Talk:Basic reproduction number

message: For this page - the general page on Basic reproduction number - we need to start thinking about what this page looks like years and decades from now. We have perhaps, justified or not, been overly focused on SARS-CoV-2 edits over the past three years. In the long run, it does not make sense to have multiple rows for the same pathogen, even if there are multiple strains of that pathogen (Flu, SARS-CoV-2, etc.). As discussed above, it is incredibly hard to know what the R0 is for any given strain (even to the point of there being many different R0s – each population and circumstance dependent). Even if there were not a problem with uncertainties in both the definition and the measurements of R0s, the table will end up being cluttered. It will also be biased towards certain pathogens that have more strains documented by editors. And it becomes a venue for endless debate among us editors over which strains should be included (and what the values to enter in the table should be). Of course, there can be lots of information on the differences in reproduction numbers between strains and circumstances for each pathogen. These discussions, perhaps with mini-tables, should go on each pathogen-specific page, not on this main page. We can still put ranges on reproduction numbers for each pathogen. We can link these ranges to pathogen-specific pages. I'll try to work on these simplifications as I get an opportunity in the coming months, but feel free to jump the gun. Discussion/comments welcome. Jaredroach (talk) 20:25, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The long view on the "Sample values for various infectious diseases" table 

message: Unfortunately the description of the SEIR model is flawed. It is apparently based on reference 21, but the content of this reference does not correspond to the content of the relevant section. The whole thing should be completely rewritten; maybe I'll do it when I have more time. Jt omega (talk) 09:01, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Please.  You've probably already noticed this, but this section refers to a section on the same topic in Compartmental models in epidemiology.  I've found it useful with similar cases to compare the two.  DavidMCEddy (talk) 10:05, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: In Compartmental models the SEIR model is correctly stated, while here it is not. Also otherwise the discussion here is nonsense. Jt omega (talk) 13:41, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

text: Ideally we move all the stuff on compartmental models from here to Compartmental models in epidemiology. We should link from here to there. We should not duplicate stuff here. We can summarize it in a sentence here. I'll start moving stuff when I get the time if nobody beats me to it. Jaredroach (talk) 17:36, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now made most of these moves. There may still be a little bit of excess detail remaining in this article, but it is looking much less cluttered now. Jaredroach (talk) 18:21, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  SEIR model 

message: Is the effective reproduction number often referred to by the term "Reff" (Reff)? If so, why not add this information to the article? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 03:51, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Reff"