Which early indicator allows for a better understanding of the evolution of the COVID-19 epidemic in France?
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
We provide an explanation for the apparent discrepancy between the dynamic of the positive COVID-19 test rates and of the numbers of COVID-19-related hospital and intensive care admissions and deaths in France. We highlight the existence of a latency period of around 5 weeks between the infections of young individual (generally asymptomatic) to older individuals that may have a severe form of the disease and may be hospitalized. If the overall positive detection rate provided relevant information until the end of August, since the beginning of September the overall positive detection rate has reached a plateau and no longer provides relevant information on the current state of the epidemic. We show that the positive detection rate in the 70+ age group is a relevant and early indicator of the epidemic. Furthermore, we have shown an identical doubling time of around 16 days for the following indicators: the positive tests rate for the 70+ age group, the number of new admissions to hospital, intensive care unit admissions and deaths.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.09.29.20203760: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not 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 …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.09.29.20203760: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not 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.
-
-