Abstract
The incubation period of SARS is the time between infection of disease and onset of symptoms. Knowledge about the distribution of incubation times is crucial in determining the length of quarantine period and is an important parameter in modelling the spread and control of SARS. As the exact time of infection is unknown for most patients, the incubation time cannot be determined. What is observable is the serial interval which is the time from the onset of symptoms in an index case to the onset of symptoms in a subsequent case infected by the index case. By constructing a convolution likelihood based on the serial interval data, we are able to estimate the incubation distribution which is assumed to be Weibull, and justifications are given to support this choice over other distributions. The method is applied to data provided by the Ministry of Health of Singapore and the results justify the choice of a ten‐day quarantine period. The indirect estimate obtained using the method of convolution likelihood is validated by means of comparison with a direct estimate obtained directly from a subset of patients for whom the incubation time can be ascertained. Despite its name, the proposed indirect estimate is actually more precise than the direct estimate because serial interval data are recorded for almost all patients, whereas exact incubation times can be determined for only a small subset. It is possible to obtain an even more efficient estimate by using the combined data but the improvement is not substantial. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Keywords: convolution, incubation distribution, quarantine period, serial interval, severe acute respiratory syndrome, Weibull distribution
REFERENCES
- 1. Peiris JSM, Lai ST, Poon LLM, Guan Y, Yam LYC, Lim W, Nicholls J, Yee WKS, Yan WW, Cheung MT, Cheng VCC, Chan KH, Tsang DNC, Yung RWH, Ng TK, Yuen KY, SARS study group . Coronavirus as a possible cause of severe acute respiratory syndrome. Lancet 2003; 361:1319–1325. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Ksiazek TG, Erdman D, Goldsmith CS, Zaki SR, Peret T, Emery S et al. A novel coronavirus associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine 2003; 348:1953–1966. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Drosten C, Günther S, Preiser W, van der Werf S, Brode HR, Becker S et al. Identification of a novel coronavirus in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine 2003; 348:1967–1976. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Donnelly CA, Ghani AC, Leung GM, Hedley AJ, Fraser C, Riley S et al. Epidemiological determinants of spread of casual agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome in Hong Kong. Lancet 2003; 361:1761–1766. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Meltzer MI. Multiple contact dates and SARS incubation periods. SARS Epidemiology 2004; 10:207–209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Lipsitch M, Cohen T, Cooper B, Robins JM, Ma S, James L, Gopalakrishna G, Chew SK, Tan CC, Samore MH, Fisman D, Murray M. Transmission dynamics and control of severe acute respiratory syndrome. Science 2003; 300:1966–1970. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Kalbfleisch JD, Prentice RL. The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data. Wiley: New York, 1980. [Google Scholar]
- 8. Prentice RL. Discrimination among some parametric models. Biometrika 1975; 62:607–614. [Google Scholar]
- 9. Riley S, Fraser C, Donnelly CA, Ghani AC, Abu‐Raddad LJ, Hedley AJ et al. Transmission dynamics of the etiological agent of SARS in Hong Kong: impact of public health interventions. Science 2003; 300:1961–1966. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Tan CC. Public health response: a view from Singapore In SARS: The First New Plague of the 21st Century. Blackwell: London, to appear. [Google Scholar]