Eruption of COVID-19 like illness in a remote village in Papua (Indonesia)

  1. Elco van Burg
  2. Wijnanda van Burg-Verhage

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background The COVID-19 pandemic is creating significant challenges for healthcare infrastructure for countries of all development and resource levels. Low-and-middle resource countries face even larger challenges, as their resources are stretched and often insufficient under normal circumstances. A village in the Papuan highlands of Indonesia; small, isolated, accessed only by small plane or trekking has experienced an outbreak typical of COVID-19. Methodology/Principal Findings This description was compiled from patient care records by lay healthcare workers in M20 (a pseudonym) during and after an outbreak and from medical doctors responding to online requests for help. We assume that, for reasons given, the outbreak that has been described was COVID-19. The dense social structure of the village resulted in a rapid infection of 90-95% of the population. Physical distancing and isolation measures were used, but probably implemented suboptimal and too late, and their effect on the illness course was unclear. The relatively young population, with a majority of women, probably influenced the impact of the epidemic, resulting in only two deaths so far. Conclusions/Significance This outbreak pattern of suspected SARS-CoV-2 in a village in the highlands of Papua (Indonesia) presents a unique report of the infection of an entire village population over five weeks. The age distribution, common in Papuan highland villages may have reduced case fatality rate (CFR) in this context and that might be the case in similar remote areas since survival to old age is already very limited and CFR among younger people is lower.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.19.20106740: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: The research has been approved by the Research Ethical Review Board of the School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
    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 10.1101/2020.05.19.20106740v1 on medRxiv