Estimating local outbreak risks and the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions in age-structured populations: SARS-CoV-2 as a case study

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.04.27.21256163: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.


    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code.


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    One caveat of the results for SARS-CoV-2 presented here is that, although the epidemiological parameters of our model were chosen to be consistent with reported literature estimates, there is considerable variation between studies. In particular, the precise age-dependent variation in susceptibility and clinical fraction remains unclear, and the relative infectiousness of asymptomatic, presymptomatic and symptomatic hosts has not been determined exactly. Furthermore, the inherent transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 is now higher than in the initial stage of the pandemic, due to the appearance of new variants such as B.1.1.7. We therefore also conducted sensitivity analyses to explore the effects of varying the parameters of the model on our results (Supplementary Figs S1-12). In each case that we considered, our main conclusions were unchanged: the probability that an introduced case initiates a local outbreak depends on age-dependent factors affecting pathogen transmission and control, with widespread interventions and combinations of NPIs reducing the risk of local outbreaks most significantly. An important limitation of our approach to modelling contact-reducing NPIs is that we made a standard assumption that ‘school’, ‘work’ and ‘other’ contacts are independent [26, 30, 46]. In other words, reducing the numbers of contacts in one location did not affect the numbers of contacts occurring in another. In reality, this is unlikely to be the case. For example, closing schools is al...

    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: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.