Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/SVG/jax.js
Search Advanced

AIMS Public Health

2020, Volume 7, Issue 2: 306-318. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020026
Previous Article Next Article
Research article Special Issues

Parameter estimation and prediction for coronavirus disease outbreak 2019 (COVID-19) in Algeria

  • 1.
    Department of Mathematics and Informatics, University center of Ain Temouchent, Algeria
  • 2.
    Laboratoire d'Analyse Nonlinéaire et Mathématiques Appliquées, University of Tlemcen, Tlemcen 13000, Algeria
  • 3.
    Graduate School of System Informatics, Kobe University, 1-1 Rokkodai-cho, Nada-ku, Kobe 657-8501, Japan

  • Citation: Soufiane Bentout, Abdennasser Chekroun, Toshikazu Kuniya. Parameter estimation and prediction for coronavirus disease outbreak 2019 (COVID-19) in Algeria[J]. AIMS Public Health, 2020, 7(2): 306-318. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020026

    Related Papers:

    [1] Ali Moussaoui, El Hadi Zerga . Transmission dynamics of COVID-19 in Algeria: The impact of physical distancing and face masks. AIMS Public Health, 2020, 7(4): 816-827. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020063
    [2] Saina Abolmaali, Samira Shirzaei . A comparative study of SIR Model, Linear Regression, Logistic Function and ARIMA Model for forecasting COVID-19 cases. AIMS Public Health, 2021, 8(4): 598-613. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2021048
    [3] Carmen Lok Tung Ho, Peter Oligbu, Olakunle Ojubolamo, Muhammad Pervaiz, Godwin Oligbu . Clinical Characteristics of Children with COVID-19. AIMS Public Health, 2020, 7(2): 258-273. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020022
    [4] Musyoka Kinyili, Justin B Munyakazi, Abdulaziz YA Mukhtar . Mathematical modeling and impact analysis of the use of COVID Alert SA app. AIMS Public Health, 2022, 9(1): 106-128. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2022009
    [5] María D Figueroa-Pizano, Alma C Campa-Mada, Elizabeth Carvajal-Millan, Karla G Martinez-Robinson, Agustin Rascon Chu . The underlying mechanisms for severe COVID-19 progression in people with diabetes mellitus: a critical review. AIMS Public Health, 2021, 8(4): 720-742. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2021057
    [6] Muhammad Farman, Muhammad Azeem, M. O. Ahmad . Analysis of COVID-19 epidemic model with sumudu transform. AIMS Public Health, 2022, 9(2): 316-330. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2022022
    [7] Yosef Mohamed-Azzam Zakout, Fayez Saud Alreshidi, Ruba Mustafa Elsaid, Hussain Gadelkarim Ahmed . The magnitude of COVID-19 related stress, anxiety and depression associated with intense mass media coverage in Saudi Arabia. AIMS Public Health, 2020, 7(3): 664-678. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020052
    [8] Ali Roghani . The relationship between macro-socioeconomics determinants and COVID-19 vaccine distribution. AIMS Public Health, 2021, 8(4): 655-664. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2021052
    [9] Ahmed A Mohsen, Hassan Fadhil AL-Husseiny, Xueyong Zhou, Khalid Hattaf . Global stability of COVID-19 model involving the quarantine strategy and media coverage effects. AIMS Public Health, 2020, 7(3): 587-605. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020047
    [10] Sushant K Singh . COVID-19: A master stroke of Nature. AIMS Public Health, 2020, 7(2): 393-402. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020033


  • 1.   Introduction

    The mathematical models in epidemiology have been used to understand the temporal dynamics of infectious diseases. The first model used to study the spread of infectious diseases was given by Kermack and Mckendrick [1] in 1927. Practically, this model is based on a system of ordinary differential equations and has been widely investigated with several modifications, in [2]–[7] and references therein. The distinct variables to formulate the individuals compartments are susceptible (S), exposed (E), infected (I) and recovered (or removed, R). The classical SEIR model has been widely studied, for instance, see [8]–[13]. It is shown that the asymptotic behavior depends on the basic reproduction number ℜ0 (the expected number of secondary cases produced by an infective person in a completely susceptible population). It is described as a threshold value that indicates whether or not the initial outbreak occurs. That is, if ℜ0 < 1, then the infective population tends to decrease and there is no outbreak, whereas if ℜ0 > 1, then the infective population tends to increase and an outbreak occurs.

    In December 2019, the first case of a novel coronavirus disease was recognized at Wuhan in China [14]. The wave of this disease has spread all over the world, and the World Health Organization (WHO) named it the coronavirus disease outbreak in 2019 (COVID-19) on 11 February, 2020 [14]. In China, during the period from December 2019 to 31 January, 2020, about 10 thausand (9,720) cases of COVID-19 were confirmed [14]. We have to note that asymptomatic individuals of COVID-19 can transmit the infection [15]. Therefore, there would be more cases that could not be reported by medical authorities. In the absence of effective vaccines and therapeutics against COVID-19, countries have to resort to non-pharmaceutical interventions to avoid the infection or to slow down the spread of the epidemic.

