̃Evaluating reduction in CoViD-19 cases by isolation and protective measures in São Paulo State, Brazil, and scenarios of release

  1. Hyun Mo Yang
  2. Luis Pedro Lombardi Junior
  3. Fabio Fernandes Morato Castro
  4. Ariana Campos Yang

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

São Paulo State registered the first case of CoViD-19 on 26 February, the first death due to CoViD-19 on 16 March, and implemented the isolation of the population in non-essential activities on 24 March, which is programmed to end on 1 June. A mathematical model considering young (below 60 years old) and elder (above 60 years) subpopulations was formulated based on the natural history of CoViD-19 to study the transmission of the new coronavirus in São Paulo State, Brazil. This deterministic model used the data collected in São Paulo State to estimate the model parameters and to evaluate the effects of herd protection, that is, isolation and personal and collective protective measures. Based on the estimated parameters, we evaluated the scenarios of three releases divided in equal proportions elapsed by 14 days between releases, but beginning in three different times (the first release occurring on 1 and 23 June, and 6 July). We concluded that these three strategies of release are equivalent (little difference) in reducing the number of severe CoViD-19 if social behaviour does not change. However, if protective measures as using face mask and hygiene (washing hands, for instance) and social distancing could be massively disseminated in the population to decrease the transmission of CoViD-19 by 80%, we concluded that the health care system may not collapse with release.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.19.20099309: (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.

    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 10.1101/2020.05.19.20099309v2 on medRxiv
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.19.20099309v1 on medRxiv