2021
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.26781
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Retrospective prediction of the epidemic trend of COVID‐19 in Wuhan at four phases

Abstract: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) outbreak caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) began in December 2019 and was basically under control in April 2020 in Wuhan. To explore the impact of intervention measures on the COVID‐19 epidemic, we established susceptible–exposed–infectious–recovered (SEIR) models to predict the epidemic characteristics of COVID‐19 at four different phases (beginning, outbreak, recession, and plateau) from January 1st to March 30th, 2020. We found tha… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…COVID-19 has affected ~199 M individuals, resulting in ~4.24 M deaths worldwide as of August 3, 2021. The scientific community has made tireless efforts to find a suitable remedy for COVID-19 since it was first reported in China's Wuhan Province (Yamamoto et al, 2020;Li et al, 2021;Mei et al, 2021;Yang et al, 2021;Zhu et al, 2021). Of most concern at present is the arrival of new, mutated, genetic variants (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…COVID-19 has affected ~199 M individuals, resulting in ~4.24 M deaths worldwide as of August 3, 2021. The scientific community has made tireless efforts to find a suitable remedy for COVID-19 since it was first reported in China's Wuhan Province (Yamamoto et al, 2020;Li et al, 2021;Mei et al, 2021;Yang et al, 2021;Zhu et al, 2021). Of most concern at present is the arrival of new, mutated, genetic variants (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A comprehensible method for defining pandemic stages is rarely found in the literature on COVID-19. Existing phase models (Ghosh & Cartone, 2020; Benita & Gasca-Sanchez 2021; Li et al 2021; Zawbaa et al 2022) define the beginning of each stage relatively arbitrarily based on individual indicators, such as incidence rates, mortality rates, or the implementation of countermeasures like lockdowns and social distancing. Typical types of phases include ‘beginning’, ‘outbreak’, ‘recession’, and ‘plateau’ (Li et al 2021).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Existing phase models (Ghosh & Cartone, 2020;Benita & Gasca-Sanchez 2021;Li et al 2021;Zawbaa et al 2022) define the beginning of each stage relatively arbitrarily based on individual indicators, such as incidence rates, mortality rates, or the implementation of countermeasures like lockdowns and social distancing. Typical types of phases include 'beginning', 'outbreak', 'recession', and 'plateau' (Li et al 2021). Schilling et al (2022) used a multivariant approach by combining several variables for their phase model for Germany, although their method of delineating phases remains unclear.…”
Section: Identifying Change Points Of Pandemic Severitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the outbreak of COVID-19, many scholars have used statistical methods [1][2][3][4][5], mechanism models [6][7][8][9][10] and deep learning methods [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] to predict the COVID-19 epidemic trend. Although the pure deep learning method has higher accuracy when compared with mechanism model in predicting the development trend of the epidemic, it cannot reflect the specific influencing factors of the epidemic trend like mechanism model and is less instructive for further taking corresponding prevention and control measures.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, our focus of interest was put to the functionalization of transmission rate β. A few of researchers have redefined the population classification based on the SIR model in order to predict the epidemic trend of COVID-19 more accurately [6][7][8][9][10]. These methods, however, ignored the time-varying characteristics of the transmission rate β so that they were not capable to improve the prediction accuracy of COVID-19 effectively.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%