Estimation of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Prevalence in Santa Clara County

  1. Steve Yadlowsky
  2. Nigam Shah
  3. Jacob Steinhardt

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

To reliably estimate the demand on regional health systems and perform public health planning, it is necessary to have a good estimate of the prevalence of infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) in the population. In the absence of wide-spread testing, we provide one approach to infer prevalence based on the assumption that the fraction of true infections needing hospitalization is fixed and that all hospitalized cases of COVID-19 in Santa Clara are identified.

Our goal is to estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infections, i.e. the true number of people currently infected with the virus, divided by the total population size.

Our analysis suggests that as of March 17, 2020 , there are 6 , 500 infections (0.34% of the population) of SARS-CoV-2 in Santa Clara County. Based on adjusting the parameters of our model to be optimistic (respectively pessimistic), the number of infections would be 1,400 (resp. 26,000), corresponding to a prevalence of 0.08% (resp. 1.36%). If the shelter-in-place led to R 0 < 1, we would expect the number of infections to remain about constant for the next few weeks. However, even if this were true, we expect to continue to see an increase in hospitalized cases of COVID-19 in the short term due to the fact that infection of SARS-CoV-2 on March 17th can lead to hospitalizations up to 14 days later.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.03.24.20043067: (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

    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 10.1101/2020.03.24.20043067v1 on medRxiv