The Effect of GDP and Distance on Timing of COVID-19 Spread in Chinese Provinces in 2020

  1. Alice Kuan
  2. Mingxin Chen
  3. David Bishai

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The geographical spread of COVID-19 across China’s provinces provides the opportunity for retrospective analysis on contributors to the timing of the spread. Highly contagious diseases need to be seeded into populations and we hypothesized that greater distance from the epicenter in Wuhan, as well as higher province-level GDP per capita, would delay the time until a province detected COVID-19 cases. To test this hypothesis, we used province-level socioeconomic data such as GDP per capita and percentage of the population aged over 65, distance from the Wuhan epicenter, and health systems capacity in a Cox proportional hazards analysis of the determinants of each province’s time until epidemic start. The start was defined by the number of days it took for each province to reach thresholds of 3, 5, 10, or 100 cases. We controlled for the number of hospital beds and physicians as these could influence the speed of case detection. Surprisingly, none of the explanatory variables had a statistically significant effect on the time it took for each province to get its first cases; the timing of COVID-19 spread appears to have been random with respect to distance, GDP, demography, and the strength of the health system. Looking to other factors, such as travel, policy, and lockdown measures, could provide additional insights on realizing most critical factors in the timing of spread.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.19.20157354: (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: Thank you for sharing your code and data.

    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 10.1101/2020.07.19.20157354v2 on medRxiv
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.07.19.20157354v1 on medRxiv