Geographical Variation in COVID-19 Cases, Prevalence, Recovery and Fatality Rate by Phase of National Lockdown in India, March 14-May 29, 2020

  1. Ankita Srivastava
  2. Vandana Tamrakar
  3. Moradhvaj
  4. Saddaf Naaz Akhtar
  5. Krishna Kumar
  6. Tek Chand Saini
  7. C Nagendra
  8. Nandita Saikia

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background

Since the COVID-19 pandemic hit Indian states at varying speed, it is crucial to investigate the geographical pattern in COVID-19. We analyzed the geographical pattern of COVID-19 prevalence and mortality by the phase of national lockdown in India.

Method

Using publicly available compiled data on COVID-19, we estimated the trends in new cases, period-prevalence rate (PPR), case recovery rate (CRR), and case fatality ratio (CFR) at national, state and district level.

Findings

The age and sex are missing for more than 60 percent of the COVID-19 patients. There is an exponential increase in COVID-19 cases both at national and sub-national levels. The COVID-19 infected has jumped about 235 times (from 567 cases in the pre-lockdown period to 1,33,669 in the fourth lockdown); the average daily new cases have increased from 57 in the first lockdown to 6,482 in the fourth lockdown; the average daily recovered persons from 4 to 3,819; the average daily death from 1 to 163. From first to the third lockdown, PPR (0.04 to 5.94), CRR (7.05 to 30.35) and CFR (1.76 to 1.89) have consistently escalated. At state-level, the maximum number of COVID-19 cases is found in the states of Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Delhi, and Gujarat contributing 66.75 percent of total cases. Whereas no cases found in some states, Kerela is the only state flattening the COVID-19 curve. The PPR is found to be highest in Delhi, followed by Maharastra. The highest recovery rate is observed in Kerala, till second lockdown; and in Andhra Pradesh in third lockdown. The highest case fatality ratio in the fourth lockdown is observed in Gujarat and Telangana. A few districts viz. like Mumbai (96.7); Chennai (63.66) and Ahmedabad (62.04) have the highest infection rate per 100 thousand population. Spatial analysis shows that clusters in Konkan coast especially in Maharashtra (Palghar, Mumbai, Thane and Pune); southern part from Tamil Nadu (Chennai, Chengalpattu and Thiruvallur), and the northern part of Jammu & Kashmir (Anantnag, Kulgam) are hot-spots for COVID-19 infection while central, northern and north-eastern regions of India are the cold-spots.

Conclusion

India has been experiencing a rapid increase of COVID-19 cases since the second lockdown phase. There is huge geographical variation in COVID-19 pandemic with a concentration in some major cities and states while disaggregated data at local levels allows understanding geographical disparity of the pandemic, the lack of age-sex information of the COVID-19 patients forbids to investigate the individual pattern of COVID-19 burden.

Major highlights of the study

  • The new cases of COVID-19 have increased exponentially since the second lockdown phase in India. There is consistent improvement in the recovery rate (CRR is 7.1 percent in pre-lockdown to 44.0 percent in fourth lockdown period) with a low level of CFR (1.87 percent as of May 29 st 2020).

  • At the state level, the most vulnerable states for the COVID-19 crisis are the state of Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Delhi, and Gujarat contributing 66.75 percent of total cases.

  • The PPR is found to be highest in Delhi, followed by Maharastra. While the highest recovery rate is observed in Kerala, the highest case fatality ratio in the fourth lockdown is observed in Gujarat and Telangana. The top 10 hotspot districts in India account for 58.3 percent of the new cases. Among them, Mumbai has the highest infection rate of 96.77 per 100 thousand, followed by Chennai with 63.66 per 100 thousand, and Ahmedabad with 62.04 per 100 thousand.

  • The information on age and sex are missing for more than 60 percent of the patients.

    • Article activity feed

    1. ScreenIT

      SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.04.20122028: (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 10.1101/2020.06.04.20122028v1 on medRxiv