    In Algeria, the first case was reported on 25 February 2020 [16]. Since then, the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 has increased day after day. From the end of March, 2020, the Algerian government mandated several approaches to eradicate the spread of COVID-19 such as trying to control the source of contagion and reducing the number of contacts between individuals by confinement and isolation [17]. The purpose of this study is to know how the epidemic will evolve in Algeria with and without such interventions. We use the early data reported in [18] until 31 March, 2020. Recently, many works used a mathematical models for COVID-19, for instance, see the following contributions [19]–[23]. In [20], an SEIR epidemic model with partially identified infected individuals was used for the prediction of the epidemic peak of COVID-19 in Japan. The results in [20] were restricted only to the cases in Japan, and the applicability of the model to the cases in any other countries were not discussed. In this paper, we apply a similar SEIR epidemic model as in [20] to the cases in Algeria. This work would contribute not only in understanding the possible spread pattern of COVID-19 in Algeria in order to act appropriately to reduce the epidemic damage, but also in showing the applicability of the model-based approach as in [20] to the cases in other countries, which might help us to assess the epidemic risk of COVID-19 worldwide in future.

    2.   Materials and method

    2.1.   Data

    We use the data of confirmed COVID-19 cases in Algeria, which is available in the epidemiological map in [18]. The data consists of the daily reported number of new cases and accumulated cases for COVID-19 in Algeria from 25 February to 18 April, 2020 (see Figure 1 and Table 1). The number of reported cases has increased rapidly in the exponential sense until the beginning of April.

    Table 1.  Number of newly reported cases and cumulative number of COVID-19 in Algeria from 25 February to 18 April, 2020 with the nationwide isolation. From 25 February to 18 April 2020.
    Date (day/month) Number of newly reported cases Cumulative number
    25 February 1 1
    26 February 0 1
    27 February 0 1
    28 February 0 1
    29 February 2 3
    1 March 0 3
    2 March 0 3
    3 March 2 5
    4 March 12 17
    5 March 0 17
    6 March 0 17
    7 March 2 19
    8 March 1 20
    9 March 0 20
    10 March 0 20
    11 March 0 20
    12 March 5 25
    13 March 0 25
    14 March 10 35
    15 March 17 52
    16 March 6 58
    17 March 2 60
    18 March 12 72
    19 March 18 90
    20 March 12 102
    21 March 37 139
    22 March 60 201
    23 March 29 230
    24 March 34 264
    25 March 38 302
    26 March 65 367
    27 March 42 409
    28 March 45 454
    29 March 57 511
    30 March 73 584
    31 March 132 716
    1 April 131 847
    2 April 139 986
    3 April 185 1171
    4 April 80 1251
    5 April 69 1320
    6 April 103 1423
    7 April 45 1468
    8 April 104 1572
    9 April 94 1666
    10 April 95 1761
    11 April 64 1825
    12 April 89 1914
    13 April 69 1983
    14 April 87 2070
    15 April 90 2160
    16 April 108 2268
    17 April 150 2418
    18 April 116 2534
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 1.  Daily reported number of new cases (left) and accumulated cases (right) of COVID-19 in Algeria from 25 February to 18 April, 2020 [18].
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    2.2.   Model

    In this paper, we use the following well-known SEIR epidemic model, for t > 0,

    {S′(t)=−βS(t)I(t),E′(t)=βS(t)I(t)−λE(t),I′(t)=−γI(t)+λE(t),R′(t)=γI(t),
    with initial conditions
    S(0)=S0, E(0)=E0, I(0)=I0 and R(0)=R0.
    (1)–(2) is a system of ordinary differential equations based on the phenomenological law of mass action. For simplicity, we suppose that E0 = R0 = 0 (initially, there is no exposed and recovered individual). Moreover, we assume that S(0) + E(0) + I(0) + R(0) = 1 from which we have S(t) + E(t) + I(t) + R(t) = 1 for all t > 0, and hence, each population implies the proportion to the total population. All the parameters of the model are nonnegative constants, and they are described in Table 2. Figure 2 provides a schematic representation of model (1).

    Figure 2.  Interactions between the compartments of the epidemiological model (1). The continuous lines represent transition between compartments, and entrance and exit of individuals. The dashed line represents the transmission of the infection through the interaction between susceptible and infected individuals. The recovered class is omitted because it is decoupled from the other compartments.
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    Note that γ implies the removal rate and the removed population R includes the individuals who died due to the infection.

    We follow the same idea in [20] to give the prediction for Algeria. Parameter estimation and epidemic peak are treated and obtained. Moreover, we estimate the basic reproduction number for the epidemic COVID-19 in Algeria. Since the virus presents asymptomatic cases and the fact that there is a sufficiently lack of diagnostic test, we consider an identification function

    t∈ℜ+↦X(t)=ϵ×I(t)×N.

    This quantity describes the number of infective individuals who are identified at time t, with N is the total population in Algeria (N = 43411571) and ε is the identification rate. As in [20], we suppose that ε ∈ [0.01, 0.1].

    3.   Results

    3.1.   Epidemic prediction

    In this section, we develop simulations to provide epidemic predictions for the COVID-19 epidemic in Algeria. We focus on predicting the cases and parameter estimation. We are able to find the basic reproduction number and to estimate the infection rate. Recall that the number ℜ0 is defined as the average number of secondary infections that occur when one infective individual is introduced into a completely susceptible population. In epidemiology, the method to compute the basic reproduction number using the next-generation matrix is given by Diekmann et al. [24] and Van den Driessche and Watmough [25]. For our model, the value of the basic reproduction number of the disease is defined by

    ℜ0=βS0γ=βγ(1−E0−I0−R0)=βγ(1−X(0)ϵN).

