How does date-rounding affect phylodynamic inference for public health?

Abstract

Phylodynamic analyses infer epidemiological parameters from pathogen genome sequences for enhanced genomic surveillance in public health. Pathogen genome sequences and their associated sampling dates are the essential data in every analysis. However, sampling dates are usually associated with hospitalisation or testing and can sometimes be used to identify individual patients, posing a threat to patient confidentiality. To lower this risk, sampling dates are often given with reduced date-resolution to the month or year, which can potentially bias inference. Here, we introduce a practical guideline on when date-rounding biases the inference of epidemiologically important parameters across a diverse range of empirical and simulated datasets. We show that the direction of bias varies for different parameters, datasets, and tree priors, while compounding with lower date-resolution and higher substitution rates. We also find that bias decreases for datasets with longer sampling intervals, implying that our guideline is most applicable to emerging datasets. We conclude by discussing future solutions that prioritise patient confidentiality and propose a method for safer sharing of sampling dates that translates them them uniformly by a random number.