Need advice.
I am a lawyer.
Need some advice in field of medicine.
I found this:
"Vaccination campaigns reduce the proportion of a population at risk for infection and have proven to be highly effective in mitigating future outbreaks. This conclusion is sometimes used to suggest that an aim of vaccination campaigns is to remove susceptible members of the population to reduce the R0 for the event to <1. Although the removal of susceptible members from the population will affect infection transmission by reducing the number of effective contacts between infectious and susceptible persons, this activity will technically not reduce the R0 value because the definition of R0 includes the assumption of a completely susceptible population. When examining the effect of vaccination, the more appropriate metric to use is the effective reproduction number (R), which is similar to R0 but does not assume complete susceptibility of the population and, therefore, can be estimated with populations having immune members. Efforts aimed at reducing the number of susceptible persons within a population through vaccination would result in a reduction of the R value, rather than R0 value. In this scenario, vaccination could potentially end an epidemic, if R can be reduced to a value <1 . The effective reproduction number can also be specified at a particular time t, presented as R(t) or Rt, which can be used to trace changes in R as the number of susceptible members in a population is reduced . When the goal is to measure the effectiveness of vaccination campaigns or other public health interventions, R0 is not necessarily the best metric."
Source: https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/25/1/17-1901_article#r26
There is a formula for R, that gave me interesting results (i found the explanation in wiki to be most easy to understand), when i put some numbers in there, to see what rises R an what not, and i put some real data in there. Comments?
I am a lawyer.
Need some advice in field of medicine.
I found this:
"Vaccination campaigns reduce the proportion of a population at risk for infection and have proven to be highly effective in mitigating future outbreaks. This conclusion is sometimes used to suggest that an aim of vaccination campaigns is to remove susceptible members of the population to reduce the R0 for the event to <1. Although the removal of susceptible members from the population will affect infection transmission by reducing the number of effective contacts between infectious and susceptible persons, this activity will technically not reduce the R0 value because the definition of R0 includes the assumption of a completely susceptible population. When examining the effect of vaccination, the more appropriate metric to use is the effective reproduction number (R), which is similar to R0 but does not assume complete susceptibility of the population and, therefore, can be estimated with populations having immune members. Efforts aimed at reducing the number of susceptible persons within a population through vaccination would result in a reduction of the R value, rather than R0 value. In this scenario, vaccination could potentially end an epidemic, if R can be reduced to a value <1 . The effective reproduction number can also be specified at a particular time t, presented as R(t) or Rt, which can be used to trace changes in R as the number of susceptible members in a population is reduced . When the goal is to measure the effectiveness of vaccination campaigns or other public health interventions, R0 is not necessarily the best metric."
Source: https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/25/1/17-1901_article#r26
There is a formula for R, that gave me interesting results (i found the explanation in wiki to be most easy to understand), when i put some numbers in there, to see what rises R an what not, and i put some real data in there. Comments?
