Epidemic size of novel coronavirus-infected pneumonia in the Epicenter Wuhan: using data of five-countries’ evacuation action
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Background
Since late December 2019, novel coronavirus–infected pneumonia (NCP) emerged in Wuhan, Hubei province, China. Meanwhile, NCP rapidly spread from China to other countries, and several countries’ government rush to evacuate their citizens from Wuhan. We analyzed the infection rate of the evacuees and extrapolated the results in Wuhan’s NCP incidence estimation.
Methods
We collected the total number and confirmed cases of 2019-nCov infection in the evacuation of Korea, Japan, Germany, Singapore, and France and estimated the infection rate of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCov) among people who were evacuated from Wuhan with a meta-analysis. NCP incidence of Wuhan was indirectly estimated based on data of evacuation.
Results
From Jan 29 to Feb 2, 2020, 1916 people have been evacuated from Wuhan, among them 17 have been confirmed 2019-nCov infected. The infection rate is estimated to be 1.1% (95% CI 0.4%-3.1%) using one group meta-analysis method with random effect model. We then estimated that almost 110,000 (95% CI: 40,000-310,000) people were infected with 2019-nCov in Wuhan around Feb 2, 2020, assuming the infection risk of evacuees is close to Chinese citizens in Wuhan.
Conclusions
At the beginning of the outbreak, incidence of NCP may be vastly underestimated. Our result emphasizes that 2019-nCov has proposed a huge public health threats in Wuhan. We need to respond more rapidly, take large-scale public health interventions and draconian measures to limiting population mobility and control the epidemic.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.02.12.20022285: (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…
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.02.12.20022285: (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.
-
