| Literature DB >> 35756701 |
Yifei Ma1, Shujun Xu1, Qi An1, Mengxia Qin1, Sitian Li1, Kangkang Lu1, Jiantao Li2, Lijian Lei1, Lu He1, Hongmei Yu1,3, Jun Xie4.
Abstract
It's urgently needed to assess the COVID-19 epidemic under the "dynamic zero-COVID policy" in China, which provides a scientific basis for evaluating the effectiveness of this strategy in COVID-19 control. Here, we developed a time-dependent susceptible-exposed-asymptomatic-infected-quarantined-removed (SEAIQR) model with stage-specific interventions based on recent Shanghai epidemic data, considering a large number of asymptomatic infectious, the changing parameters, and control procedures. The data collected from March 1st, 2022 to April 15th, 2022 were used to fit the model, and the data of subsequent 7 days and 14 days were used to evaluate the model performance of forecasting. We then calculated the effective regeneration number (R t) and analyzed the sensitivity of different measures scenarios. Asymptomatic infectious accounts for the vast majority of the outbreaks in Shanghai, and Pudong is the district with the most positive cases. The peak of newly confirmed cases and newly asymptomatic infectious predicted by the SEAIQR model would appear on April 13th, 2022, with 1963 and 28,502 cases, respectively, and zero community transmission may be achieved in early to mid-May. The prediction errors for newly confirmed cases were considered to be reasonable, and newly asymptomatic infectious were considered to be good between April 16th to 22nd and reasonable between April 16th to 29th. The final ranges of cumulative confirmed cases and cumulative asymptomatic infectious predicted in this round of the epidemic were 26,477 ∼ 47,749 and 402,254 ∼ 730,176, respectively. At the beginning of the outbreak, R t was 6.69. Since the implementation of comprehensive control, R t showed a gradual downward trend, dropping to below 1.0 on April 15th, 2022. With the early implementation of control measures and the improvement of quarantine rate, recovery rate, and immunity threshold, the peak number of infections will continue to decrease, whereas the earlier the control is implemented, the earlier the turning point of the epidemic will arrive. The proposed time-dependent SEAIQR dynamic model fits and forecasts the epidemic well, which can provide a reference for decision making of the "dynamic zero-COVID policy".Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; COVID-19, Coronavirus disease 2019; Dynamic model; Dynamic zero-COVID policy; Effective reproduction number; MAPE, mean absolute percentage error; MCMC, Markov Chain Monte Carlo; MH, Metropolis-Hastings; Prediction; R0, basic regeneration number; RMSPE, root mean squared percentage error; Rt, effective regeneration number; SEAIQR, susceptible-exposed-asymptomatic-infected-quarantined-removed; SEIR, susceptible-exposed-infected-removed
Year: 2022 PMID: 35756701 PMCID: PMC9212988 DOI: 10.1016/j.jobb.2022.06.002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Biosaf Biosecur ISSN: 2588-9338
Fig. 1Flowchart of the SEAIQR model for COVID-19.
Model parameters and their values.
