Proximity ascertainment bias in early COVID case locations

2024/03/20 by M. B. Weissman · 1 voice · 1 citation
Decision Sciences · Mathematics · #Advanced Statistical Methods and Models #COVID-19 epidemiological studies #Reliability and Agreement in Measurement

paper · doi:10.1093/jrsssa/qnae021

openalex publication_date 2024/03/20 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/29

Abstract

Abstract A comparison of the distances to the Huanan Seafood Market of early COVID cases with known links to the market versus cases without known links shows results apparently incompatible with a location model lacking proximity ascertainment bias. The sign of the difference instead agrees with a model in which such ascertainment bias is large. In the presence of such bias inferences based on the clustering of case locations become unreliable.

Cited by

• The Data are Insufficient to Confidently Root the SARS-CoV-2 Phylogenetic Tree

Discussions

• Wrong hill to die on. RFK jr et al. are so deeply wrong on so many issues (michaelweissman.substack.com/p/bhattachar...), it seems perverse to keep attacking them on the one where they're right. on th [bsky, 1 points, 2 comments]

Related

• No evidence of systematic proximity ascertainment bias in early COVID-19 cases in Wuhan Reply to Weissman (2024)
• Confirmation of the centrality of the Huanan market among early COVID-19 cases
• Statistics did not prove that the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was the early epicentre of the COVID-19 pandemic
• Effects of Population Co-location Reduction on Cross-county Transmission Risk of COVID-19 in the United States
• Adapting Node-Place Model to Predict and Monitor COVID-19 Footprints and Transmission Risks