Abstract
Background COVID-19 will not be the last pandemic of the 21st century. To better prepare for the next one, it is essential that we make honest appraisals of the utility of different responses to COVID. In this paper we focus specifically on epidemiologic forecasting. Characterizing forecast efficacy over the history of the pandemic is challenging, especially given its significant spatial, temporal, and contextual variability. In this light, we introduce the Weighted Contextual Interval Score (WCIS), a new method for retrospective interval forecast evaluation. The WCIS reflects the potential utility of predictions, resulting in a score that is easily comparable across different pandemic scenarios despite remaining intuitively representative of the in-situ quality of individual forecasts.
Methods The central tenet of the WCIS is a direct incorporation of contextual utility into the evaluation. This necessitates a specific characterization of forecast efficacy depending on the use case for predictions, accomplished via defining a utility threshold parameter. In essence, changes in forecast accuracy beyond this threshold do not map to changes in the utility of a prediction. This idea is generalized to probabilistic interval-form forecasts, which are the preferred prediction format for epidemiological modeling, as an adaptation of the existing Weighed Interval Score (WIS).
Results We apply the WCIS to two different forecasting scenarios. The first assesses the performance of facility-level COVID-19 hospital bed occupancy predictions for the state of Maryland during the Omicron wave, and the second evaluates state-level hospitalization forecasts drawn from the COVID-19 Forecast Hub. We use these applications to demonstrate the parameterization of contextual utility, compare the WCIS to the WIS, and explore the utility of the WCIS.
Conclusions The WCIS provides a pragmatic utility-based characterization of probabilistic predictions. This method is expressly intended to enable practitioners and policymakers who may not have expertise in forecasting but are nevertheless essential partners in epidemic response to use and provide insightful analysis of predictions. We note that the WCIS is intended specifically for retrospective forecast evaluation and should not be used as a minimized penalty in a competitive context as it lacks statistical propriety.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was supported by the National Science Foundation under grant no. 2108526
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 study used ONLY openly available human COVID-19 outcome data that were originally located at: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6301718 AND https://healthdata.gov/d/j4ip-wfsv
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
Footnotes
This version of the manuscript has been revised to clarify the intended use of the WCIS and simplify its formulation. Use-case clarifications are present in minor narrative changes throughout the manuscript, and in a significant change in the application chosen for Section 3.1. The formulation of the method in Equation 4 was changed for clarity and to better reflect the evolution of the WCIS from the extant IS, but this change does not alter the output (as demonstrated in the supplement in Section 1.2).
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available online at https://github.com/cpt-diabetes/wcis
