Abstract
Effective responses to the COVID-19 pandemic require integrating behavioral factors such as risk-driven contact reduction, improved treatment, and adherence fatigue with asymptomatic transmission, disease acuity, and hospital capacity. We build one such model and estimate it for all 92 nations with reliable testing data. Cumulative cases and deaths through 22 December 2020 are estimated to be 7.03 and 1.44 times official reports, yielding an infection fatality rate (IFR) of 0.51% which has been declining over time. Absent adherence fatigue cumulative cases would have been 47% lower. Scenarios through June 2021 show that modest improvement in responsiveness could reduce cases and deaths ≈14%, more than the impact of vaccinating half of the population by that date. Variations in responsiveness to risk explain two orders of magnitude difference in per-capita deaths despite reproduction numbers fluctuating ∼ 1 across nations. A public online simulator facilitates scenario analysis over the coming months.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No funding was used to conduct this study.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Not applicable
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
- Updated with data until Dec 22, 2020 - Added 1 country to the estimates - Incorporated new risk-driven response functions - Incorporated impact of vaccination - Edited the manuscript extensively
↵1 In the equations below we use short-hand to simplify mathematical notations. The full model documentation uses full variable names. Table S1 provides the mapping between the short-hand and the full names, as well as the sources and equations for the variables and parameters discussed below.
↵2 https://blog.ons.gov.uk/2020/03/31/counting-deaths-involving-the-coronavirus-covid-19/
↵3 https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/previous-testing-in-us.html
↵4 See e.g. https://www.wcvb.com/article/massachusetts-coronavirus-reporting-delay-due-to-quest-lab-it-glitch/32288903#
↵5 It may be argued that there are weekly cycles in large-scale human behaviour that may drive some true weekly cyclicality in the true rates of infection and death, and as such it may be wrong to consider such cycles to be artefacts of the data- generation process. However, we find this unlikely for a few reasons. First, weekly cycles in human interactions, largely driven by the work and school week and weekend, will have been significantly attenuated by widespread adoption of social distancing measures around the world. Second and more importantly, variation in incubation period and time before development of symptoms means that any true cyclicality in the timing of initial infection will be further attenuated in the timing of symptom development. By the same logic, wide variability in the delay from symptom development to death means there should be minimal cyclicality, if any, in the timing of deaths, meaning any such cycles visible in the data are due to measurement and reporting lags.
↵6 https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.interpolate.PchipInterpolator.html
↵7 Cleveland R.B., Cleveland W.S., McRae J.E., Terpenning I. (1990) STL: A seasonal-trend decomposition procedure based on Loess. J Off Stat 6: 3-73
↵8 https://www.statsmodels.org/stable/generated/statsmodels.tsa.seasonal.STL.html
Data Availability
All data, codes, and simulation models are publicly available.
