Modeling of COVID-19 Outbreak Indicators in China Between January and June

  1. Senol Celik
  2. Handan Ankarali
  3. Ozge Pasin

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objectives:

The objective of this study is to compare the various nonlinear and time series models in describing the course of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in China. To this aim, we focus on 2 indicators: the number of total cases diagnosed with the disease, and the death toll.

Methods:

The data used for this study are based on the reports of China between January 22 and June 18, 2020. We used nonlinear growth curves and some time series models for prediction of the number of total cases and total deaths. The determination coefficient (R 2 ), mean square error (MSE), and Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) were used to select the best model.

Results:

Our results show that while the Sloboda and ARIMA (0,2,1) models are the most convenient models that elucidate the cumulative number of cases; the Lundqvist-Korf model and Holt linear trend exponential smoothing model are the most suitable models for analyzing the cumulative number of deaths. Our time series models forecast that on 19 July, the number of total cases and total deaths will be 85,589 and 4639, respectively.

Conclusion:

The results of this study will be of great importance when it comes to modeling outbreak indicators for other countries. This information will enable governments to implement suitable measures for subsequent similar situations.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.26.20080465: (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: 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: 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.

    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.

  2. Version published to 10.1017/dmp.2020.323
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.04.26.20080465 on medRxiv