Effect of control measures on the pattern of COVID-19 Epidemics in Japan

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Abstract

COVID-19 has spread worldwide since its emergence in 2019. In contrast to many other countries with epidemics, Japan differed in that it avoided lockdowns and instead asked people for self-control. A travel campaign was conducted with a sizable budget, but the number of PCR tests was severely limited. These choices may have influenced the course of the epidemic.

Methods

The increase or decrease in the classes of SARS-CoV-2 variants was estimated by analyzing the published sequences with an objective multivariate analysis. This approach observes the samples in multiple directions, digesting complex differences into simpler forms. The results were compared over time with the number of confirmed cases, PCR tests, and overseas visitors. The kinetics of infection were analyzed using the logarithmic growth rate.

Results

The declared states of emergency failed to alter the movement of the growth rate. Three epidemic peaks were caused by domestically mutated variants. In other countries, there are few cases in which multiple variants have peaked. However, due to the relaxation of immigration restrictions, several infective variants have been imported from abroad and are currently competing for expansion, creating the fourth peak. By April 2021, these foreign variants exceeded 80%. The chaotic situation in Japan will continue for some time, in part because no effort has been made to identify asymptomatic carriers, and details of the vaccination program are undecided.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.24.21253923: (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

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Sequences were aligned using DECIPHER (Wright 2015), converted to a Boolean vector, and subjected to PCA (Konishi et al. 2019).
    DECIPHER
    suggested: (DECIPHER, RRID:SCR_006552)

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your 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.

    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.