| Compartments& | Interpretations | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| S(0) | Initial susceptible | 24,870,838 | Actual epidemic |
| Sq(0) | Initial quarantined susceptible | 0 | Actual epidemic |
| E(0) | Initial exposed | 53 | Actual epidemic |
| Eq(0) | Initial quarantined exposed | 0 | Actual epidemic |
| A(0) | Initial asymptomatic infectious | 1 | Actual epidemic |
| I(0) | Initial infected | 1 | Actual epidemic |
| H(0) | Initial hospitalized | 2 | Actual epidemic |
| R(0) | Initial removed | 0 | Actual epidemic |
| β | Infectious rate | 0.041 | MCMC |
| c0 | Number of early contacts | 20 | Actual epidemic |
| c1 | Number of minimum contacts | 2 | Actual epidemic |
| w | Index decline rate ( | 0.096 | MCMC |
| r | Index decline rate ( | 3.060 | MCMC |
| θ | Infectivity coefficient (exposed) | 0.887 | MCMC |
| k | Infectivity coefficient (asymptomatic infectious) | 0.917 | MCMC |
| q | Quarantine rate | 0.150 | Actual epidemic |
| σI | Incubation rate (exposed to infected) | 1/7 | Actual epidemic |
| σA | Incubation rate (exposed to asymptomatic infectious) | 1/10 | Actual epidemic |
| p | Proportion of asymptomatic infectious to infected | 0.912 | Actual epidemic |
| α | Mortality rate of the virus | 0.002 | Actual epidemic |
| λ | Quarantine release rate | 1/14 | Literature reports |
| γI | Recovery rate (infected) | 0.086 | MCMC |
| γA | Recovery rate (asymptomatic infectious) | 0.104 | MCMC |
| γH | Recovery rate (hospitalized) | 0.114 | MCMC |
| h | Decrease in antibody levels | 0.700 | Actual epidemic |
| v | Immunity threshold | 0.700 | Actual epidemic |
| δI | Conversion rate of quarantine | 0.775 | MCMC |
| δq | Conversion rate of quarantine | 0.812 | MCMC |
Fig. 2COVID-19 cases curve in Shanghai.
Fig. 3Infected regions in Shanghai.
Fig. 4The SEAIQR model predicted COVID-19 cases in Shanghai: (a) newly confirmed cases; (b) newly asymptomatic infectious.
Performance evaluation results of MAPE and RMSPE.
| Variable | MAPE (RMSPE) (%) | Predicting result | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 days | 14 days | 7 days | 14 days | |
| Newly confirmed cases | 33.86(37.01) | 33.54(39.51) | Reasonable | Reasonable |
| Newly asymptomatic infectious | 12.34(16.45) | 22.01(25.79) | Good | Reasonable |
Fig. 5Predicted final range of COVID-19 cases in Shanghai: (a) cumulative confirmed cases; (b) cumulative asymptomatic infectious.
Fig. 6Trend of Rt in Shanghai.
Fig. 7Effects of different measures scenarios on COVID-19 cases in Shanghai: (a) different time to implement control on newly confirmed cases; (b) different time to implement control on newly asymptomatic infectious; (c) different quarantine rates on newly confirmed cases; (d) different quarantine rates on newly asymptomatic infectious; (e) different recovery rates on newly confirmed cases; (f) different recovery rates on newly asymptomatic infectious; (g) different immunity thresholds on newly confirmed cases; (h) different immunity thresholds on newly asymptomatic infectious.
Epidemic peak time and peak number of cases under different measures scenarios.
| Parameter | Value | Epidemic peak | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Newly confirmed cases | Newly asymptomatic infectious | ||||
| Time | Number | Time | Number | ||
| 44&53d | 4-22-2022 | 8,606 | 4-22-2022 | 124,861 | |
| 34&43d* | 4-13-2022 | 1,963 | 4-13-2022 | 28,502 | |
| 24&33d | 4-3-2022 | 266 | 4-3-2022 | 3,858 | |
| 14&23d | 3-24-2022 | 33 | 3-24-2022 | 473 | |
| q | 0.10 | 4-13-2022 | 4,096 | 4-13-2022 | 59,461 |
| 0.15* | 4-13-2022 | 1,963 | 4-13-2022 | 28,502 | |
| 0.20 | 4-13-2022 | 925 | 4-13-2022 | 13,432 | |
| 0.25 | 4-13-2022 | 428 | 4-13-2022 | 6,216 | |
| γ | 0.10* | 4-13-2022 | 1,963 | 4-13-2022 | 28,502 |
| 0.15 | 4-13-2022 | 1,294 | 4-13-2022 | 18,778 | |
| 0.20 | 4-13-2022 | 864 | 4-13-2022 | 12,540 | |
| v | 0.70* | 4-13-2022 | 1,963 | 4-13-2022 | 28,502 |
| 0.75 | 4-13-2022 | 1,734 | 4-13-2022 | 25,672 | |
| 0.80 | 4-13-2022 | 1,560 | 4-13-2022 | 23,103 | |
*: Parameters observed or specified in the model as a reference.