Abstract
Objective/Background: Transmission-dynamic models are commonly used to study infectious disease epidemiology. Calibration involves identifying model parameter values that align model outputs with observed data or other evidence. Inaccurate calibration and inconsistent reporting produce inference errors and limit reproducibility, compromising confidence in modeled results. No standardized framework exists for reporting on calibration of infectious disease models, and an understanding of current calibration approaches is lacking. Methods: We developed a 15-item framework for reporting calibration practices and applied it in a scoping review to assess calibration approaches and evaluate reporting comprehensiveness in transmission-dynamic models of tuberculosis, HIV and malaria published between January 1, 2018, and January 16, 2024. We searched relevant databases and websites to identify eligible publications, including peer-reviewed studies where these models were calibrated to empirical data or published estimates. Results: We identified 411 eligible studies encompassing 419 models, with 74% (n=309) being compartmental models and 20% (n=82) individual-based models (IBMs). The predominant analytical purpose was to evaluate interventions (71% of models, n=298). Parameters were calibrated mainly because they were unknown or ambiguous (40%, n=168), or because determining their value was relevant to the scientific question beyond being necessary to run the model (20%, n=85). The choice of calibration method was significantly associated with model structure (p-value<0.001) and stochasticity (p-value=0.006), with approximate Bayesian computation more frequently used with IBMs and Markov-Chain Monte Carlo with compartmental models. Regarding reporting comprehensiveness, all 15 framework items in the framework were reported in 4% (n=18) of models; 11-14 items in 66% (n=277), and 10 or fewer items in 28% (n= 124). Implementation code was the least reported, available in only 20% (n=82) of models. Conclusions: Reporting on calibration is heterogeneous in recent infectious disease modeling literature. Our proposed framework for reporting of calibration approaches could support improved reproducibility and credibility of modeled analyses.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This project has been funded (in part) by contract 200-2016-91779 with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data relevant to this study are included or linked in the article.
