Abstract
Outbreaks of emerging and zoonotic infections represent a substantial threat to human health and well-being. These outbreaks tend to be characterised by highly stochastic transmission dynamics with intense variation in transmission potential between cases. The negative binomial distribution is commonly used as a model for transmission in the early stages of an epidemic as it has a natural interpretation as the convolution of a Poisson contact process and a gamma-distributed infectivity. In this study we expand upon the negative binomial model by introducing a beta-Poisson mixture model in which infectious individuals make contacts at the points of a Poisson process and then transmit infection along these contacts with a beta-distributed probability. We show that the negative binomial distribution is a limit case of this model, as is the zero-inflated Poisson distribution obtained by combining a Poisson-distributed contact process with an additional failure probability. We assess the beta-Poisson models applicability by fitting it to secondary case distributions (the distribution of the number of subsequent cases generated by a single case) estimated from outbreaks covering a range of pathogens and geographical settings. We find that while the beta-Poisson mixture can achieve a closer to fit to data than the negative binomial distribution, it is consistently outperformed by the negative binomial in terms of Akaike Information Criterion, making it a suboptimal choice on parsimonious grounds. The beta-Poisson performs similarly to the negative binomial model in its ability to capture features of the secondary case distribution such as overdispersion, prevalence of superspreaders, and the probability of a case generating zero subsequent cases. Despite this possible shortcoming, the beta-Poisson distribution may still be of interest in the context of intervention modelling since its structure allows for the simulation of measures which change contact structures while leaving individual-level infectivity unchanged, and vice-versa.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The inferred secondary case distributions used in our study were taken from published studies which are cited in our manuscript.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The code used in this study is available at https://github.com/JBHilton/beta-poisson-epidemics.