    In fact, the largest eigenvalue or spectral radius of FV−1 is the basic reproduction number of the model, where

    F=[0βS000] and V=[λ0−λγ].
    In our case, we assume that X(0) = 1 and N = 43411571, see Tables 1 and 2.

    By some choices on the parameter ε, illustrations for prediction are given in Figures 3, 4 and 5. To estimate the parameters, we use the method of least squares and the best fit curve that minimizes the sum of squared residuals. We remark that ε does not affect the basic reproduction number and the infection rate as the total population N is large. We obtain an estimation of them as shown in Table 2 (ℜ0 = 4.1 and β = 0.41). However, we observe that ε is an important parameter for prediction. In fact, the three illustrations in Figures 3, 4 and 5 show its influence on the peak.

    As stated before, we use a simple but useful measure to provide the average number of infections caused by one infected individual R0 = 4.1. The R0 value in China was estimated to be around 2.5 in the early stage of epidemic. In April 2020, the contagiousness rate was reassessed upwards, between 3.8 and 8.9 (see, [26]). Comparing with other results (see, [27]), R0 may be unstable.

    Table 2.  Parameter values for numerical simulation.
    Description Value Reference
    β: Contact rate 0.41 Estimated
    γ: Removal rate 0.1 [28], [29]
    λ: Onset rate 0.2 [14], Situation report 30, [28], [30]
    1/γ: The average infectious period 10 [28], [29]
    1/λ: The average incubation period 5 [14], Situation report 30, [28], [30]
    ε: Identification rate 0.01–0.1 [20]
    N: Total population in Algeria 43411571 [31]
    ℜ0: Basic reproduction number 4.1 Estimated
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 3.  Graph of X(t), with ε = 0.01, is plotted. It represents the number of identified newly cases. The red small circles are the reported case data. In this case, the data from the number of newly reported cases is well fitted the epidemic. Without the nationwide lockdown, the peak occurs approximately at t = 100 associated to a date between the beginning and the middle of June.
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint
    Figure 4.  Graph of X(t), with ε = 0.05, is plotted. It represents the number of identified newly cases. The red small circles are the reported case data. In this case, the data from the number of newly reported cases is well fitted the epidemic. Without the nationwide lockdown, the peak occurs approximately at t = 110 associated to a date close to the middle of June.
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint
    Figure 5.  Graph of X(t), with ε = 0.1, is plotted. It represents the number of identified newly cases. The red small circles are the reported case data. In this case, the data from the number of newly reported cases is well fitted the epidemic. Without the nationwide lockdown, the peak occurs approximately at t = 115 associated to a date between the middle and the end of June.
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    3.2.   Intervention effect

    We now discuss the effect of intervention. We first assume that the intervention is carried out for two months from April 1 (t = 37) to May 31 (t = 96) with reducing the contact rate β to kβ, where 0 ≤ k ≤ 1. We use the parameter values as in Table 2 with ε = 0.1. Time variation of the identification function X(t) for k = 1, 0.75, 0.5 and 0.25 is displayed in Figure 6.

    Figure 6.  Time variation of the identification function X(t) for k = 1, 0.75, 0.5 and 0.25 in the two months intervention from April 1 (t = 37) to May 31 (t = 96).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    From Figure 6, we see that the two months intervention in this case has the positive effect on the time delay of the epidemic peak. On the other hand, the epidemic size is almost the same for each k in this case.

    We secondly assume that the intervention is carried out for three months from April 1 (t = 37) to June 30 (t = 126).

    From Figure 7, we see that the epidemic peak is also delayed in this case. Moreover, the epidemic size is reduced for k = 0.75. In contrast, the epidemic size for k = 0.5 and k = 0.25 is almost the same as that for k = 1.

    Figure 7.  Time variation of the identification function X(t) for k = 1, 0.75, 0.5 and 0.25 in the three months intervention from April 1 (t = 37) to June 30 (t = 126).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    We thirdly assume that the intervention is carried out for four months from April 1 (t = 37) to July 31 (t = 157).

    Figure 8.  Time variation of the identification function X(t) for k = 1, 0.75, 0.5 and 0.25 in the four months intervention from April 1 (t = 37) to July 31 (t = 157).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    From Figure 8, we see that the epidemic peak is also delayed in this case. On the other hand, similar to the example for three months intervention, the epidemic size is effectively reduced only for k = 0.75.

    We fourthly assume that the intervention is carried out for five months from April 1 (t = 37) to August 31 (t = 188). From Figure 9, we see that the epidemic peak is also delayed in this case. Moreover, the epidemic size is effectively reduced for k = 0.75 and k = 0.5. In contrast, the epidemic size for k = 0.25 is almost the same as that for k = 1.

    Figure 9.  Time variation of the identification function X(t) for k = 1, 0.75, 0.5 and 0.25 in the five months intervention from April 1 (t = 37) to August 31 (t = 188).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    We finally assume that the intervention is carried out for six months from April 1 (t = 37) to September 30 (t = 218). From Figure 10, we see that the epidemic peak is also delayed in this case. Moreover, the epidemic size is effectively reduced for k = 0.75 and k = 0.5. In contrast, the epidemic size for k = 0.25 is almost the same as that for k = 1.

