COVID-19’s U.S. Temperature Response Profile
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
We estimate the U.S. temperature response profile (TRP) for COVID-19 and show it is highly sensitive to temperature variation. Replacing the erratic daily death counts U.S. states initially reported with counts based on death certificate date, we build a week-ahead statistical forecasting model that explains most of their daily variation (R 2 = 0.97) and isolates COVID-19’s TRP ( p < 0.001). These counts, normalized at 31 °C (U.S. mid-summer average), scale up to 160% at 5 °C in the static case where the infection pool is held constant. Positive case counts are substantially more temperature sensitive. When temperatures are declining, dynamic feedback through a growing infection pool can substantially amplify these temperature effects. Our estimated TRP can be incorporated into COVID-related planning exercises and used as an input to SEIR models employed for longer run forecasting. For the former, we show how our TRP is predictive of the realized pattern of growth rates in per capita positive cases across states five months after the end of our sample period. For the latter, we show the variation in herd immunity levels implied by temperature-driven, time-varying R 0 series for the Alpha and Delta variants of COVID-19 for several representative states.
Article activity feed
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.03.20225581: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.11.03.20225581: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: Please consider improving the rainbow (“jet”) colormap(s) used on pages 33 and 35. At least one figure is not accessible to readers with colorblindness and/or is not true to the data, i.e. not perceptually uniform.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-