Folkhälsomyndigheten has not reported R since September 5, so thought I'd run the numbers myself, using the same EpiEstim software Folkhalsomyndigheten was using to calculate R, with the parameters they reported. They may have tweaked them, so might be some minor differences.
Friday Stockholm hit ca Rt 1.7, Sweden ca Rt 1.2 😬
Above 1 means you're starting to look at exponential-like growth again.
Tip: "Estim" in the name of the software is short for *estimate* and there's different ways of calculating this.
Above 1 means you're starting to look at exponential-like growth again.
Tip: "Estim" in the name of the software is short for *estimate* and there's different ways of calculating this.
Addition: As others have noted, FHM is using a different dataset than I am, apparently excluding "mild cases" and various other groups, so we're not going to come up with the same figures.
I'm using the complete case dataset from FHM. This is likely to be a slightly less reliable measure as it's easily affected by testing protocols (or lack of!) but it's also more likely to reflect things as they are happening rather than afterwards.
Which tradeoff you should make is a matter of debate. Speed or accuracy?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