    Figure 10.  Time variation of the identification function X(t) for k = 1, 0.75, 0.5 and 0.25 in the six months intervention from April 1 (t = 37) to September 30 (t = 218).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    From these examples, we obtain the following epidemiological insights.

    • The epidemic peak is delayed monotonically as k decreases (that is, the contact rate is reduced by the intervention).
    • The epidemic size is not necessarily reduced even if a long and strong intervention is carried out. To effectively reduce the epidemic size by the intervention, it suffices to continue the intervention until the epidemic peak attains during the intervention period.

    In Figure 11, we look at the case of measures that are more effective. Our model shows that the end of the disease can be reached in the three months intervention, from April 1, for k = 0.05 and in the four months intervention for k = 0.1, from April 1. More severe measures can induce an end of the disease in two months (see Figure 12 (a) with k = 0.01).

    Figure 11.  Case of a very strong intervention, with ε = 0.1. The red small circles are the reported case data. Left: time variation of the identification function X(t) for k = 0.05 in the three months intervention, from April 1 (t = 37). Right: time variation of the identification function X(t) for k = 0.1 in the four months intervention, from April 1 (t = 37).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    In Figure 12, we consider the cases where interventions are not taken early. It is shown that a delay in intervention implies a larger peak and additional duration for the epidemic to disappear. For instance, an intervention from April 20 implies a supplementary delay by 23 days for the epidemic to disappear with high considerable peak.

    Figure 12.  Simulation of different start times of carrying out the measures, with ε = 0.1 and k = 0.01 (Case of a very strong intervention). The red small circles are the reported case data. (a) from April 1 (t = 37), (b) from April 10 (t = 46), (c) from April 20 (t = 56) and (d) from April 30 (t = 66).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    For some economical and social reasons and according to the situation of the epidemic, the strictness of intervention measures will decrease in a gradual way. The Figure 13 shows the case where the severity of intervention measures is reduced. This simulation suggests that decrease the parameter k gradually, on each half month, implies automatically a delay, at least of one month, for the end of the epidemic.

    Figure 13.  Simulation of the case where the strictness of intervention measures is reduced. The red small circles are the reported case data. From April 1 (t = 37), we take k = 0.01. From April 15 (t = 52), we take k = 0.05. From April 30 (t = 67), we take k = 0.1.
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    4.   Conclusion

    We have applied a mathematical model to predict the evolution of a COVID-19 epidemic in Algeria. It is employed to estimate the basic reproduction number ℜ0, to obtain the epidemic peak and to discuss the effect of interventions. In this model, we take the fact that the virus presents asymptomatic cases and that there exists a sufficiency lack of diagnostic test.

    The prognostic capacity of our model requires a valid values for the parameters β, λ, γ, the mean incubation period 1/λ and the mean infectious period 1/γ. The precision of these parameters is very important for predicting the value of the basic reproduction number ℜ0 and the peak of the epidemic. Their estimations depend on the public health data in Algeria. To fight the new coronavirus COVID-19, it is necessary to control information based on valid diagnosis system.

    From 25 February to 31 March, we founded that ℜ0 = 4.1 > 1, which means that we need strong interventions to reduce the epidemic damage that could be brought by the serious disease. Moreover, the model suggests that the pandemic COVID-19 in Algeria would not finish at a fast speed.

    In the Figures 3, 4 and 5, where ε = 0.01, 0.05, 0.1, respectively, the data from the number of newly reported cases is well fitted the epidemic. The peak will occur at the month of June and approximately close to the middle, the maximum number of new cases (relatively also the cumulative number) could achieve an important value in Algeria. This number will probably persist at a high level for several days if we do not apply intervention measures (isolation, quarantine and public closings). The model's predictions highlight an importance for intervening in the fight against COVID-19 epidemics by early government action. To this end, we have discussed different intervention scenarios in relation to the duration and severity of these interventions. We see that the intervention has a positive effect on the time delay of the epidemic peak. On the other hand, the epidemic size is almost the same for short intervention (effective or not) and decrease depending on the severity of the measures. In contrast with the last previous case, we observe that a large epidemic can occur even if the intervention is long and sufficiently effective.

    At the moment, the consequence of COVID-19 in China is encouraging for many countries where COVID-19 is starting to spread. Despite the difficulties, Algeria must also implement the strict measures as in Figure 11, which could be similar to the one that China has finally adopted.


    Acknowledgments


    The authors would like to thank the associate editor and the anonymous reviewer for their valuable comments and suggestions, which have led to a significant improvement of the whole manuscript. S. Bentout and A. Chekroun are supported by the DGRSDT, Algeria. T. Kuniya is supported by JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Early-Career Scientists (grant number 19K14594).

