BACKGROUND: Accurate estimation of the effective reproductive number ([Formula: see text]) of epidemic outbreaks is of central relevance to public health policy and decision making. We present estimateR, an R package for the estimation of the reproductive number through time from delayed observations of infection events. Such delayed observations include confirmed cases, hospitalizations or deaths. The package implements the methodology of Huisman et al. but modularizes the [Formula: see text] estimation procedure to allow easy implementation of new alternatives to the currently available methods. Users can tailor their analyses according to their particular use case by choosing among implemented options. RESULTS: The estimateR R package allows users to estimate the effective reproductive number of an epidemic outbreak based on observed cases, hospitalization, death or any other type of event documenting past infections, in a fast and timely fashion. We validated the implementation with a simulation study: estimateR yielded estimates comparable to alternative publicly available methods while being around two orders of magnitude faster. We then applied estimateR to empirical case-confirmation incidence data for COVID-19 in nine countries and for dengue fever in Brazil; in parallel, estimateR is already being applied (i) to SARS-CoV-2 measurements in wastewater data and (ii) to study influenza transmission based on wastewater and clinical data in other studies. In summary, this R package provides a fast and flexible implementation to estimate the effective reproductive number for various diseases and datasets. CONCLUSIONS: The estimateR R package is a modular and extendable tool designed for outbreak surveillance and retrospective outbreak investigation. It extends the method developed for COVID-19 by Huisman et al. and makes it available for a variety of pathogens, outbreak scenarios, and observation types. Estimates obtained with estimateR can be interpreted directly or used to inform more complex epidemic models (e.g. for forecasting) on the value of [Formula: see text].

Recent years have seen many advances in methods for causal structure learning from data. The empirical assessment of such methods, however, is much less developed. Motivated by this gap, we pose the following question: how can one assess, in a given problem setting, the practical efficacy of one or more causal structure learning methods? We formalize the problem in a decision-theoretic framework, via a notion of expected loss or risk for the causal setting. We introduce a theoretical notion of causal risk as well as sample quantities that can be computed from data, and study the relationship between the two, both theoretically and through an extensive simulation study. Our results provide an assumptions-light framework for assessing causal structure learning methods that can be applied in a range of practical use-cases.

Genotypic causes of a phenotypic trait are typically determined via randomized controlled intervention experiments. Such experiments are often prohibitive with respect to durations and costs, and informative prioritization of experiments is desirable. We therefore consider predicting stable rankings of genes (covariates), according to their total causal effects on a phenotype (response), from observational data. Since causal effects are generally non-identifiable from observational data only, we use a method that can infer lower bounds for the total causal effect under some assumptions. We validated our method, which we call Causal Stability Ranking (CStaR), in two situations. First, we performed knock-out experiments with Arabidopsis thaliana according to a predicted ranking based on observational gene expression data, using flowering time as phenotype of interest. Besides several known regulators of flowering time, we found almost half of the tested top ranking mutants to have a significantly changed flowering time. Second, we compared CStaR to established regression-based methods on a gene expression dataset of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We found that CStaR outperforms these established methods. Our method allows for efficient design and prioritization of future intervention experiments, and due to its generality it can be used for a broad spectrum of applications.