Estimating underdetection of internationally imported COVID-19 cases
De Salazar, P. M.; Niehus, R.; Taylor, A.; Lipsitch, M.
Show abstract
Risk of COVID-19 infection in Wuhan has been estimated using imported case counts of international travelers, often under the assumption that all cases in travelers are ascertained. Recent work indicates variation among countries in detection capacity for imported cases. Singapore has historically had very strong epidemiological surveillance and contact-tracing capacity and has shown in the COVID-19 epidemic evidence of a high sensitivity of case detection. We therefore used a Bayesian modeling approach to estimate the relative imported case detection capacity for other countries compared to that of Singapore.We estimate that the global ability to detect imported cases is 38% (95% HPDI 22% - 64%) of Singapores capacity. Equivalently, an estimate of 2.8 (95% HPDI 1.5 - 4.4) times the current number of imported cases, could have been detected, if all countries had had the same detection capacity as Singapore. Using the second component of the Global Health Security index to stratify likely case-detection capacities, we found that the ability to detect imported cases relative to Singapore among high surveillance locations is 40% (95% HPDI 22% - 67%), among intermediate surveillance locations it is 37% (95% HPDI 18% - 68%), and among low surveillance locations it is 11% (95% HPDI 0% - 42%). Using a simple mathematical model, we further find that treating all travelers as if they were residents (rather than accounting for the brief stay of some of these travelers in Wuhan) can modestly contribute to underestimation of prevalence as well. We conclude that estimates of case counts in Wuhan based on assumptions of perfect detection in travelers may be underestimated by several fold, and severity correspondingly overestimated by several fold. Undetected cases are likely in countries around the world, with greater risk in countries of low detection capacity and high connectivity to the epicenter of the outbreak.
Matching journals
The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Global surveillance of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants 94%
- Novel application of capture-recapture methods to estimate the completeness of contact tracing during a large outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease, Democratic Republic of Congo, 2018-2020 92%
- Daily Forecasting of New Cases for Regional Epidemics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 with Bayesian Uncertainty Quantification 91%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Estimating the effect of mobility on SARS-CoV-2 transmission during the first and second wave of the COVID-19 epidemic in Switzerland: a population-based study 92%
- Estimating the false-negative test probability of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR 91%
- Impact of mass testing during an epidemic rebound of SARS-CoV-2: A modelling study 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Using next generation matrices to estimate the proportion of cases that are not detected in an outbreak 94%
- Evaluating Age-Dependent Transmission and Vaccination Policy in Singapore's SARS-CoV-2 Epidemic: A Computational Modelling Approach 93%
- Sustaining effective COVID-19 control in Malaysia through large-scale vaccination 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.