Some of these points seem like attempts at being conservative (I imagine most people will prefer to err in the direction of caution when advising others), while other points just look like the project is not well-maintained anymore.
Do you have a feeling for what a good adjustment factor is that one could apply to the result to compensate the first kind of problem, so everything related to others’ vaccination status? (I’ll just enter the local data manually while the importer is broken.)
(I’m hesitant to go with a budget that would imply a 50% yearly risk for me, but if I’m going to stick with my approximate 3% p.a. risk budget, I want to do so using a median estimate, not a conservative one. Update: Did some math. I think I’m comfortable with a 20% p.a. budget now. But I don’t really do budgets because I weigh for every event what risk it is worth or whether there’s an equally good but safer alternative.)
Do you have a feeling for what a good adjustment factor is that one could apply to the result to compensate the first kind of problem?
microCOVID uses https://apidocs.covidactnow.org/ for US positive test rates. I removed the “apidocs.” part, entered my county, and it gives you a graph showing daily new cases. I think you could take a look at that graph and then try to extrapolate out seven days or so.
For example, I live in Multnomah County, OR. The last day they have is 2/18/22 and the number is 29.7 (new cases per 100k people). On 2/11/22 it was 47.8. The decline is slowing, so maybe we can say a 15k drop over 7 days. So over 10 days, maybe 21k or something. Which would mean we’re currently at something like 9k cases/day.
I’m a little confused by your methodology here—if the last day they have is 2⁄18, and today is 2⁄22 (or was 2⁄21 when you posted it), why are you extrapolating out by 10 days (29.7 − 21 ~ 9k)?
More generally, does the following seem like a valid way to input data manually into microCOVID?
Take the last reported daily cases/100K from covidactnow.org. Reduce by extrapolating to what you’d expect for today
Multiply by 7 and input into “Reported cases in past week”
Enter “100000” into Total Population
Leave “Percent increase in cases from last week to this week” at 0%, since you can’t set it to negative
Take the latest “percent of tests that come back positive” as-is from the latest number available at covidactnow
Take the “2+ or J&J” number and enter it into “Percent of population fully vaccinated” (looking at the default number in there before I typed mine in, it looks like that’s what microCOVID is using, not % boosted)
Hi! I suppose that question mostly goes to Adam? The importer is fixed, so I’m not doing any of this anymore. What I did was to extrapolate to the current, incomplete week n using the slope from week n-2 to n-1. Then I set the percent increase to 0 because the week is actually the current week already.
But the differences from week to week will, in most cases, be minor, so I don’t think it’s important to get this exactly right. There are so many other uncertain factors that go into the model that I don’t recommend investing too much time into this one.
Thanks for the analysis!
Some of these points seem like attempts at being conservative (I imagine most people will prefer to err in the direction of caution when advising others), while other points just look like the project is not well-maintained anymore.
Do you have a feeling for what a good adjustment factor is that one could apply to the result to compensate the first kind of problem, so everything related to others’ vaccination status? (I’ll just enter the local data manually while the importer is broken.)
(I’m hesitant to go with a budget that would imply a 50% yearly risk for me, but if I’m going to stick with my approximate 3% p.a. risk budget, I want to do so using a median estimate, not a conservative one. Update: Did some math. I think I’m comfortable with a 20% p.a. budget now. But I don’t really do budgets because I weigh for every event what risk it is worth or whether there’s an equally good but safer alternative.)
microCOVID uses https://apidocs.covidactnow.org/ for US positive test rates. I removed the “apidocs.” part, entered my county, and it gives you a graph showing daily new cases. I think you could take a look at that graph and then try to extrapolate out seven days or so.
For example, I live in Multnomah County, OR. The last day they have is 2/18/22 and the number is 29.7 (new cases per 100k people). On 2/11/22 it was 47.8. The decline is slowing, so maybe we can say a 15k drop over 7 days. So over 10 days, maybe 21k or something. Which would mean we’re currently at something like 9k cases/day.
Good. There’s a site for Switzerland like that too. I extrapolated from that in a similar manner. :-)
I’m a little confused by your methodology here—if the last day they have is 2⁄18, and today is 2⁄22 (or was 2⁄21 when you posted it), why are you extrapolating out by 10 days (29.7 − 21 ~ 9k)?
More generally, does the following seem like a valid way to input data manually into microCOVID?
Take the last reported daily cases/100K from covidactnow.org. Reduce by extrapolating to what you’d expect for today
Multiply by 7 and input into “Reported cases in past week”
Enter “100000” into Total Population
Leave “Percent increase in cases from last week to this week” at 0%, since you can’t set it to negative
Take the latest “percent of tests that come back positive” as-is from the latest number available at covidactnow
Take the “2+ or J&J” number and enter it into “Percent of population fully vaccinated” (looking at the default number in there before I typed mine in, it looks like that’s what microCOVID is using, not % boosted)
Thanks!
Hi! I suppose that question mostly goes to Adam? The importer is fixed, so I’m not doing any of this anymore. What I did was to extrapolate to the current, incomplete week n using the slope from week n-2 to n-1. Then I set the percent increase to 0 because the week is actually the current week already.
But the differences from week to week will, in most cases, be minor, so I don’t think it’s important to get this exactly right. There are so many other uncertain factors that go into the model that I don’t recommend investing too much time into this one.
Thanks!