2019-nCoV: preliminary estimates of the confirmed-case-fatality-ratio and infection-fatality-ratio, and initial pandemic risk assessment
The revision of CFR upwards is now ‘possibly comparable to 1918’ may meaningfully impact risk perception. institutefordiseasemodeling.github.io/nCoV-public/an…
The revision of CFR upwards is now ‘possibly comparable to 1918’ may meaningfully impact risk perception. institutefordiseasemodeling.github.io/nCoV-public/an…
“the shift in framing brought about by this three-fold revision [by including delay in case ascertainment rate] from ‘possibly comparable to the 1957 flu but not 1918’ to ‘possibly comparable to 1918’ may meaningfully impact risk perception.”
“With this additional adjustment and using the same methodology and data from the original version of this report, the corrected estimate of the infection-fatality-ratio (IFR) is 0.94 (0.37, 2.9) percent.”
“While the uncertainty remains large, this estimate now excludes CDC’s reference estimate for the 1957 H2N2 pandemic flu (0.1 to 0.3 percent) and is only two-fold lower than and overlapping with CDC’s reference estimate of 2.04 percent for the 1918 H1N1 pandemic flu.”
“much clarity has been gained about the transmissibility of 2019-nCoV–that people may be infectious while exhibiting no or mild symptoms, that some shedders can display very high viral load, and that R0 in China prior to interventions is likely around 2.5 to 2.9.”
“Early crude estimates of the confirmed-CFR based on the ratio of confirmed cases to reported deaths are hovering around 2-3 percent, but this naive calculation is incorrect because it does not account for the time required from symptom onset, case confirmation, and death.”
“This report uses publicly-available data through January 31, 2020 and published modeling results to estimate the confirmed-CFR and IFR, adjusted for age and delays between case confirmation and death.”
