A Very Flat Peak: Why Standard SEIR Models Miss the Plateau of COVID-19 Infections and How it Can be Corrected

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Abstract

Innumerable variants of the susceptible-exposed-infected-recovered (SEIR) model predicted the course of COVID-19 infections for different countries, along with the ‘peaks’ and the subsequent decline of infections. One thing these models could not have predicted prospectively in January or did not adapt to in the following months is that the peak is rather a ‘plateau’ for many countries. For example, USA and UK have been persisting at the same high peak of approximately 30,000 and 5,000 daily new infections respectively, for more than a month. Other countries had shorter plateaus of about 3 weeks (6,400 cases in Spain). We establish that this plateau is not an artifact, and the “persistence number” describing the decline needs an equally important attention as the “reproduction number”. The solution lies in including the specific epidemiological role of asymptomatics and pre-symptomatics in COVID-19 transmission, different from SARS and influenza. We identify the minimal changes that can be made to any SEIR model to capture this plateau while studying seasonal effects, mitigation strategies, or the second wave of infections etc.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.07.20055772: (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.