CAJ | 학술논문

比较5种基于汇总数据的疫情病死率估计方法的差异。通过模拟分析发现，方法3（见文献［7，8］）、方法4（见文献［9］）病死率估计值的相对误差和标准差均较小；而实例数据分析中，方法3和方法4能够较好反映中国香港和新加坡两地SARS病死率情况，而方法1（见文献［5］）和方法2（见文献［6］）能较好评估北京地区SARS和中国大陆人感染H7N9禽流感疫情病死率的即时情况。表明基于汇总数据的方法3、4可在疫情初期对病死率进行较为准确的估计，而方法1、2可在疫情出现变化时较好反映病死率的即时情况。
비교5충기우회총수거적역정병사솔고계방법적차이。통과모의분석발현，방법3（견문헌［7，8］）、방법4（견문헌［9］）병사솔고계치적상대오차화표준차균교소；이실례수거분석중，방법3화방법4능구교호반영중국향항화신가파량지SARS병사솔정황，이방법1（견문헌［5］）화방법2（견문헌［6］）능교호평고북경지구SARS화중국대륙인감염H7N9금류감역정병사솔적즉시정황。표명기우회총수거적방법3、4가재역정초기대병사솔진행교위준학적고계，이방법1、2가재역정출현변화시교호반영병사솔적즉시정황。
To evaluate five methods in the estimation on the rate of case fatality during the epidemics of diseases based on the summarizing data. Case fatality rates,derived from the simulation data,2003 SARS epidemic data in Hong Kong,Singapore Beijing and the 2013 H7N9 epidemic data in mainland China were analyzed,using these 5 methods. Results from the simulation analysis discovered that the relative errors and the standard deviations of the Chen[7,8] (method 3),Chen[9] (method 4) were minor with high accuracy. Data from the analysis on 2003 SARS epidemic was noticed that the estimation from method 3,4 in Hong Kong and Singapore both showing high veracities. Since the case fatality rate reported in Beijing was not a constant value,method 5 showed low accuracy even though it was close to the final case fatality rate. Data from the 2013 H7N9 epidemic showed that the estimations of method 1,2,3,4 were all higher than that in the method 5, suggesting that method 3,4 could be used to estimate the case fatality rates of epidemics more precisely.