Table 2. MCMC-estimated parameter values for the infection MMs^*.

Parameter (units)	Poor efficacy	Infection resistance	p- value
Inoculum, VPCR(0) $\left(\frac{\text{vRNA}}{\text{mL}}\right)$	102.2 [2.1, 2.3], (2.2)	102.1 [2, 2.3], (2.1)	0.248
Inoculum, VHEp−2(0) $\left(\frac{\text{PFU}}{\text{mL}}\right)$	103.8 [3.8, 3.9], (3.8)	102.9 [2.6, 3.2], (2.9)	<0.001
Inoculum, VSIAT(0) $\left(\frac{{\text{TCID}}_{69}}{\text{mL}}\right)$	10−0.09 [−0.38, 0.16], (−0.17)	10−0.1 [−0.38, 0.17], (−0.18)	0.490
SC rinse factor, $\frac{V_{\text{post}-\text{rinse}}}{V_{\text{pre}-\text{rinse}}}$	10−2.3 [−2.5, −2.2], (−2.3)	10−2.2 [−2.4, −1.9], (−2.1)	0.136
Prod. rate, pPCR $\left(\frac{\text{vRNA}}{\text{mL}·\mathrm{h}}\right)$	104.8 [4.5, 5.6], (4.7)	104.5 [4.3, 4.7], (4.5)	0.050
Prod. rate, pHEp−2 $\left(\frac{\text{PFU}}{\text{mL}·\mathrm{h}}\right)$	105.4 [5.2, 6.2], (5.3)	105.1 [4.8, 5.3], (5)	0.014
Prod. rate, pSIAT $\left(\frac{{\text{TCID}}_{69}}{\text{mL}·\mathrm{h}}\right)$	103.2 [3, 4], (3.1)	103 [2.8, 3.2], (2.9)	0.052
Infectiousness, β $\left(\frac{\text{mL}}{\text{PFU}·\mathrm{h}}\right)$	10−7.3 [−7.4, −7.1], (−7.2)	10−6.4 [−6.7, −6.2], (−6.4)	<0.001
Eclipse phase, τE (days)	3.7 [3.1, 5.7], (3.5)	3 [2.5, 3.5], (2.8)	0.027
Virus-prod. phase, τI (days)	0.63 [0.45, 4.2], (3.6)	16 [9.5, ND], (15)	<0.001
Antivir. timing, τF (days)	—	4.5 [3.5, 5.4], (4.5)	—
Derived (computed) parameters
Infecting time, tinf (h)	13 [4.9, 14], (13)	6.9 [5.4, 8.6], (7.5)	0.233
Infection rate, R0/τI (1/day)	1.1 [0.74, 7], (1.1)	3.6 [2.3, 6.1], (3.4)	0.233
Basic repro. num., R0	3.9 [3.1, 4.7], (3.9)	50 [26, ND], (50)	<0.001
Sum Squared Resid., SSR	240 [230, 250], (230)	180 [170, 190], (170)	<0.001
Akaike Inform. Crit., AICC	110 [100, 110], (100)	72 [67, 80], (65)	<0.001

* Estimates are provided as: Mode [95% credible region] (best), where ‘best’ corresponds to the value of that parameter in the parameter set that yields the highest likelihood. A CR bound of ‘ND’ indicates the parameter is not bounded. The ‘Poor efficacy’ MM has 10 estimated parameters whereas the ‘Infection resistance’ MM has 11 (τ_F). This was taken into account in the calculation of the AIC_C. Parameters of the two age class MM for RSV infectivity loss MMs were fixed to the maximum likelihood values identified in Table 1 and thus are not included in the count of estimated parameters. The ‘Derived parameters’ were computed from the MM’s estimated parameters.