Recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic by mass vaccination: emergent lessons from the United States and India

  1. Edwin Michael
  2. Ken Newcomb
  3. Anuj Mubayi
  4. Imran Mahmood

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The advent of vaccinations has heightened global optimism that the end of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic could be in sight. However, concerns, including the impact of variations in the rates of vaccination between countries, raise questions about the use of mass vaccination for accomplishing a quick recovery from the contagion. Here, we used a SEIR-based model calibrated to data on the pandemic and vaccinations reported for the United States (US) and India to gain strategic insights into using mass vaccinations for ending COVID-19. We estimate that while up to 65% of the US population is already immune to the virus due to the recent rapid mass vaccinations carried out, only 13% of the Indian population may be immune currently owing to a slow rate of vaccination and the effect of a stricter lockdown imposed to curb the first wave of the pandemic. We project that due to the higher immune to susceptible ratio already achieved in the US, the pandemic will only decline if the present rates of vaccinations and social mitigations are continued and remain effective. By contrast, the recent loosening of social measures coupled with a slow rate of vaccination is the chief reason for the virus resurgence in India, with only immediate lockdowns coupled with ramping up of vaccinations providing the means to control the present wave. These results highlight that using mass vaccination to achieve a speedy recovery from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic will depend crucially on the ability to carry out national vaccinations as rapidly as possible.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.26.21257847: (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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    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 10.1101/2021.05.26.21257847v1 on medRxiv