This article is a Preprint
Preprints are preliminary research reports that have not been certified by peer review. They should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Preprints posted online allow authors to receive rapid feedback and the entire scientific community can appraise the work for themselves and respond appropriately. Those comments are posted alongside the preprints for anyone to read them and serve as a post publication assessment.
Impact of changing case definitions for COVID-19 on the epidemic curve and transmission parameters in mainland China (preprint)
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint
in English
| medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.03.23.20041319
ABSTRACT
Background:
When a new infectious disease emerges, appropriate case definitions are important for clinical diagnosis and also for public health surveillance. Tracking case numbers over time allows us to determine speed of spread and the effectiveness of interventions. Changing case definitions during an epidemic can affect these inferences.Methods:
We examined changes in the case definition for COVID-19 in mainland China during the first epidemic wave. We used simple models assuming exponential growth and then exponential decay to estimate how changes in the case definitions affected the numbers of cases reported each day. We then inferred how the epidemic curve would have appeared if the same case definition had been used throughout the epidemic.Findings:
From January through to early March 2020, seven versions of the case definition for COVID-19 were issued by the National Health Commission in China. As of February 20, there were 55,508 confirmed cases reported in mainland China. We estimated that when the case definitions were changed from version 1 to 2, version 2 to 4 and version 4 to 5, the proportion of infections being detected as cases were increased by 7.1-fold (95% credible interval (CI) 4.8, 10.9), 2.8-fold (95% CI 1.9, 4.2) and 4.2-fold (95% CI 2.6, 7.3) respectively. If the fifth version of the case definition had been applied throughout the outbreak, we estimated that by February 20 there would have been 232,000 (95% CI 161,000, 359,000) confirmed cases.Interpretation:
The case definition was initially narrow, but was gradually broadened to allow detection of more cases as knowledge increased, particularly milder cases and those without epidemiological links to Wuhan or other known cases. This should be taken into account when making inferences on epidemic growth rates and doubling times, and therefore on the reproductive number, to avoid bias.Funding:
Commissioned grant from the Health and Medical Research Fund, Food and Health Bureau, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
Full text:
Available
Collection:
Preprints
Database:
medRxiv
Main subject:
COVID-19
Language:
English
Year:
2020
Document Type:
Preprint
Similar
MEDLINE
...
LILACS
LIS