Feasibility of Booster Vaccination in High-Risk Populations for Controlling Coronavirus Variants - China, 2021

The impact of triple doses vaccination and other interventions for controlling the outbreak of COVID-19 cases and mortality in Australia: A modelling study

COVID-19 is a significant public health problem around the globe, including in Australia. Despite this, Australia's Ministry of Health has expanded COVID-19 control measures widely, logistical trials exist, and the disease burden still needs more clarity. One of the best methods to comprehend the dynamics of disease transmission is by mathematical modeling of COVID-19, which also makes it possible to quantify factors in many places, including Australia. In order to understand the dynamics of COVID-19 in Australia, we examine a mathematical modeling framework for the virus in this study. Australian COVID-19 actual incidence data from January to December 2021 was used to calibrate the model. We also performed a sensitivity analysis of the model parameters and found that the COVID-19 transmission rate was the primary factor in determining the basic reproduction number (R0). Gradually influential intervention policies were established, with accurate effect and coverage regulated with the help of COVID-19 experts in Australia. We simulated data for the period from April 2022 to August 2023. To ascertain which of these outcomes is most effective in lowering the COVID-19 burden, we here assessed the COVID-19 burden (as shown by the number of incident cases and mortality) under a range of intervention scenarios. Regarding the policy of single intervention, the fastest and most efficient way to lower the incidence of COVID-19 is via increasing the first-dose immunization rate, while an improved treatment rate for the afflicted population is also helps to lower mortality in Australia. Furthermore, our results imply that integrating more therapies at the same time increases their efficacy, particularly for mortality, which significantly reduced with a moderate effort, while lowering the number of COVID-19 instances necessitates a major and ongoing commitment.

Predictive models for health outcomes due to SARS-CoV-2, including the effect of vaccination: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The interaction between modelers and policymakers is becoming more common due to the increase in computing speed seen in recent decades. The recent pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus was no exception. Thus, this study aims to identify and assess epidemiological mathematical models of SARS-CoV-2 applied to real-world data, including immunization for coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODOLOGY

PubMed, JSTOR, medRxiv, LILACS, EconLit, and other databases were searched for studies employing epidemiological mathematical models of SARS-CoV-2 applied to real-world data. We summarized the information qualitatively, and each article included was assessed for bias risk using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and PROBAST checklist tool. The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42022344542.

FINDINGS

In total, 5646 articles were retrieved, of which 411 were included. Most of the information was published in 2021. The countries with the highest number of studies were the United States, Canada, China, and the United Kingdom; no studies were found in low-income countries. The SEIR model (susceptible, exposed, infectious, and recovered) was the most frequently used approach, followed by agent-based modeling. Moreover, the most commonly used software were R, Matlab, and Python, with the most recurring health outcomes being death and recovery. According to the JBI assessment, 61.4% of articles were considered to have a low risk of bias.

INTERPRETATION

The utilization of mathematical models increased following the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Stakeholders have begun to incorporate these analytical tools more extensively into public policy, enabling the construction of various scenarios for public health. This contribution adds value to informed decision-making. Therefore, understanding their advancements, strengths, and limitations is essential.

Mathematical Models Supporting Control of COVID-19

Mathematical models have played an important role in the management of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The aim of this review is to describe the use of COVID-19 mathematical models, their classification, and the advantages and disadvantages of different types of models. We conducted subject heading searches of PubMed and China National Knowledge Infrastructure with the terms "COVID-19," "Mathematical Statistical Model," "Model," "Modeling," "Agent-based Model," and "Ordinary Differential Equation Model" and classified and analyzed the scientific literature retrieved in the search. We categorized the models as data-driven or mechanism-driven. Data-driven models are mainly used for predicting epidemics, and have the advantage of rapid assessment of disease instances. However, their ability to determine transmission mechanisms is limited. Mechanism-driven models include ordinary differential equation (ODE) and agent-based models. ODE models are used to estimate transmissibility and evaluate impact of interventions. Although ODE models are good at determining pathogen transmission characteristics, they are less suitable for simulation of early epidemic stages and rely heavily on availability of first-hand field data. Agent-based models consider influences of individual differences, but they require large amounts of data and can take a long time to develop fully. Many COVID-19 mathematical modeling studies have been conducted, and these have been used for predicting trends, evaluating interventions, and calculating pathogen transmissibility. Successful infectious disease modeling requires comprehensive considerations of data, applications, and purposes.

Model-Based Evaluation of Transmissibility and Intervention Measures for a COVID-19 Outbreak in Xiamen City, China

Background

In September 2021, there was an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Xiamen, China. Various non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) and pharmacological interventions (PIs) have been implemented to prevent and control the spread of the disease. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of various interventions and to identify priorities for the implementation of prevention and control measures.

Methods

The data of patients with COVID-19 were collected from 8 to 30 September 2021. A Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Recovered (SEIR) dynamics model was developed to fit the data and simulate the effectiveness of interventions (medical treatment, isolation, social distancing, masking, and vaccination) under different scenarios. The effective reproductive number (R_eff) was used to assess the transmissibility and transmission risk.

Results

A total of 236 cases of COVID-19 were reported in Xiamen. The epidemic curve was divided into three phases (R_eff = 6.8, 1.5, and 0). Notably, the cumulative number of cases was reduced by 99.67% due to the preventive and control measures implemented by the local government. In the effective containment stage, the number of cases could be reduced to 115 by intensifying the implementation of interventions. The total number of cases (TN) could be reduced by 29.66–95.34% when patients voluntarily visit fever clinics. When only two or three of these measures are implemented, the simulated TN may be greater than the actual number. As four measures were taken simultaneously, the TN may be <100, which is 57.63% less than the actual number. The simultaneous implementation of five interventions could rapidly control the transmission and reduce the number of cases to fewer than 25.

Conclusion

With the joint efforts of the government and the public, the outbreak was controlled quickly and effectively. Authorities could promptly cut the transmission chain and control the spread of the disease when patients with fever voluntarily went to the hospital. The ultimate effect of controlling the outbreak through only one intervention was not obvious. The combined community control and mask wearing, along with other interventions, could lead to rapid control of the outbreak and ultimately lower the total number of cases. More importantly, this would mitigate the impact of the outbreak on society and socioeconomics.