Spotlight on the dark figure: Exhibiting dynamics in the case detection ratio of COVID-19 infections in Germany

  1. Marc Schneble
  2. Giacomo De Nicola
  3. Göran Kauermann
  4. Ursula Berger

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The case detection ratio of COVID-19 infections varies over time due to changing testing capacities, modified testing strategies and also, apparently, due to the dynamics in the number of infected itself. In this paper we investigate these dynamics by jointly looking at the reported number of detected COVID-19 infections with non-fatal and fatal outcomes in different age groups in Germany. We propose a statistical approach that allows us to spotlight the case detection ratio and quantify its changes over time. With this we can adjust the case counts reported at different time points so that they become comparable. Moreover we can explore the temporal development of the real number of infections, shedding light on the dark number. The results show that the case detection ratio has increased and, depending on the age group, is four to six times higher at the beginning of the second wave compared to what it was at the peak of the first wave. The true number of infection in Germany in October was considerably lower as during the peak of the first wave, where only a small fraction of COVID-19 infections were detected. Our modelling approach also allows quantifying the effects of different testing strategies on the case detection ratio. The analysis of the dynamics in the case detection rate and in the true infection figures enables a clearer picture of the course of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1101/2020.12.23.20248763v2 on medRxiv
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.12.23.20248763: (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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.12.23.20248763v1 on medRxiv