9873210 wrote:servodude wrote:Julian wrote:Neither of those distortions happen with the CODC numbers but there is a delay in compiling that data due to the time it takes for the death certificates to be processed so I can see why the 28DA data is still published but I do worry that with the massive amount of testing and probably quite a few people testing themselves for the first time in the run up and over Christmas the distortions on the 28DA data might be in danger of making those data a very unreliable indicator now.
Indeed
it was useful for "dead reckoning" during the fog at the start of the pandemic when things were moving faster than the paperwork could keep up
- it has served its purpose and should be retired
the pun was accidental
-sd
The two numbers track very closely. Between Jan 1 2021 and Dec 15 2021 the r-square between the seven day averages of 28DA and the CODC is 0.99!!!! (and the death certificate numbers are 7% higher).
I think we can reasonably use 28DA as a timely proxy for CODC. In any case the alternatives that don't use it are worse. Either you make policy without data or you make policy based on data such as cases, which would result in a massive overreaction to Omicron.
!!!! I rarely use multiple explanation marks, but I have never seen an R^2 of .99 in real data. I was ready to work up a multi-variant model that included test numbers. But with only 1% left to explain it scarcely seems worth it.
I agree on the R^2 stuff
- it's the kind of thing that makes you think you've made a mistake (or I did anyway when I tried exponential fits to the rising hospital figures back in the mists of this thing)
The main issue I have with the 28DA as it is "going forward" is we know it's going to get less and less accurate
- particularly in the face of a variant with a proven degree of significant escape
- which leaves it open to some valid criticism (and then we're into politics )
Fixing that for me would just require the removal of the word "first" from the definition - but i think that might be fixing it in the wrong direction for most of its detractors (whereas i think likelihood of anyone dying in a given 28day period is probably quite well understood)
- sd