    Conflict of interest


    The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

    [1] Kermack WO, McKendrick AG (1927) A contribution to the mathematical theory of epidemics. Proc R Soc London Ser A 115: 700-721. doi: 10.1098/rspa.1927.0118
    [2] Bentout S, Touaoula TM (2016) Global analysis of an infection age model with a class of nonlinear incidence rates. J Math Anal Appl 434: 1211-1239. doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2015.09.066
    [3] Chekroun A, Frioui MN, Kuniya T, et al. (2020) Mathematical analysis of an age structured heroin-cocaine epidemic model. Discrete Contin Dyn Syst Ser B 25: 1-13.
    [4] Diekmann O, Heesterbeek J (2000)  Mathematical Epidemiology of Infective Diseases: Model Building, Analysis and Interpretation New York: Wiley.
    [5] Hattaf K, Yang Y (2018) Global dynamics of an age-structured viral infection model with general incidence function and absorption. Int J Biomath 11: 1-18. doi: 10.1142/S1793524518500651
    [6] Liu L, Wanga J, Liu X (2015) Global stability of an SEIR epidemic model with age-dependent latency and relapse. Nonlinear Anal Real World Appl 24: 18-35. doi: 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2015.01.001
    [7] Magal P, McCluskey CC, Webb GF (2010) Lyapunov functional and global asymptotic stability for an infection-age model. Appl Anal 89: 1109-1140. doi: 10.1080/00036810903208122
    [8] Korobeinikov A (2004) Lyapunov functions and global properties for SEIR and SEIS epidemic models. Math Med Biol 21: 75-83. doi: 10.1093/imammb/21.2.75
    [9] Korobeinikov A, Maini PK (2004) A Lyapunov function and global properties for SIR and SEIR epidemiological models with nonlinear incidence. Math Biosci Eng 1: 57-60. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2004.1.57
    [10] Li MY, Graef JR, Wang L, et al. (1999) Global dynamics of a SEIR model with varying total population size. Math Biosci 160: 191-213. doi: 10.1016/S0025-5564(99)00030-9
    [11] Li G, Jin Z (2005) Global stability of a SEIR epidemic model with infectious force in latent, infected and immune period. Chaos Solitons Fractals 25: 1177-1184. doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2004.11.062
    [12] Li MY, Muldowney JS (1995) Global stability for the SEIR model in epidemiology. Math Biosci 12: 155-164.
    [13] Zhang J, Ma Z (2003) Global dynamics of an SEIR epidemic model with saturating contact rate. Math Biosci 185: 15-32. doi: 10.1016/S0025-5564(03)00087-7
    [14] WHO (2020) Coronavirus disease (COVID-2019) situation reports.Available from: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports.
    [15] Rothe C, Schunk M, Sothmann P, et al. (2020) Transmission of 2019-nCoV Infection from an Asymptomatic Contact in Germany. New Eng J 382: 970-971. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc2001468
    [16] African Future (2020) Algerian health minister confirms first COVID-19 case.Available from: https://africatimes.com/2020/02/25/algerian-health-minister-confirms-first-covid-19-case/.
    [17] COVID-19 pandemic in Algeria (2020) Available from: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pand%C3%A9mie_de_Covid-19_en_Alg%C3%A9rie.
    [18] Epidemiological map (in Arabic and French) (2020) COVID-19-Algérie - Evolution de la situation (in Arabic and French).Available from: http://covid19.sante.gov.dz/carte/.
    [19] Jia J, Ding J, Liu S, et al. (2020) Modeling the Control of COVID-19: Impact of Policy Interventions and Meteorological Factors. Electron J Differ Equations 23: 1-24.
    [20] Kuniya T (2020) Prediction of the Epidemic Peak of Coronavirus Disease in Japan, 2020. J Clin Med 9: 1-7. doi: 10.3390/jcm9030789
    [21] Liu Y, Gayle A, Wilder Smith A, et al. (2020) The reproductive number of COVID-19 is higher compared to SARS coronavirus. J Travel Med 27: 1-4.
    [22] Liu Z, Magal P, Seydi O, et al. (2020) Understanding Unreported Cases in the COVID-19 Epidemic Outbreak in Wuhan, China, and the Importance of Major Public Health Interventions. Biology 9: 1-22.
    [23] Volpert V, Banerjee M, Petrovskii S (2020) On a quarantine model of coronavirus infection and data analysis. Math Model Nat Phenom 15: 1-6. doi: 10.1051/mmnp/2020006
    [24] Diekmann O, Heesterbeek JAP, Metz JAJ (1990) On the definition and the computation of the basic reproduction ratio R0 in models for infectious diseases in heterogeneous populations. J Math Biol 28: 365-382. doi: 10.1007/BF00178324
    [25] Van den Driessche P, Watmough J (2002) Reproduction numbers and sub-threshold endemic equilibria for compartmental models of disease transmission. Math Biosci 180: 29-48. doi: 10.1016/S0025-5564(02)00108-6
    [26] Sanche S, Lin YT, Xu C, et al. (2020) High Contagiousness and Rapid Spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2. Emerg Infect Diseases 26: 1-4. doi: 10.3201/eid2607.200282
    [27] Liu Y, Gayle AA, Wilder-Smith A, et al. (2020) The reproductive number of COVID-19 is higher compared to SARS coronavirus. J Travel Med 27: 1-4.
    [28] Anderson RM, Heesterbeek H, Klinkenberg D, et al. (2020) How will country-based mitigation measures influence the course of the COVID-19 epidemic? Lancet 395: 931-934. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30567-5
    [29] Zou L, Ruan F, Huang M, et al. (2020) SARS-CoV-2 viral load in upper respiratory specimens of infected patients. N Engl J Med .
    [30] Li Q, Guan X, Wu P, et al. (2020) Early transmission dynamics in Wuhan, China, of novel coronavirus-infected pneumonia. N Engl J Med .
    [31] Office National des Statistiques (in French) (2020) Available from: http://www.ons.dz/-Demographie-.html.

