4.7 Article

Ascertainment rate of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in Japan

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 96, Issue -, Pages 673-675

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.04.080

Keywords

Coronavirus; Outbreak; Diagnosis; Reporting; Statistical model; Epidemiology; Viruses

Funding

  1. Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development [JP18fk0108050]
  2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [17H04701, 17H05808, 18H04895, 19H01074]
  3. Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) Core Research for Evolutional Science and Technology (CREST) program [JPMJCR1413]
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [19H01074, 17H05808, 18H04895] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To estimate the ascertainment rate of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Methods: The epidemiological dataset of confirmed cases with COVID-19 in Japan as of February 28, 2020 was analyzed. A statistical model was constructed to describe the heterogeneity of the reporting rate by age and severity. We estimated the number of severe and non-severe cases, accounting for under-ascertainment. Results: The ascertainment rate of non-severe cases was estimated at 0.44 (95% confidence interval 0.37-0.50), indicating that the unbiased number of non-severe cases would be more than twice the reported count. Conclusions: Severe cases are twice as likely to be diagnosed and reported when compared to other cases. Considering that reported cases are usually dominated by non-severe cases, the adjusted total number of cases is also approximately double the observed count. This finding is critical in interpreting the reported data, and it is advised that the mild case data for COVID-19 should always be interpreted as underascertained [Au?1]. (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available