Wikidata:Property proposal/basic reproduction number
basic reproduction number edit
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Natural science
| Description | number of infections caused by one infection within an uninfected population |
|---|---|
| Represents | basic reproduction number (Q901464) |
| Data type | Number (not available yet) |
| Domain | infectious disease (Q18123741) |
| Allowed values | positive rational numbers |
| Allowed units | none |
| Example | Orthoebolavirus zairense (Q10538943) → 1.51±0.01 for Guinea (Q1006), according to Estimating the Reproduction Number of Ebola Virus (EBOV) During the 2014 Outbreak in West Africa (Q21128647) |
| Source | medical and scientific literature |
| Planned use | on items about infectious agents (e.g. subclasses of virus (Q808)), this could inform epidemiological models; usually reported on a per-country and per-year basis, so should probably have country (P17) and point in time (P585) as a qualifiers |
| Robot and gadget jobs | hopefully at some point, but there are no obvious databases to pull the information from |
- Motivation
The basic reproduction number (Q901464) is another parameter often used in epidemiological modeling. Its value captures the potential of an infectious agent to spread, which is an important piece of information that has to be taken into account when considering how to prevent outbreaks or how to respond to them. The information can typically be obtained from individual papers. There seems to be no place where it is collated systematically, so having it on Wikidata would be especially valuable.
Notified participants of WikiProject Medicine.
Daniel Mietchen (talk) 08:40, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
- Discussion
Question Could you give us examples of papers with "basic reproduction number"? The example "Universe (Q1) → Earth (Q2)" seems wrong. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 09:05, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking — it's fixed now. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 09:43, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Support - though I wonder if there is possibly a more generic name that could have wider applicability (meme spreading, nuclear reactions, ???) ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:43, 4 November 2016 (UTC)- Support I think having the property to be targeted on diseases is fine. ChristianKl (talk) 20:32, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
- Question It seems like for this property to be meaningful it has to be matched with both a geographical location and a period of time, right? In the example it is matched to a geographical location. Is some kind of match essential, or does the number inherently have value without further explanation? Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:06, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
