Closed AndreaPi closed 4 years ago
I agree that this would be a better default. The problem is that I introduced the per_capita_x_axis
later and thus, changing its default might break plots that rely on the old default behavior... I'll think about it. Maybe a warning?
Personally, I wouldn't be afraid of changing defaults in a package which is still at version 0.0.0.9000 🙂 If you highlight the change in the release notes and/or in plot_covid19_spread
help, it should be fine. After all, it's just a default: if people purposely want to make big countries look better and/or small countries look worse 🙃 they can always pass per_capita = TRUE
& per_capita_x_axis = FALSE
.
But if you prefer not to touch defaults, a warning would be great!
You know what? You are right.
When comparing per capita plots among countries, one should not set the origin of the x-axis to the day the same number of cases/deaths was reached (i.e., use absolute values to define the 'event date' cutoff set by
min_cases
), but to the day the same fraction of cases/deaths was reached. This is clearly explained by renown epidemiologists and medical researchers here:https://twitter.com/CT_Bergstrom/status/1249491368507932672?s=20
here:
https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1249771636712067073?s=20
and here:
https://twitter.com/CT_Bergstrom/status/1249930299258990592?s=20
Now, in your excellent function
plot_covid19_spread
, settingper_capita_x_axis = TRUE
wheneverper_capita = TRUE
is sufficient to get this kind of plot, according toplot_covid19_spread
help:However, currently the default
per_capita_x_axis
isFALSE
, irrespective of the value ofper_capita
. In order to promote plotting best practices, I suggest to set the default value ofper_capita_x_axis
so that it follows the value ofper_capita
. In other words, I suggest setting the following default value: