Role of multiresolution vulnerability indices in COVID-19 spread in India: a Bayesian model-based analysis.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 has differentially affected countries, with health infrastructure and other related vulnerability indicators playing a role in determining the extent of its spread. Vulnerability of a geographical region to COVID-19 has been a topic of interest, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries like India to assess its multifactorial impact on incidence, prevalence or mortality. This study aims to construct a statistical analysis pipeline to compute such vulnerability indices and investigate their association with metrics of the pandemic growth. DESIGN: Using publicly reported observational socioeconomic, demographic, health-based and epidemiological data from Indian national surveys, we compute contextual COVID-19 Vulnerability Indices (cVIs) across multiple thematic resolutions for different geographical and spatial administrative regions. These cVIs are then used in Bayesian regression models to assess their impact on indicators of the spread of COVID-19. SETTING: This study uses district-level indicators and case counts data for the state of Odisha, India. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: We use instantaneous R (temporal average of estimated time-varying reproduction number for COVID-19) as the primary outcome variable in our models. RESULTS: Our observational study, focussing on 30 districts of Odisha, identified housing and hygiene conditions, COVID-19 preparedness and epidemiological factors as important indicators associated with COVID-19 vulnerability. CONCLUSION: Having succeeded in containing COVID-19 to a reasonable level during the first wave, the second wave of COVID-19 made greater inroads into the hinterlands and peripheral districts of Odisha, burdening the already deficient public health system in these areas, as identified by the cVIs. Improved understanding of the factors driving COVID-19 vulnerability will help policy makers prioritise resources and regions, leading to more effective mitigation strategies for the present and future.

Lessons from SARS-CoV-2 in India: A data-driven framework for pandemic resilience.

India experienced a massive surge in SARS-CoV-2 infections and deaths during April to June 2021 despite having controlled the epidemic relatively well during 2020. Using counterfactual predictions from epidemiological disease transmission models, we produce evidence in support of how strengthening public health interventions early would have helped control transmission in the country and significantly reduced mortality during the second wave, even without harsh lockdowns. We argue that enhanced surveillance at district, state, and national levels and constant assessment of risk associated with increased transmission are critical for future pandemic responsiveness. Building on our retrospective analysis, we provide a tiered data-driven framework for timely escalation of future interventions as a tool for policy-makers.

A comparison of five epidemiological models for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in India.

BACKGROUND: Many popular disease transmission models have helped nations respond to the COVID-19 pandemic by informing decisions about pandemic planning, resource allocation, implementation of social distancing measures, lockdowns, and other non-pharmaceutical interventions. We study how five epidemiological models forecast and assess the course of the pandemic in India: a baseline curve-fitting model, an extended SIR (eSIR) model, two extended SEIR (SAPHIRE and SEIR-fansy) models, and a semi-mechanistic Bayesian hierarchical model (ICM). METHODS: Using COVID-19 case-recovery-death count data reported in India from March 15 to October 15 to train the models, we generate predictions from each of the five models from October 16 to December 31. To compare prediction accuracy with respect to reported cumulative and active case counts and reported cumulative death counts, we compute the symmetric mean absolute prediction error (SMAPE) for each of the five models. For reported cumulative cases and deaths, we compute Pearson's and Lin's correlation coefficients to investigate how well the projected and observed reported counts agree. We also present underreporting factors when available, and comment on uncertainty of projections from each model. RESULTS: For active case counts, SMAPE values are 35.14% (SEIR-fansy) and 37.96% (eSIR). For cumulative case counts, SMAPE values are 6.89% (baseline), 6.59% (eSIR), 2.25% (SAPHIRE) and 2.29% (SEIR-fansy). For cumulative death counts, the SMAPE values are 4.74% (SEIR-fansy), 8.94% (eSIR) and 0.77% (ICM). Three models (SAPHIRE, SEIR-fansy and ICM) return total (sum of reported and unreported) cumulative case counts as well. We compute underreporting factors as of October 31 and note that for cumulative cases, the SEIR-fansy model yields an underreporting factor of 7.25 and ICM model yields 4.54 for the same quantity. For total (sum of reported and unreported) cumulative deaths the SEIR-fansy model reports an underreporting factor of 2.97. On October 31, we observe 8.18 million cumulative reported cases, while the projections (in millions) from the baseline model are 8.71 (95% credible interval: 8.63-8.80), while eSIR yields 8.35 (7.19-9.60), SAPHIRE returns 8.17 (7.90-8.52) and SEIR-fansy projects 8.51 (8.18-8.85) million cases. Cumulative case projections from the eSIR model have the highest uncertainty in terms of width of 95% credible intervals, followed by those from SAPHIRE, the baseline model and finally SEIR-fansy. CONCLUSIONS: In this comparative paper, we describe five different models used to study the transmission dynamics of the SARS-Cov-2 virus in India. While simulation studies are the only gold standard way to compare the accuracy of the models, here we were uniquely poised to compare the projected case-counts against observed data on a test period. The largest variability across models is observed in predicting the "total" number of infections including reported and unreported cases (on which we have no validation data). The degree of under-reporting has been a major concern in India and is characterized in this report. Overall, the SEIR-fansy model appeared to be a good choice with publicly available R-package and desired flexibility plus accuracy.

Incorporating false negative tests in epidemiological models for SARS-CoV-2 transmission and reconciling with seroprevalence estimates.

Susceptible-Exposed-Infected-Removed (SEIR)-type epidemiologic models, modeling unascertained infections latently, can predict unreported cases and deaths assuming perfect testing. We apply a method we developed to account for the high false negative rates of diagnostic RT-PCR tests for detecting an active SARS-CoV-2 infection in a classic SEIR model. The number of unascertained cases and false negatives being unobservable in a real study, population-based serosurveys can help validate model projections. Applying our method to training data from Delhi, India, during March 15-June 30, 2020, we estimate the underreporting factor for cases at 34-53 (deaths: 8-13) on July 10, 2020, largely consistent with the findings of the first round of serosurveys for Delhi (done during June 27-July 10, 2020) with an estimated 22.86% IgG antibody prevalence, yielding estimated underreporting factors of 30-42 for cases. Together, these imply approximately 96-98% cases in Delhi remained unreported (July 10, 2020). Updated calculations using training data during March 15-December 31, 2020 yield estimated underreporting factor for cases at 13-22 (deaths: 3-7) on January 23, 2021, which are again consistent with the latest (fifth) round of serosurveys for Delhi (done during January 15-23, 2021) with an estimated 56.13% IgG antibody prevalence, yielding an estimated range for the underreporting factor for cases at 17-21. Together, these updated estimates imply approximately 92-96% cases in Delhi remained unreported (January 23, 2021). Such model-based estimates, updated with latest data, provide a viable alternative to repeated resource-intensive serosurveys for tracking unreported cases and deaths and gauging the true extent of the pandemic.

Comprehensive public health evaluation of lockdown as a non-pharmaceutical intervention on COVID-19 spread in India: national trends masking state-level variations.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of four-phase national lockdown from March 25 to May 31 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in India and unmask the state-wise variations in terms of multiple public health metrics. DESIGN: Cohort study (daily time series of case counts). SETTING: Observational and population based. PARTICIPANTS: Confirmed COVID-19 cases nationally and across 20 states that accounted for >99% of the current cumulative case counts in India until 31 May 2020. EXPOSURE: Lockdown (non-medical intervention). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We illustrate the masking of state-level trends and highlight the variations across states by presenting evaluative evidence on some aspects of the COVID-19 outbreak: case fatality rates, doubling times of cases, effective reproduction numbers and the scale of testing. RESULTS: The estimated effective reproduction number R for India was 3.36 (95% CI 3.03 to 3.71) on 24 March, whereas the average of estimates from 25 May to 31 May stands at 1.27 (95% CI 1.26 to 1.28). Similarly, the estimated doubling time across India was at 3.56 days on 24 March, and the past 7-day average for the same on 31 May is 14.37 days. The average daily number of tests increased from 1717 (19-25 March) to 113 372 (25-31 May) while the test positivity rate increased from 2.1% to 4.2%, respectively. However, various states exhibit substantial departures from these national patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Patterns of change over lockdown periods indicate the lockdown has been partly effective in slowing the spread of the virus nationally. However, there exist large state-level variations and identifying these variations can help in both understanding the dynamics of the pandemic and formulating effective public health interventions. Our framework offers a holistic assessment of the pandemic across Indian states and union territories along with a set of interactive visualisation tools that are daily updated at covind19.org.

