Comparison of prospective Hawkes and recursive point process models for Ebola in DRC

Point process models, such as Hawkes and recursive models, have recently been shown to offer improved accuracy over more traditional compartmental models for the purposes of modeling and forecasting the spread of disease epidemics. To explicitly test the performance of these two models in a real‐wor...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of forecasting 2022-01, Vol.41 (1), p.201-210
Main Authors: Lee, Sarita D., Shen, Andy A., Park, Junhyung, Harrigan, Ryan J., Hoff, Nicole A., Rimoin, Anne W., Paik Schoenberg, Frederic
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
disease epidemics
Ebola virus
Epidemics
forecasting
Hawkes model
Mitigation
point processes
recursive
self‐exciting
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Point process models, such as Hawkes and recursive models, have recently been shown to offer improved accuracy over more traditional compartmental models for the purposes of modeling and forecasting the spread of disease epidemics. To explicitly test the performance of these two models in a real‐world and ongoing epidemic, we compared the fit of Hawkes and recursive models to outbreak data on Ebola virus disease (EVD) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2018–2020. The models were estimated, and the forecasts were produced, time‐stamped, and stored in real time, so that their prospective value can be assessed and to guard against potential overfitting. The fit of the two models was similar, with both models resulting in much smaller errors in the beginning and waning phases of the epidemic and with slightly smaller error sizes on average for the Hawkes model compared with the recursive model. Our results suggest that both Hawkes and recursive point process models can be used in near real time during the course of an epidemic to help predict future cases and inform management and mitigation strategies.
ISSN:0277-6693
1099-131X
DOI:10.1002/for.2803