Base Reproduction Number of COVID-19: Statistic Analysis

  1. Hongjun Zhu
  2. Jiangping Huang
  3. Xin Liu

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has grown up to be a pandemic within a short span of time. The quantification of COVID-19 transmissibility is desired for purposes of assessing the potential for a place to start an outbreak and the extent of transmission in the absence of control measures. It is well known that the transmissibility can be measured by reproduction number. For this reason, the large amount of research focuses on the estimations of reproduction number of COVID-19. However, these previous results are controversial and even misleading. To alleviate this problem, Liu et al advised to use averaging technique. Unfortunately, the fluctuant consequence principally arises from data error or model limitations rather than stochastic noise, where the averaging technique doesn’t work well. The most likely estimation in USA and Wuhan is about 8.21 and 7.9. However, no enough evidence demonstrates the transmissibility increase of infectious agent of COVID-19 throughout the world.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.09.26.20202010: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    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 10.1101/2020.09.26.20202010 on medRxiv