The risk for a new COVID-19 wave and how it depends on R 0 , the current immunity level and current restrictions

  1. Tom Britton
  2. Pieter Trapman
  3. Frank Ball

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

The COVID-19 pandemic has hit different regions differently. The current disease-induced immunity level î in a region approximately equals the cumulative fraction infected, which primarily depends on two factors: (i) the initial potential for COVID-19 in the region ( R 0 ), and (ii) the preventive measures put in place. Using a mathematical model including heterogeneities owing to age, social activity and susceptibility, and allowing for time-varying preventive measures, the risk for a new epidemic wave and its doubling time are investigated. Focus lies on quantifying the minimal overall effect of preventive measures p Min needed to prevent a future outbreak. It is shown that î plays a more influential roll than when immunity is obtained from vaccination. Secondly, by comparing regions with different R 0 and î it is shown that regions with lower R 0 and low î may need higher preventive measures ( p Min ) compared with regions having higher R 0 but also higher î , even when such immunity levels are far from herd immunity. Our results are illustrated on different regions but these comparisons contain lots of uncertainty due to simplistic model assumptions and insufficient data fitting, and should accordingly be interpreted with caution.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1098/rsos.210386
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.09.20209981: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Materials and Methods:
    Methods
    suggested: None

    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.
    • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.10.09.20209981 on medRxiv