ArticleEpidemiology and infection2021
A simple model for the total number of SARS-CoV-2 infections on a national level.
Article in Epidemiology and infection, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- What does COVID-19 testing results really say? The real statistics concealed behind the accessible data.Journal of medical virology · 2021Article
- Piecewise quadratic growth during the 2019 novel coronavirus epidemic.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2020Article
- A simple mathematical tool to forecast COVID-19 cumulative case numbers.Clinical epidemiology and global healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to identify an appropriate simple mathematical model to fit the number of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases at the national level for the early portion of the pandemic, before significant public health interventions could be enacted. The total number of cases for the COVID-19 epidemic over time in 28 countries was analysed and fit to several simple rate models. The resulting model parameters were used to extrapolate projections for more recent data. While the Gompertz growth model (mean R2 = 0.998) best fit the current data, uncertainties in the eventual case limit introduced significant model errors. However, the quadratic rate model (mean R2 = 0.992) fit the current data best for 25 (89%) countries as determined by R2 values of the remaining models. Projection to the future using the simple quadratic model accurately forecast the number of future total number of cases 50% of the time up to 10 days in advance. Extrapolation to the future with the simple exponential model significantly overpredicted the total number of future cases. These results demonstrate that accurate future predictions of the case load in a given country can be made using this very simple model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.