COVID-19 Acceleration and Vaccine Status in France - Summer 2021

  1. Christelle Baunez
  2. Mickael Degoulet
  3. Stéphane Luchini
  4. Patrick A. Pintus
  5. Miriam Teschl

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objectives

This note provides an assessment of COVID-19 acceleration among groups with different vaccine status in France.

Methods

We assess viral acceleration using a novel indicator introduced in Baunez et al. (2021). The acceleration index relates the percentage change of tests that have been performed on a given day to the percentage change in the associated positive cases that same day. We compare viral acceleration among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in France over the period May 31st - August 29, 2021.

Results

Once the state of the epidemic within each groups is accounted for, it turns out that viral acceleration has since mid-July converged to similar levels among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in France, even though viral speed is larger for the latter group compared to the former.

Conclusion

Our results call for an increasing testing effort for both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, in view of the fact that viral circulation is currently accelerating at similar levels for both groups in France.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1101/2021.09.18.21263773v2 on medRxiv
  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.09.18.21263773v3 on medRxiv
  3. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.09.18.21263773: (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.

    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.

  4. Version published to 10.1101/2021.09.18.21263773v1 on medRxiv