Estimate of Covid prevalence using imperfect data

  1. Witold R. Rudnicki
  2. Radosław Piliszek

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The real number of people who were truly infected with SARS-CoV-2, is certainly significantly larger than the official record. Few countries have tracking and testing procedures that are sufficiently robust to discover nearly all infections. In most countries they are inadequate, hence the true extent of the pandemic is unknown. The current study proposes the estimate of the COVID-19 extent for countries with sufficiently high number of deaths and cases. The estimate is based on a simple model of mortality. This model was developed for a reference country with a large number of cases and high intensity of COVID-19 testing. The model is then applied to compute apparent mortality in the target and reference countries. The number of cases in the target country is then estimated assuming constant underlying true mortality. The estimate of cases in most countries is significantly higher than the official record. As of April 12, 2020, the global estimate is 5.2 million compared to 1.8 million in the official record. The models developed in this study are available at covid-model.net. The model ignores several factors that are known to influence mortality, such as the demographics and health condition of population, state of epidemic and sociological differences between countries. While the model is rough, it nevertheless provides a unified approach to producing a systematic global estimate of the extent of the COVID-19 epidemic and can be useful for its monitoring.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.14.20064840: (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 10.1101/2020.04.14.20064840v1 on medRxiv