  Mathematical models of cholera and waterborne disease vary widely in their
structures, in terms of transmission pathways, loss of immunity, and other
features. These differences may yield different predictions and parameter
estimates from the same data. Given the increasing use of models to inform
public health decision-making, it is important to assess distinguishability
(whether models can be distinguished based on fit to data) and inference
robustness (whether model inferences are robust to realistic variations in
model structure). We examined the effects of uncertainty in model structure in
epidemic cholera, testing a range of models based on known features of cholera
epidemiology. We fit to simulated epidemic and long-term data, as well as data
from the 2006 Angola epidemic. We evaluated model distinguishability based on
data fit, and whether parameter values and forecasts can accurately be inferred
from incidence data. In general, all models were able to successfully fit to
all data sets, even if misspecified. However, in the long-term data, the best
model fits were achieved when the loss of immunity form matched those of the
model that simulated the data. Two transmission and reporting parameters were
accurately estimated across all models, while the remaining showed broad
variation across the different models and data sets. Forecasting efforts were
not successful early, but once the epidemic peak had been achieved, most models
showed similar accuracy. Our results suggest that we are unlikely to be able to
infer mechanistic details from epidemic case data alone, underscoring the need
for broader data collection. Nonetheless, with sufficient data, conclusions
from forecasting and some parameter estimates were robust to variations in the
model structure, and comparative modeling can help determine how variations in
model structure affect conclusions drawn from models and data.
