Predicting subnational incidence of COVID-19 cases and deaths in EU countries.

BACKGROUND: Recurring COVID-19 waves highlight the need for tools able to quantify transmission risk, and identify geographical areas at risk of outbreaks. Local outbreak risk depends on complex immunity patterns resulting from previous infections, vaccination, waning and immune escape, alongside other factors (population density, social contact patterns). Immunity patterns are spatially and demographically heterogeneous, and are challenging to capture in country-level forecast models. METHODS: We used a spatiotemporal regression model to forecast subnational case and death counts and applied it to three EU countries as test cases: France, Czechia, and Italy. Cases in local regions arise from importations or local transmission. Our model produces age-stratified forecasts given age-stratified data, and links reported case counts to routinely collected covariates (e.g. test number, vaccine coverage). We assessed the predictive performance of our model up to four weeks ahead using proper scoring rules and compared it to the European COVID-19 Forecast Hub ensemble model. Using simulations, we evaluated the impact of variations in transmission on the forecasts. We developed an open-source RShiny App to visualise the forecasts and scenarios. RESULTS: At a national level, the median relative difference between our median weekly case forecasts and the data up to four weeks ahead was 25% (IQR: 12-50%) over the prediction period. The accuracy decreased as the forecast horizon increased (on average 24% increase in the median ranked probability score per added week), while the accuracy of death forecasts was more stable. Beyond two weeks, the model generated a narrow range of likely transmission dynamics. The median national case forecasts showed similar accuracy to forecasts from the European COVID-19 Forecast Hub ensemble model, but the prediction interval was narrower in our model. Generating forecasts under alternative transmission scenarios was therefore key to capturing the range of possible short-term transmission dynamics. DISCUSSION: Our model captures changes in local COVID-19 outbreak dynamics, and enables quantification of short-term transmission risk at a subnational level. The outputs of the model improve our ability to identify areas where outbreaks are most likely, and are available to a wide range of public health professionals through the Shiny App we developed.

Transition from time-variant to static networks: Timescale separation in N-intertwined mean-field approximation of susceptible-infectious-susceptible epidemics.

We extend the N-intertwined mean-field approximation (NIMFA) for the susceptible-infectious-susceptible (SIS) epidemiological process to time-varying networks. Processes on time-varying networks are often analyzed under the assumption that the process and network evolution happen on different timescales. This approximation is called timescale separation. We investigate timescale separation between disease spreading and topology updates of the network. We introduce the transition times [under T]̲(r) and T[over ¯](r) as the boundaries between the intermediate regime and the annealed (fast changing network) and quenched (static network) regimes, respectively, for a fixed accuracy tolerance r. By analyzing the convergence of static NIMFA processes, we analytically derive upper and lower bounds for T[over ¯](r). Our results provide insights and bounds on the time of convergence to the steady state of the static NIMFA SIS process. We show that, under our assumptions, the upper-transition time T[over ¯](r) is almost entirely determined by the basic reproduction number R_{0} of the network. The value of the upper-transition time T[over ¯](r) around the epidemic threshold is large, which agrees with the current understanding that some real-world epidemics cannot be approximated with the aforementioned timescale separation.

Characterising information gains and losses when collecting multiple epidemic model outputs.

BACKGROUND: Collaborative comparisons and combinations of epidemic models are used as policy-relevant evidence during epidemic outbreaks. In the process of collecting multiple model projections, such collaborations may gain or lose relevant information. Typically, modellers contribute a probabilistic summary at each time-step. We compared this to directly collecting simulated trajectories. We aimed to explore information on key epidemic quantities; ensemble uncertainty; and performance against data, investigating potential to continuously gain information from a single cross-sectional collection of model results. METHODS: We compared projections from the European COVID-19 Scenario Modelling Hub. Five teams modelled incidence in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain. We compared July 2022 projections by incidence, peaks, and cumulative totals. We created a probabilistic ensemble drawn from all trajectories, and compared to ensembles from a median across each model's quantiles, or a linear opinion pool. We measured the predictive accuracy of individual trajectories against observations, using this in a weighted ensemble. We repeated this sequentially against increasing weeks of observed data. We evaluated these ensembles to reflect performance with varying observed data. RESULTS: By collecting modelled trajectories, we showed policy-relevant epidemic characteristics. Trajectories contained a right-skewed distribution well represented by an ensemble of trajectories or a linear opinion pool, but not models' quantile intervals. Ensembles weighted by performance typically retained the range of plausible incidence over time, and in some cases narrowed this by excluding some epidemic shapes. CONCLUSIONS: We observed several information gains from collecting modelled trajectories rather than quantile distributions, including potential for continuously updated information from a single model collection. The value of information gains and losses may vary with each collaborative effort's aims, depending on the needs of projection users. Understanding the differing information potential of methods to collect model projections can support the accuracy, sustainability, and communication of collaborative infectious disease modelling efforts.