Confidence in Covid-19 models

Author:

Nguyen JamesORCID

Abstract

AbstractEpidemiological models of the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 played an important role in guiding the decisions of policy-makers during the pandemic. Such models provide output projections, in the form of time -series of infections, hospitalisations, and deaths, under various different parameter and scenario assumptions. In this paper I caution against handling these outputs uncritically: raw model-outputs should not be presented as direct projections in contexts where modelling results are required to support policy -decisions. I argue that model uncertainty should be handled and communicated transparently. Drawing on methods used by climate scientists in the fifth IPCC report I suggest that this can be done by: attaching confidence judgements to projections based on model results; being transparent about how multi-model ensembles are supposed to deal with such uncertainty; and using expert judgement to ‘translate’ model-outputs into projections about the actual world. In a slogan: tell me what you think (and why), not (just) what your models say. I then diffuse the worry that this approach infects model-based policy advice with some undesirably subjective elements, and explore how my discussion fares if one thinks the role of a scientific advisor is to prompt action, rather than communicate information.

Funder

Stockholm University

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference67 articles.

1. BBC. (2020a). Coronavirus: ‘act early to save more than 30 million lives’. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-52055546

2. BBC. (2020b). Coronavirus: Strict new curbs on life in UK announced by PM. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52012432

3. Birch, J. (2021). Science and policy in extremis: The UK’s initial response to covid-19. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 11(3), 90.

4. Boseley, S. (2020). New data, new policy: Why UK’s coronavirus strategy changed. The Guardian.

5. Boulicault, M., & Schroeder, S. A. (2021). Public trust in science: Exploring the idiosyncrasy-free ideal. In K. Vallier & M. Weber (Eds.), Social trust. Routledge.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3