  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Ahmed A Mohsen, Hassan Fadhil AL-Husseiny, Xueyong Zhou, Khalid Hattaf, Global stability of COVID-19 model involving the quarantine strategy and media coverage effects, 2020, 7, 2327-8994, 587, 10.3934/publichealth.2020047
    2. Aka Christian Euloge Mouvoh, Anass Bouchnita, Aissam Jebrane, 2020, A contact-structured SEIR model to assess the impact of lockdown measures on the spread of COVID-19 in Morocco’s population, 978-1-7281-6921-7, 1, 10.1109/ICECOCS50124.2020.9314462
    3. Mohamed Lounis, Juarez dos Santos Azevedo, Application of a Generalized SEIR Model for COVID-19 in Algeria, 2021, 5, 25424742, em0150, 10.21601/ejosdr/9675
    4. Abdelfatah Kouidere, Driss Kada, Omar Balatif, Mostafa Rachik, Mouhcine Naim, Optimal control approach of a mathematical modeling with multiple delays of the negative impact of delays in applying preventive precautions against the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic with a case study of Brazil and cost-effectiveness, 2021, 142, 09600779, 110438, 10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110438
    5. Anass Bouchnita, Abdennasser Chekroun, Aissam Jebrane, Mathematical Modeling Predicts That Strict Social Distancing Measures Would Be Needed to Shorten the Duration of Waves of COVID-19 Infections in Vietnam, 2021, 8, 2296-2565, 10.3389/fpubh.2020.559693
    6. Shi Yin, Nan Zhang, Prevention schemes for future pandemic cases: mathematical model and experience of interurban multi-agent COVID-19 epidemic prevention, 2021, 0924-090X, 10.1007/s11071-021-06385-4
    7. H. Ferjouchia, A. Kouidere, O. Zakary, M. Rachik, Optimal control strategy of COVID-19 spread in Morocco using SEIRD model, 2021, 7, 2351-8227, 66, 10.2478/mjpaa-2021-0007
    8. Firdos Khan, Mohamed Lounis, Short-term forecasting of daily infections, fatalities and recoveries about COVID-19 in Algeria using statistical models, 2021, 10, 2314-8543, 10.1186/s43088-021-00136-5
    9. M. Y. Hamada, Tamer El-Azab, H. El-Metwally, Bifurcations and dynamics of a discrete predator–prey model of ricker type, 2023, 69, 1598-5865, 113, 10.1007/s12190-022-01737-8
    10. Lin Feng, Ziren Chen, Harold A. Lay Jr., Khaled Furati, Abdul Khaliq, Data driven time-varying SEIR-LSTM/GRU algorithms to track the spread of COVID-19, 2022, 19, 1551-0018, 8935, 10.3934/mbe.2022415
    11. Zhenyong Li, Ting Li, Weijun Xu, Yan Shao, Dynamic modelling and optimal control of herd behaviour with time delay and media, 2022, 10, 2164-2583, 789, 10.1080/21642583.2022.2123059
    12. Svetozar Margenov, Nedyu Popivanov, Iva Ugrinova, Stanislav Harizanov, Tsvetan Hristov, 2022, 2528, 0094-243X, 080010, 10.1063/5.0106519
    13. Abdelhamid Ajbar, Rubayyi T. Alqahtani, Mourad Boumaza, Dynamics of an SIR-Based COVID-19 Model With Linear Incidence Rate, Nonlinear Removal Rate, and Public Awareness, 2021, 9, 2296-424X, 10.3389/fphy.2021.634251
    14. Abdennour Sebbagh, Sihem Kechida, EKF-SIRD model algorithm for predicting the coronavirus (COVID-19) spreading dynamics, 2022, 12, 2045-2322, 10.1038/s41598-022-16496-6
    15. Patikiri Arachchige Don Shehan Nilmantha Wijesekara, Yu-Kai Wang, A Mathematical Epidemiological Model (SEQIJRDS) to Recommend Public Health Interventions Related to COVID-19 in Sri Lanka, 2022, 2, 2673-8112, 793, 10.3390/covid2060059
    16. Marcelo Bongarti, Luke Diego Galvan, Lawford Hatcher, Michael R. Lindstrom, Christian Parkinson, Chuntian Wang, Andrea L. Bertozzi, Alternative SIAR models for infectious diseases and applications in the study of non-compliance, 2022, 32, 0218-2025, 1987, 10.1142/S0218202522500464
    17. Ran Liu, Lixing Zhu, Specification testing for ordinary differential equation models with fixed design and applications to COVID-19 epidemic models, 2023, 180, 01679473, 107616, 10.1016/j.csda.2022.107616
    18. Mohamed Mehdaoui, Abdesslem Lamrani Alaoui, Mouhcine Tilioua, Dynamical analysis of a stochastic non-autonomous SVIR model with multiple stages of vaccination, 2022, 1598-5865, 10.1007/s12190-022-01828-6
    19. M.T. Rouabah, A. Tounsi, N.E. Belaloui, Genetic algorithm with cross-validation-based epidemic model and application to the early diffusion of COVID-19 in Algeria, 2021, 14, 24682276, e01050, 10.1016/j.sciaf.2021.e01050
    20. Qu Haidong, Mati ur Rahman, Muhammad Arfan, Fractional model of smoking with relapse and harmonic mean type incidence rate under Caputo operator, 2023, 69, 1598-5865, 403, 10.1007/s12190-022-01747-6
