2020
DOI: 10.1101/2020.02.05.20020750
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Doubling Time of the COVID-19 Epidemic by Chinese Province

Abstract: COVID-19 epidemic doubling time by Chinese province was increasing from January 20 through February 9, 2020. The harmonic mean of the arithmetic mean doubling time estimates ranged from 1.4 (Hunan, 95% CI, 1.2-2.0) to 3.1 (Xinjiang, 95% CI, 2.1-4.8), with an estimate of 2.5 days (95% CI, 2.4-2.6) for Hubei.

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
49
0
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(53 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
2
49
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…[7][8][9][10] The extent of infection under-ascertainment has been difficult to assess because of three biasing processes: (i) cases have been diagnosed with PCR-based tests, which do not provide information about resolved infections; (ii) the majority of cases tested early in the course of the epidemic have been acutely ill and highly symptomatic, while most asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic individuals have not been tested; and (iii) PCR-based testing rates have been highly variable across contexts and over time, leading to noisy relationships between the number of cases and infections. If, in the absence of interventions, the epidemic's early doubling time is estimated to be four days 6,11,12 , then by February 27th, 2020, when the third case was identified in Santa Clara County, the county may have already had 256 infections.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[7][8][9][10] The extent of infection under-ascertainment has been difficult to assess because of three biasing processes: (i) cases have been diagnosed with PCR-based tests, which do not provide information about resolved infections; (ii) the majority of cases tested early in the course of the epidemic have been acutely ill and highly symptomatic, while most asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic individuals have not been tested; and (iii) PCR-based testing rates have been highly variable across contexts and over time, leading to noisy relationships between the number of cases and infections. If, in the absence of interventions, the epidemic's early doubling time is estimated to be four days 6,11,12 , then by February 27th, 2020, when the third case was identified in Santa Clara County, the county may have already had 256 infections.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An earlier study (from 20 January to 9 February 2020) in China reported that doubling times of the COVID-19 epidemic for Hunan Province, Hubei Province and Xinjiang Province were 1.4 days (95% CI 1.2-2.0), 2.5 days (95% CI 2.4-2.6) and 3.1 days (95% CI 2.1-4.8) respectively [16]. On the other hand, analysis of data obtained from several European countries in February and March 2020 indicates that the initial doubling times of COVID-19 was approximately 3 days or less using semiparametric and generalised linear methods, until social distancing measures were in place.…”
Section: Doubling Timementioning
confidence: 95%
“…show simulation results for different levels of social distancing and implementation times, assuming an epidemic doubling time of (A) 7.2 days [22][23][24][25] or (B) 4 days [25,27,28] . Each graph displays three projections: a baseline assuming no social distancing (red), social distancing implemented March 14-Aug 17, 2020 (blue), and social distancing implemented May 14-Aug 17, 2020 (black).…”
Section: Fig 1 Projected Weekly Incident Covid-19 Cases In the Austimentioning
confidence: 99%