ArticleInfectious Disease Modelling2024
Counterfactual analysis of the 2023 Omicron XBB wave in China.
Article in Infectious Disease Modelling, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Dynamics of an SVEIR transmission model with protection awareness and two strains.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2025Article
- Factors influencing the time to COVID-19 antigen tests negative conversion among students at a Chinese university: a retrospective analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Epidemiological feature analysis of SVEIR model with control strategy and variant evolution.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2024Article
- Assessing the impact of interventions on the major Omicron BA.2 outbreak in spring 2022 in Shanghai.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: China has experienced a COVID-19 wave caused by Omicron XBB variant starting in April 2023. Our aim is to conduct a retrospective analysis exploring the dynamics of the outbreak under counterfactual scenarios that combine the use of vaccines, antiviral drugs, and nonpharmaceutical interventions. Methods: We developed a mathematical model of XBB transmission in China, which has been calibrated using SARS-CoV-2 positive rates per week. Intrinsic age-specific infection-hospitalization risk, infection-ICU risk, and infection-fatality risk were used to estimate disease burdens, characterized as number of hospital admissions, ICU admissions, and deaths. Results: We estimated that in absence of behavioral change, the XBB outbreak in spring 2023 would have resulted in 0.86 billion infections (∼61% of the total population). Our counterfactual analysis shows that the synergetic effect of vaccination (70% vaccination coverage), antiviral treatment (20% receiving antiviral treatment), and moderate nonpharmaceutical interventions (20% isolation and L1 PHSMs) could reduce the number of deaths to levels close to seasonal influenza (1.17 vs. 0.65 per 10,000 individuals and 5.85 vs. 3.85 per 10,000 individuals aged 60+, respectively). The maximum peak prevalence of hospital and ICU admissions are estimated to be lower than the corresponding capacities (8.6 vs. 10.4 per 10,000 individuals and 1.2 vs. 2.1 per 10,000 individuals, respectively). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the capacity of the Chinese healthcare system was adequate to face the Omicron XBB wave in spring 2023 but, at the same time, supports the importance of administering highly effective vaccine with long-lasting immune response, and the use of antiviral treatments.
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.