Lessons from SARS-CoV-2 in India: A data-driven framework for pandemic resilience

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

India experienced a massive surge in SARS-CoV-2 infections and deaths during April to June 2021 despite having controlled the epidemic relatively well during 2020. Using counterfactual predictions from epidemiological disease transmission models, we produce evidence in support of how strengthening public health interventions early would have helped control transmission in the country and significantly reduced mortality during the second wave, even without harsh lockdowns. We argue that enhanced surveillance at district, state, and national levels and constant assessment of risk associated with increased transmission are critical for future pandemic responsiveness. Building on our retrospective analysis, we provide a tiered data-driven framework for timely escalation of future interventions as a tool for policy-makers.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.06.23.21259405: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.


    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Study Limitations: We acknowledge there are certain overarching limitations in our work. First, under-reporting of cases and deaths attributed to COVID-19 is not aptly accounted for across these results. At the time of this report, officials have reported intermittent excess death calculations for selected cities (60–62) and for even fewer states in India, and hence, adjusting for under-reporting remains a challenge (62). All reports point to a large degree of underreporting, particularly in rural India (48). Similar considerations apply for infections. While we characterize effects of NPI on reported cases this only captures a small fraction of infections. The more recent serosurveys that are emerging indicate 55% seropositivity in age-groups 0-17 and 63% in adults in urban areas (63). Second, the lack of disaggregation of cases and deaths attributed to COVID-19 in the data available at the time of this study prohibits any investigation into differences within age-sex strata and identify vulnerable, underserved subgroups. This limits our ability to interpret some of the observations. For example, the apparent overall lower infection fatality rate in Wave 2 can be largely due to younger people getting infected. An age-specific fatality comparison is necessary but could not be performed. Third, our models do not incorporate vaccine roll-out. For further context, during the Wave 2 analysis period, about 3% of India was fully vaccinated and 10% received at least one dose (based ...

    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.