CDC awards Carnegie Mellon University $3 million for flu forecasting | TribLIVE.com
Allegheny

CDC awards Carnegie Mellon University $3 million for flu forecasting

Madasyn Lee
1783066_web1_1730025-fbcca52a2801446bba69c0696a370054
The Associated Press
Experts say the upcoming flu season could be a bad one.

Researchers at Carnegie Mellon University said this flu season has the potential to be severe.

They should know.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention this week named CMU as an Influenza Forecasting Center of Excellence, a five-year designation that includes $3 million in research funding.

Its Delphi Research Group, which is devoted to epidemic forecasting, has proven to be the most accurate of all the research groups participating in CDC’s FluSight Network, an initiative that encourages outside academic and private industry researchers to forecast the timing, peak, and intensity of the flu season.

Accurate forecasting enables health officials to look into the future and better plan ahead, potentially reducing the impact of the flu.

“We’re pleased as punch, not just because we got awarded this money, but because epidemic forecasting has become a real thing, and it wasn’t a real thing five years ago,” said Roni Rosenfeld, head of CMU’s Machine Learning Department and leader of its epidemic forecasting efforts. “When the CDC started their first competition, it was 2013, I think there were seven submissions. Today there are about 40 every year.”

CMU uses two methods to generate flu forecasts. One uses machine learning and computational statistics to make predictions based on both past patterns and input from the CDC’s domestic flu surveillance system. The other bases its predictions on the judgments of human volunteers who submit weekly predictions.

CMU’s methods provide fairly accurate flu forecasting data.

While not at 100% because of outside factors such as doctors reports being delivered late to the CDC, they fall within a 10% error rate, which researchers consider “quite good.” For example, if the actual number is 5%, CMU said its methods will predict the flu as close as 4.5 or 5.5%.

“You collect the forecasts that we’ve made, and you look at how off they were, and you average overall a bunch of different locations in which we made forecasts and times and you get some kind of sense of how accurate we are,” said Ryan Tibshirani, co-leader of the Delphi Research Group.

The additional funding will expand CMU’s existing forecasting research, enable the university to initiate studies on how to best communicate forecast information to the public and to leaders, and support efforts to determine how forecasting techniques might apply to pandemics.

The CDC estimated that from October 2018 through May, there were 37.4 million to 42.9 million reported flu illnesses in the United States.

As for this season: “We, as a research group, still don’t have much we can say about the current flu season, but it has been pointed out by others that the flu season in the Southern Hemisphere, the flu season of the last six months, has been particularly severe,” Rosenfeld said. “So, there’s some reason to think it may be severe this year.”

To see the research visit: https://delphi.midas.cs.cmu.edu

Madasyn Lee is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Madasyn at [email protected], 724-226-4702 or via Twitter.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.