    21. Yudan Ma, Ming Zhao, Yunfei Du, Impact of the strong Allee effect in a predator-prey model, 2022, 7, 2473-6988, 16296, 10.3934/math.2022890
    22. Yuncheng Xu, Xiaojun Sun, Hua Hu, Extinction and stationary distribution of a stochastic SIQR epidemic model with demographics and non-monotone incidence rate on scale-free networks, 2022, 68, 1598-5865, 3367, 10.1007/s12190-021-01645-3
    23. Sarafa A. Iyaniwura, Musa Rabiu, Jummy F. David, Jude D. Kong, Cecilia Ximenez, The basic reproduction number of COVID-19 across Africa, 2022, 17, 1932-6203, e0264455, 10.1371/journal.pone.0264455
    24. Jinxing Guan, Yang Zhao, Yongyue Wei, Sipeng Shen, Dongfang You, Ruyang Zhang, Theis Lange, Feng Chen, Transmission dynamics model and the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic: applications and challenges, 2022, 2, 2749-9642, 89, 10.1515/mr-2021-0022
    25. Lubna Pinky, Hana M. Dobrovolny, Epidemiological Consequences of Viral Interference: A Mathematical Modeling Study of Two Interacting Viruses, 2022, 13, 1664-302X, 10.3389/fmicb.2022.830423
    26. Antoine Baker, Indaco Biazzo, Alfredo Braunstein, Giovanni Catania, Luca Dall’Asta, Alessandro Ingrosso, Florent Krzakala, Fabio Mazza, Marc Mézard, Anna Paola Muntoni, Maria Refinetti, Stefano Sarao Mannelli, Lenka Zdeborová, Epidemic mitigation by statistical inference from contact tracing data, 2021, 118, 0027-8424, 10.1073/pnas.2106548118
    27. Moumita Ghosh, Samhita Das, Pritha Das, Dynamics and control of delayed rumor propagation through social networks, 2022, 68, 1598-5865, 3011, 10.1007/s12190-021-01643-5
    28. A. Sreenivasulu, B. V. Appa Rao, Stability and controllability for Volterra integro-dynamical matrix Sylvester impulsive system on time scales, 2022, 68, 1598-5865, 3705, 10.1007/s12190-021-01688-6
    29. Chia-Hsien Tang, Yen-Hsien Lee, Win Liu, Li Wei, Effect of the Universal Health Coverage Healthcare System on Stock Returns During COVID-19: Evidence From Global Stock Indices, 2022, 10, 2296-2565, 10.3389/fpubh.2022.919379
    30. Salih Djilali, Soufiane Bentout, Sunil Kumar, Tarik Mohammed Touaoula, Approximating the asymptomatic infectious cases of the COVID-19 disease in Algeria and India using a mathematical model, 2022, 13, 1793-9623, 10.1142/S1793962322500283
    31. Selain Kasereka, Glody Zohinga, Vogel Kiketa, Ruffin-Benoît Ngoie, Eddy Mputu, Nathanaël Kasoro, Kyamakya Kyandoghere, Equation-Based Modeling vs. Agent-Based Modeling with Applications to the Spread of COVID-19 Outbreak, 2023, 11, 2227-7390, 253, 10.3390/math11010253
    32. Xinghua Hu, Yimei Xu, Jianpu Guo, Tingting Zhang, Yuhang Bi, Wei Liu, Xiaochuan Zhou, A Complete Information Interaction-Based Bus Passenger Flow Control Model for Epidemic Spread Prevention, 2022, 14, 2071-1050, 8032, 10.3390/su14138032
    33. Yue Deng, Siming Xing, Meixia Zhu, Jinzhi Lei, Impact of insufficient detection in COVID-19 outbreaks, 2021, 18, 1551-0018, 9727, 10.3934/mbe.2021476
    34. Md. Mulk, Kazi Nusrat Islam, Md. Haider Ali Biswas, Modeling and numerical analysis for mechanical characterization of soft tissue mechanism applying inverse finite element technique, 2023, 9, 2297-4687, 10.3389/fams.2023.1064130
    35. Yuan Yuan, Xianlong Fu, Dynamics of an age-structured HIV model with general nonlinear infection rate, 2023, 88, 0272-4960, 308, 10.1093/imamat/hxad010
    36. Xiangyu Tang, Yujuan Chen, Mengxin Chen, Analysis of the Diffusion SIR Epidemic Model With Networked Delay and Nonlinear Incidence Rate, 2024, 2024, 2314-4629, 10.1155/2024/5739758
    37. Ishwor Thapa, Dario Ghersi, Modeling preferential attraction to infected hosts in vector-borne diseases, 2023, 11, 2296-2565, 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1276029
    38. Hadi Barzegar, Alireza Eshghi, Abtin Ijadi Maghsoodi, Amir Mosavi, Optimal Control for Economic Development During the Pandemic, 2024, 12, 2169-3536, 2445, 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3337825
    39. Ming Lu, Xu-yang Zheng, Wei-nan Jia, Chun-zhi Tian, Analysis and prediction of improved SEIR transmission dynamics model: taking the second outbreak of COVID-19 in Italy as an example, 2023, 11, 2296-2565, 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1223039
    40. Chih-Li Sung, Ying Hung, Efficient calibration for imperfect epidemic models with applications to the analysis of COVID-19, 2024, 73, 0035-9254, 47, 10.1093/jrsssc/qlad083
