I'd do a thread collating some of the infection-fatality estimates for #COVID19 1/n
-
-
5/n Later estimates that also used data from China came to similar conclusions - an IFR of 0.66% in this paperpic.twitter.com/J70ZG84Nu2
Show this thread -
6/n Next up, we have evidence from the Diamond Princess (remember that? It was either one month or 1,000,000 years ago) Based on infections in this closed environment, the estimate came back at 1.3%, but with a WIDE confidence intervalpic.twitter.com/mJKsdYMI0S
Show this thread -
7/n In early March, we get the lowest estimate so far, from Oxford University, using a number of datasets to predict an IFR of 0.1-0.36%pic.twitter.com/NQNzFHDqR6
Show this thread -
8/n There's also a modelling paper from Imperial College that has a much higher estimate, predicting 1% IFRpic.twitter.com/mo4zgFXMSw
Show this thread -
9/n A preprint from Italy in early April looked at these previous estimates and argued that neither the very low estimate (0.1%) nor the very high (1.3%) seemed consistent with the data therepic.twitter.com/20lNWiSrWZ
Show this thread -
10/n And now, serology from New York appears to imply an IFR of 0.9% in the city and closer to 0.5% across the statehttps://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1253441361547689984?s=20 …
Show this thread -
11/n This is in contrast with two serology studies in California, that implied a much lower IFR (but had significant flaws)pic.twitter.com/7O35um7Vdi
Show this thread -
12/n I'll keep adding to this thread, but up until now the estimates range from 0.1% at the lowest to 1.3% at the highest Almost all estimates are between 0.3-1%, very few argue for lower or higher than this Virtually all include 0.3-0.5% in their confidence interval
Show this thread -
13/n Something worth noting here is that IFR is likely to vary by place, due to demographics and healthcare systems A range of 0.3-1% depending on place would actually be entirely unsurprising
Show this thread -
Since I had a minute, I plugged this all into a random-effects model in Stata Looks like the point estimate from these studies is a 0.68% fatality rate, 95% CI 0.33-1.03%pic.twitter.com/8NKqzQs2ku
Show this thread -
15/n If you know of any IFR estimates I missed, let me know!
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.