Empirical non-linear modeling & forecast of global daily deaths of COVID-19 pandemic & evidence that a “third wave” is beginning to decay

  1. Jorge Sánchez-Sesma

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objectives

The present COVID-19 pandemic (C19P) is challenging our socities all over the world. In this work, based on massive health information daily updated, the C19P daily death numbers at a global level, are modelled, analyzed and forecasted.

Methods

Two empirical models are proposed to explain daily death (DD) records: a) self-similar (SS) recurrences of the global responses, and b) geometric averaging of two independent SS models for global DD records.

Findings

The detected self-similar recurrences in the global response suggest three global “self-similar waves” that support multi-month forecasts of the DD numbers. However, there are upper and lower-limit SS forecast DD scenarios that were jointly integrated with a geometrical average (GA) model, that support the existence of a moderated “third wave”, with a decaying stage for the next months (July-September 2020). It appears that the “third world” (South America [SAM]+Asia [ASI] +Africa [AFR]), is the actual “big player”, (following China, and Europe [EUR]+North America [NAM]) with its biggest contribution to a global “third wave” (W3) of C19P.

Conclusion

The empirical global modeling of the C19P has suggested us a possible moderated W3 scenario, with contributions mainly coming from the third world people. This moderated W3 scenario, after to be calibrated with the last weeks, has provided to stakeholders of significant data and criteria to define, sustain and support plans for the next months, based on data and self-similarities. These scenarios provide a well-based perspective on non-linear dynamics of C19P, that will complement the standard health and economic models.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.07.20147900: (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 10.1101/2020.07.07.20147900v1 on medRxiv