PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Favas, Caroline
AU  - Jarrett, Prudence
AU  - Ratnayake, Ruwan
AU  - Watson, Oliver J
AU  - Checchi, Francesco
TI  - Country differences in transmissibility, age distribution and case-fatality of SARS-CoV-2: a global ecological analysis
AID  - 10.1101/2021.02.17.21251839
DP  - 2021 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2021.02.17.21251839
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/19/2021.02.17.21251839.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/19/2021.02.17.21251839.full
AB  - Introduction SARS-CoV-2 has spread rapidly across the world yet the first pandemic waves in many low-income countries appeared milder than initially forecasted through mathematical models. Hypotheses for this observed difference include under-ascertainment of cases and deaths, country population age structure, and immune modulation secondary to exposure to endemic parasitic infections. We conducted a country-level ecological study to describe patterns in key SARS-CoV-2 outcomes by country and region and to explore possible associations of the potential explanatory factors with these outcomes.Methods We collected publicly available data at country level and compared them using standardisation techniques. We then explored the association between exposures and outcomes using alternative approaches: random forest (RF) regression and linear (LM) regression. We adjusted for potential confounders and plausible effect modifications.Results Altogether, data on the mean time-varying reproduction number (mean Rt) were available for 153 countries, but standardised averages for the age of cases and deaths and for the case-fatality ratio (CFR) could only be computed for 61, 39 and 31 countries respectively. While mean Rt was highest in the WHO Europe and Americas regions, median age of death was lower in the Africa region even after standardisation, with broadly similar CFR. Population age was strongly associated with mean Rt and the age-standardised median age of observed cases and deaths in both RF and LM models. The models highlighted other plausible roles of population density, testing intensity and co-morbidity prevalence, but yielded uncertain results as regards exposure to common parasitic infections.Conclusions The average age of a population seems to be an important country-level factor explaining both transmissibility and the median age of observed cases and deaths, even after age-standardisation. Potential associations between endemic infections and COVID-19 are worthy of further exploration but seem unlikely, from this analysis, to be key drivers of the variation in observed COVID-19 epidemic trends. Our study was limited by the availability of outcome data and its causally uncertain ecological design, with the observed distribution of age amongst reported cases and deaths suggesting key differences in surveillance and testing strategy and capacity by country and the representativeness of case reporting of infection. Research at subnational and individual level is needed to explore hypotheses further.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementCaroline Favas was supported by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and Wellcome [ref. 221303/Z/20/Z, Epidemic Preparedness - Coronavirus research programme]. Ruwan Rutnayake and Francesco Checchi were supported by UK Research and Innovation as part of the Global Challenges Research Fund [grant number ES/P010873/1]. Oliver J Watson was supported by the UK Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office. All the authors declare no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three yearsAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:No ethical approval was obtained because we used publicly available and aggregated data only. Our study did not involve personal or private data, and did not qualify as human subject research.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesFor our ecological study, we used publicly available data only. Data and R scripts are available at https://github.com/francescochecchi/covid_eco_analysis/ https://github.com/francescochecchi/covid_eco_analysis/