    41. Archana Mishra, Bimal Kumar Mishra, Ajit Kumar Keshri, Quarantine Model on the Transmission of Ebola Virus Disease in the Human Population with Infectious Dead Class, 2023, 9, 2349-5103, 10.1007/s40819-023-01608-1
    42. Shuqing Yang, Chunping Jia, Jia-Fang Zhang, Complex dynamics of an SIRS epidemic model with non-monotone incidence and saturated cure rate, 2024, 112, 0924-090X, 8695, 10.1007/s11071-024-09480-4
    43. Lahna Idres, Moundir Lassassi, Sensitization against Covid-19 in Algeria: Which communication strategies?, 2024, 111, 22124209, 104718, 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104718
    44. Marian Petrica, Ionel Popescu, Inverse problem for parameters identification in a modified SIRD epidemic model using ensemble neural networks, 2023, 16, 1756-0381, 10.1186/s13040-023-00337-x
    45. Qi Zhou, Xinzhong Xu, Qimin Zhang, Dynamics and calculation of the basic reproduction number for a nonlocal dispersal epidemic model with air pollution, 2023, 69, 1598-5865, 3205, 10.1007/s12190-023-01867-7
    46. Dipo Aldila, Ranandha P. Dhanendra, Sarbaz H. A. Khoshnaw, Juni Wijayanti Puspita, Putri Zahra Kamalia, Muhammad Shahzad, Understanding HIV/AIDS dynamics: insights from CD4+T cells, antiretroviral treatment, and country-specific analysis, 2024, 12, 2296-2565, 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1324858
    47. Zia Ullah Khan, Mati ur Rahman, Muhammad Arfan, Salah Boulaaras, The artificial neural network approach for the transmission of malicious codes in wireless sensor networks with Caputo derivative, 2024, 37, 0894-3370, 10.1002/jnm.3256
    48. Jinxiang Zhan, Yongchang Wei, Dynamical behavior of a stochastic non-autonomous distributed delay heroin epidemic model with regime-switching, 2024, 184, 09600779, 115024, 10.1016/j.chaos.2024.115024
    49. Anwarud Din, Yongjin Li, Ergodic stationary distribution of age-structured HBV epidemic model with standard incidence rate, 2024, 112, 0924-090X, 9657, 10.1007/s11071-024-09537-4
    50. Xin Xie, Lijun Pei, Long-Term Prediction of Large-Scale and Sporadic COVID-19 Epidemics Induced by the Original Strain in China Based on the Improved Nonautonomous Delayed Susceptible-Infected-Recovered-Dead and Susceptible-Infected-Removed Models, 2024, 19, 1555-1415, 10.1115/1.4064720
    51. Sami Ullah Khan, Saif Ullah, Shuo Li, Almetwally M. Mostafa, Muhammad Bilal Riaz, Nouf F. AlQahtani, Shewafera Wondimagegnhu Teklu, A novel simulation-based analysis of a stochastic HIV model with the time delay using high order spectral collocation technique, 2024, 14, 2045-2322, 10.1038/s41598-024-57073-3
    52. Abdellah Ouakka, Abdelhai Elazzouzi, Zakia Hammouch, An SVIQR model with vaccination-age, general nonlinear incidence rate and relapse: Dynamics and simulations, 2025, 18, 1793-5245, 10.1142/S1793524523500924
    53. Arzu Unal, Elif Demirci, Parameter estimation for a SEIRS model with COVID-19 data of Türkiye, 2023, 31, 1844-0835, 229, 10.2478/auom-2023-0041
    54. Li-Ping Gao, Can-Jun Zheng, Ting-Ting Tian, Alie Brima Tia, Michael K. Abdulai, Kang Xiao, Cao Chen, Dong-Lin Liang, Qi Shi, Zhi-Guo Liu, Xiao-Ping Dong, Spatiotemporal prevalence of COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 variants in Africa, 2025, 13, 2296-2565, 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1526727
    55. Puhua Niu, Byung-Jun Yoon, Xiaoning Qian, 2024, Calibration of Compartmental Epidemiological Models via Graybox Bayesian Optimization, 979-8-3503-5155-2, 1, 10.1109/BHI62660.2024.10913555
    56. Olumuyiwa James Peter, Oluwatosin Babasolac, Mayowa Micheal Ojo, Andrew Omame, A mathematical model for assessing the effectiveness of vaccination in controlling Mpox dynamics and mitigating disease burden in Nigeria and the Democratic Republic of Congo, 2025, 1598-5865, 10.1007/s12190-025-02455-7
    57. Anass Bouchnita, Jean-Pierre Llored, Les intelligences artificielles comme outils au service de la santé : limites et perspectives, 2021, N° 2, 2606-6645, 36, 10.3917/dsso.082.0036
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2020 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索
AIMS Public Health
3.1 4.8

Metrics

Article views(9115) PDF downloads(568) Cited by(57)

Preview PDF
Download XML
Export Citation
Article outline
   Introduction
   Materials and method
   Results
   Conclusion
References

Figures and Tables

Figures(13)  /  Tables(2)

Other Articles By Authors

Related pages

Tools

Copyright © AIMS Press

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog