This would push the analyst towards choosing a model-based approach. Model-based approaches are especially useful when there is little data available; data-driven methods tend to require more data. However, it depends on the time-series and the particular type of approach. A naive model, which is a data-driven method, tends to require very little data, especially if there is not significant seasonality.
If admissions data for the nearby hospital are correlated to daily patient visit data at the clinic, then the hospital data could be useful.
The advantage of this approach is that it is simple (it is a seasonal naïve forecast where the seasons are days of the week), the administrator can quickly and easily do this without the need of an experienced analyst. The disadvantage is that the administrator may be missing out on systematic variations that could be captured by a more complex model and thus lead to better predictions.
It would be useful to automate this task since it is trying to forecast daily patient visits, so if it were automated a new forecast could easily be generated each day.
In addition to the naïve approach currently used, I would suggest creating two other models:
Then combine the forecasts of these three models. Unless there is strong evidence that one model is much better than the others, I would weight the forecasts from each model equally when combining them.
Persistance Method: This method is also known as ‘Naive Predictor’. It is assumed that the wind speed at time t + \(\delta\)t will be the same as it was at time t. Unbelieveably, it is more accurate than most of the physical and statistical methods for very-short to short term forecasts…
Physical Approach: Physical systems use parametrizations based on a detailed physical description of the atmosphere…
Statistical Approach: The statistical approach is based on training with measurement data and uses differences between the predicted and the actual wind speeds in immediate past to tune model parameters. It is easy to model, inexpensive, and provides timely predictions. It is not based on any predefined mathematical model and is rather based on patterns…
Hybrid Approach: In general, the combination of different approaches such as mixing physical and statistical approaches or combining short term and medium-term models, etc., is referred to as a hybrid approach.
Persistence Method: data-driven - naïve forecasts are the most basic types of data-driven models
Physical Approach: model-based - Assumes a relationship between physical characteristics/features of the atmosphere and wind speed. The model parameters in this case would likely be coefficients relating the values the features of the atmosphere to future wind speed.
Statistical Approach: data-driven - Soman et al. say in the description that the approach “.is not based on any predefined mathematical model and rather it is based on patterns.”, this is pretty much the definition of a data-driven approach.
Hybrid Approach: combination - It combines multiple models
Persistence Method: extrapolation - forecasts of a time-series based on its history are extrapolations.
Physical Approach: this is either based on correlation or causation. It is unclear if the modelers assume that the atmospheric features actually effect windspeed and thus have a causal relationship with wind, or are just correlated with certain windspeed.
Statistical Approach: extrapolation - creates forecasts of future windspeeds using historical windspeed data
Hybrid Approach: combination - it combines several different methods creating an ensemble forecast
Advantages: Combined forecasts tend to have reduced errors compared with the component forecasts that make up the combined forecast. The error of the combined forecast is always less than the average error of its component forecasts, and is often less than the most accurate of its combined forecasts. If you don’t know which method is best, then the hybrid approach is a good option because it combines them all.
Disadvantages: It requires creating multiple different forecasts to combine and is thus inherently costlier. It is much more complicated than persistence method and requires a forecaster (or forecasters) who are familiar with multiple methods and how to combine forecasts in a structured way. If a rule for combining forecasts is not made in advance, then a forecaster may (perhaps inadvertently) combine forecasts in a biased way.