A Comprehensive Public Health Evaluation of Lockdown as a Non-pharmaceutical Intervention on COVID-19 Spread in India: National Trends Masking State Level Variations.

Introduction India has been under four phases of a national lockdown from March 25 to May 31 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Unmasking the state-wise variation in the effect of the nationwide lockdown on the progression of the pandemic could inform dynamic policy interventions towards containment and mitigation. Methods Using data on confirmed COVID-19 cases across 20 states that accounted for more than 99% of the cumulative case counts in India till May 31, 2020, we illustrate the masking of state-level trends and highlight the variations across states by presenting evaluative evidence on some aspects of the COVID-19 outbreak: case-fatality rates, doubling times of cases, effective reproduction numbers, and the scale of testing. Results The estimated effective reproduction number R for India was 3.36 (95% confidence interval (CI): [3.03, 3.71]) on March 24, whereas the average of estimates from May 25 - May 31 stands at 1.27 (95% CI: [1.26, 1.28]). Similarly, the estimated doubling time across India was at 3.56 days on March 24, and the past 7-day average for the same on May 31 is 14.37 days. The average daily number of tests have increased from 1,717 (March 19-25) to 131,772 (May 25-31) with an estimated testing shortfall of 4.58 million tests nationally by May 31. However, various states exhibit substantial departures from these national patterns. Conclusions Patterns of change over lockdown periods indicate the lockdown has been effective in slowing the spread of the virus nationally. The COVID-19 outbreak in India displays large state-level variations and identifying these variations can help in both understanding the dynamics of the pandemic and formulating effective public health interventions. Our framework offers a holistic assessment of the pandemic across Indian states and union territories along with a set of interactive visualization tools that are daily updated at covind19.org.

Predictions, role of interventions and effects of a historic national lockdown in India's response to the COVID-19 pandemic: data science call to arms.

With only 536 cases and 11 fatalities, India took the historic decision of a 21-day national lockdown on March 25. The lockdown was first extended to May 3 soon after the analysis of this paper was completed, and then to May 18 while this paper was being revised. In this paper, we use a Bayesian extension of the Susceptible-Infected-Removed (eSIR) model designed for intervention forecasting to study the short- and long-term impact of an initial 21-day lockdown on the total number of COVID-19 infections in India compared to other less severe non-pharmaceutical interventions. We compare effects of hypothetical durations of lockdown on reducing the number of active and new infections. We find that the lockdown, if implemented correctly, can reduce the total number of cases in the short term, and buy India invaluable time to prepare its healthcare and disease-monitoring system. Our analysis shows we need to have some measures of suppression in place after the lockdown for increased benefit (as measured by reduction in the number of cases). A longer lockdown between 42-56 days is preferable to substantially "flatten the curve" when compared to 21-28 days of lockdown. Our models focus solely on projecting the number of COVID-19 infections and, thus, inform policymakers about one aspect of this multi-faceted decision-making problem. We conclude with a discussion on the pivotal role of increased testing, reliable and transparent data, proper uncertainty quantification, accurate interpretation of forecasting models, reproducible data science methods and tools that can enable data-driven policymaking during a pandemic. Our software products are available at covind19.org.