Validation for flu prediction

Validation for flu prediction
Network scientist Alessandro Vespignani’s predictions about the spread of the H1N1 in 2009 were highly accurate, according to new validation studies. Credit: Brooks Canaday

(Medical Xpress)—In 2009, the H1N1 virus slipped into the blood­streams of more than 40 mil­lion people around the world. In just four months, it killed more than 14,000 indi­vid­uals as it trav­eled from Mexico to India on its most favored vehicle: humans. As trav­elers moved about the planet via air­planes and cars, the pathogen fol­lowed, cre­ating an epi­demic the likes of which had not been seen since the 1970s.

At the time, Alessandro Vespig­nani was at the Uni­ver­sity of Indiana, where he began tracking the dis­ease with as much atten­tion as the Cen­ters for Dis­ease Con­trol. Vespignani—now the Stern­berg Family Dis­tin­guished Uni­ver­sity Pro­fessor of physics, com­puter sci­ence, and health sci­ences at North­eastern University—and his research team built a com­pu­ta­tional model called GLEAM, or Global Epi­demic and Mobility Model, which they used to pre­dict the out­breaks as they sur­faced around the globe.

In the last three years, the team has been tire­lessly working to val­i­date its pre­dic­tions. To that end, its recently pub­lished article in the journal BMC Med­i­cine offers defin­i­tive proof of a strong agree­ment between the pre­dic­tions and the real-​​life sur­veil­lance data col­lected in 2009.

"Although we knew the pre­dic­tion of the model were in pretty good agree­ment in sev­eral places of the world," said Vespig­nani, "here we pro­duce a very exten­sive val­i­da­tion on more than 45 countries."

To model dis­ease spreading, GLEAM inte­grates three data "layers." The first uses a pop­u­la­tion data­base, which was devel­oped by a team at Columbia Uni­ver­sity and pro­vides a high-​​resolution pop­u­la­tion den­sity map of the entire planet. The second uses local com­muting flows and air­line trans­porta­tion data­bases to esti­mate within and between coun­tries, respec­tively. Finally, an epi­demic layer accounts for the behavior of the dis­ease itself, including infor­ma­tion such has incu­ba­tion and trans­mis­sion times.

Oper­ating from within the prover­bial eye of the storm in 2009, the team used the model to fore­cast the week of the epidemic's peak in 48 coun­tries in the Northern Hemi­sphere. In 42 of these coun­tries, the fore­casts were directly on target; in the other five, the team's pre­dic­tions were off by only one to two weeks.

Nor­mally, flu season peaks months after H1N1 did, making even the two-​​week vari­a­tion a con­sid­er­ably good result. "This is the first large-​​scale val­i­da­tion of a com­pu­ta­tional model that pulled out pre­dic­tions in real time," said Vespig­nani. "It shows that com­pu­ta­tional models have acquired the matu­rity to pro­vide useful infor­ma­tion and at the same time points out the way on how to improve and develop better models and tools."

More information: www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/10/165/abstract

Citation: Validation for flu prediction (2013, January 8) retrieved 25 April 2024 from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-01-validation-flu.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Explore further

Opioid overdose rates 'impossible' to ignore

 shares

Feedback to editors