Coronametrics: The UK turns the corner

  1. Adam Goliński
  2. Peter Spencer

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

  • *

    There are many ways of analyzing the progress of an epidemic, but when it comes to short term forecasting, it is very hard to beat a simple time series regression model. These are good at allowing for the noise in day to day observations, extracting the trend and projecting it forward.

  • *

    Our regression models are designed to exploit this, using the daily statistics released by PHE and NHSE. These strongly suggest that the tide has turned and that taking one day with the next, the national figures for deaths from this virus will now fall back noticeably, easing the pressure on the NHS and its staff.

  • *

    There is still a huge range of uncertainty associated with any forecast. The model is currently predicting a total of 113,000 admissions to UK hospitals by the end of April and that 19,000 people will die from the virus in English hospitals by then. There is a 1 in 20 chance that the mortality figures could flatten out more quickly, with around 1,000 more deaths occurring by the end of April. However, there is the same risk that this figure continues to mount, rising to a total of 24,000 by the end of the month. On current trends, the number of deaths in the UK is likely to be 10% higher than the number in England.

  • *

    Longer term, the impact of the virus will depend critically upon the likely relaxation of the current government strategy of suppression.

    • Article activity feed

    1. ScreenIT

      SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.17.20069278: (What is this?)

      Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

      Table 1: Rigor

      Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
      Randomizationnot detected.
      Blindingnot detected.
      Power Analysisnot detected.
      Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

      Table 2: Resources

      No key resources detected.

      Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

      Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

      Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

      Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

      Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

      Results from rtransparent:
      • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
      • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
      • No protocol registration statement was detected.

      About SciScore

      SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

    2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.04.17.20069278v1 on medRxiv