Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32342242›Full record

ArticleBiomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology2020

Outbreak dynamics of COVID-19 in China and the United States.

Mathias Peirlinck, Kevin Linka, Francisco Sahli Costabal, Ellen Kuhl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
71citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

71 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Mathias PeirlinckDepartments of Mechanical Engineering and Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Kevin LinkaDepartments of Mechanical Engineering and Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Francisco Sahli CostabalDepartment of Mechanical and Metallurgical Engineering, School of Engineering and Institute for Biological and Medical Engineering, Schools of Engineering, Medicine and Biological Sciences, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Ellen KuhlDepartments of Mechanical Engineering and Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. ekuhl@stanford.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6283-935X

Funding

Multi-Scale Laws of Myocardial Growth and RemodelingU01HL119578 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GUCCIONE, JULIUS MATTEO, KASSAB, GHASSAN S · 2014 to 2018
$3.8M
NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL119578
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the coronavirus disease 2019, COVID-19, a global pandemic. In an unprecedented collective effort, massive amounts of data are now being collected worldwide to estimate the immediate and long-term impact of this pandemic on the health system and the global economy. However, the precise timeline of the disease, its transmissibility, and the effect of mitigation strategies remain incompletely understood. Here we integrate a global network model with a local epidemic SEIR model to quantify the outbreak dynamics of COVID-19 in China and the United States. For the outbreak in China, in [Formula: see text] provinces, we found a latent period of 2.56 ± 0.72 days, a contact period of 1.47 ± 0.32 days, and an infectious period of 17.82 ± 2.95 days. We postulate that the latent and infectious periods are disease-specific, whereas the contact period is behavior-specific and can vary between different provinces, states, or countries. For the early stages of the outbreak in the United States, in [Formula: see text] states, we adopted the disease-specific values from China and found a contact period of 3.38 ± 0.69 days. Our network model predicts that-without the massive political mitigation strategies that are in place today-the United States would have faced a basic reproduction number of 5.30 ± 0.95 and a nationwide peak of the outbreak on May 10, 2020 with 3 million infections. Our results demonstrate how mathematical modeling can help estimate outbreak dynamics and provide decision guidelines for successful outbreak control. We anticipate that our model will become a valuable tool to estimate the potential of vaccination and quantify the effect of relaxing political measures including total lockdown, shelter in place, and travel restrictions for low-risk subgroups of the population or for the population as a whole.

Indexed as

Basic Reproduction NumberBetacoronavirusChinaCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesGeographyHumansModels, TheoreticalPandemicsPneumonia, ViralSARS-CoV-2United StatesViral VaccinesCOVID-19 VaccinesViral VaccinesCoronavirusCOVID-19Epidemiology modelingNetwork modelSEIR model

Identifiers

PMID32342242
PMCPMC7185268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.