undefined | Better HN

0 pointslearc836y ago0 comments

We don't have any idea what the hospitalization rates are. We only know what the hospitalization rates are for people who have a confirmed diagnosis, which skews towards people with severe symptoms.

>Also, the cruise ship cases aren’t all resolved outcomes yet.

No they aren't, but the vast majority have been symptomatic longer than the average time till hospitalization and the number in critical condition hasn't increased in days. It's very unlikely they'll get to anywhere near 20%. And this is in a more geriatric population.

0 comments

gdubs6y ago

Except we do have data, that’s my point. China’s study is being cited by most experts as this situation unfolds. It doesn’t mean these numbers will hold — it’s possible that what we see out of South Korea over the coming month might be more representative — but it’s what we have, and it’s not nothing:

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/02/study-720...

learc83OP6y ago

The data can't support your 20% hospitalization claim though, and no one in public health is using that study to make that claim. The study itself makes no such claims that this study is in any way applicable to the general population.

About 40% of the patients in that study weren't even tested. They were included based on symptoms that include severe pneumonia. The ones who were tested, sought testing because they displayed symptoms severe enough to seek treatment.

This is the very definition of selection bias, and there is absolutely no reason to pretend that a 20% hospitalization rate is a realistic outcome.

treis6y ago

Lots of people on the ship that tested positive showed little to no symptoms. It's very likely that there are a large number of infections that have gone undetected. Until we test everyone we won't know the true number.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse