Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

- use epireview functions to get parameters #305

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

cm401
Copy link
Collaborator

@cm401 cm401 commented May 16, 2024

  • add notes & limitations on review data
  • Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING guidelines
  • A new item has been added to NEWS.md
  • Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
  • Docs have been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)
  • Checks have been run locally and pass
  • What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
    In the data_from_epireview vignette we use epireview functions to get and filter parameters
    We add notes on epireview data for users.

  • What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here)
    No change in behaviour.

  • What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
    No change in behaviour.

  • Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR?)
    No

  • Other information:

@annecori, @patcatgit, @kellymccain28, @ruthmccabe - please review, in particular notes + limitations on epireview.

- add notes & limitations on review data
@cm401 cm401 requested a review from joshwlambert May 16, 2024 11:00
@cm401 cm401 self-assigned this May 16, 2024
@kellymccain28
Copy link

Notes and limitations look great to me. I have a few editing suggestions:

  • Update the sentence under Multi-row epireview entries to:
  • "We are trying to avoid this as linking these entries is very challenging, but there are still some cases in which there are linked parameters on different rows."
  • A few small edits to the limitations section:
  • The database schema of {epireview} has evolved over time as the Imperial PERG team has extracted more pathogens.
  • A list of parameter types is available in the {epireview} package
  • It is important to differentiate between variability of the sample (e.g. sample standard deviation) and uncertainty of the estimate (e.g. 95% confidence interval or credible interval). From the database version of {epireview} of Zika, we will explicitly expose this to remove any ambiguity of the extracted data. Please note that in the Marburg, Lassa, and Ebola datasets, there may be some ambiguity between variability and uncertainty.
  • This is functionality in {epireview} which will be developed and improved over the coming months.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

accommodating changes in extraction of uncertainty/variability
2 participants