Loading [MathJax]/jax/element/mml/optable/BasicLatin.js
Review

COVID-19 pandemic containment in the Caribbean Region: A review of case-management and public health strategies

  • COVID-19 emerged initially from Wuhan, Hubei province, China, in late December 2019, and since then, it has spread globally to be declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. The Caribbean region started reporting COVID-19 cases in early March 2020, triggering new regional public health crises. The initial suspects and confirmed cases across the Caribbean countries were mainly imported cases and from cruise ships. The clinical manifestations varied from fever, cough, and malaise in mild cases to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and shock in severe cases. The Caribbean Public Health Agency has provided frequent updates on the preventive strategies and quarantine measures across the Caribbean member states. COVID-19 has had a serious impact on the Caribbean region's health system, economy, and psychology. This review presents the Caribbean perspective of COVID-19, detailing the epidemiology, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, management, and preventive and surveillance measures. Vaccine hesitancy was found to be a major challenge that needs appropriate health education strategies to address the public. Strong leadership and regional collaboration among the Caribbean member states are necessary to provide optimal real-time data to the public and implement appropriate and effective guidelines in the island states.

    Citation: Srikanth Umakanthan, Anuradha Chauhan, Madan Mohan Gupta, Pradeep Kumar Sahu, Maryann M Bukelo, Vijay Kumar Chattu. COVID-19 pandemic containment in the Caribbean Region: A review of case-management and public health strategies[J]. AIMS Public Health, 2021, 8(4): 665-681. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2021053

    Related Papers:

    [1] Hamdy M. Youssef, Najat A. Alghamdi, Magdy A. Ezzat, Alaa A. El-Bary, Ahmed M. Shawky . A new dynamical modeling SEIR with global analysis applied to the real data of spreading COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(6): 7018-7044. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020362
    [2] Tianfang Hou, Guijie Lan, Sanling Yuan, Tonghua Zhang . Threshold dynamics of a stochastic SIHR epidemic model of COVID-19 with general population-size dependent contact rate. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(4): 4217-4236. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022195
    [3] Jiying Ma, Wei Lin . Dynamics of a stochastic COVID-19 epidemic model considering asymptomatic and isolated infected individuals. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(5): 5169-5189. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022242
    [4] Fen-fen Zhang, Zhen Jin . Effect of travel restrictions, contact tracing and vaccination on control of emerging infectious diseases: transmission of COVID-19 as a case study. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(3): 3177-3201. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022147
    [5] Xinyu Bai, Shaojuan Ma . Stochastic dynamical behavior of COVID-19 model based on secondary vaccination. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(2): 2980-2997. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023141
    [6] Liping Wang, Jing Wang, Hongyong Zhao, Yangyang Shi, Kai Wang, Peng Wu, Lei Shi . Modelling and assessing the effects of medical resources on transmission of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(4): 2936-2949. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020165
    [7] Tao Chen, Zhiming Li, Ge Zhang . Analysis of a COVID-19 model with media coverage and limited resources. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(4): 5283-5307. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024233
    [8] Ziqiang Cheng, Jin Wang . Modeling epidemic flow with fluid dynamics. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(8): 8334-8360. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022388
    [9] Matthew D. Johnston, Bruce Pell . A dynamical framework for modeling fear of infection and frustration with social distancing in COVID-19 spread. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(6): 7892-7915. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020401
    [10] Sha He, Jie Yang, Mengqi He, Dingding Yan, Sanyi Tang, Libin Rong . The risk of future waves of COVID-19: modeling and data analysis. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(5): 5409-5426. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021274
  • COVID-19 emerged initially from Wuhan, Hubei province, China, in late December 2019, and since then, it has spread globally to be declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. The Caribbean region started reporting COVID-19 cases in early March 2020, triggering new regional public health crises. The initial suspects and confirmed cases across the Caribbean countries were mainly imported cases and from cruise ships. The clinical manifestations varied from fever, cough, and malaise in mild cases to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and shock in severe cases. The Caribbean Public Health Agency has provided frequent updates on the preventive strategies and quarantine measures across the Caribbean member states. COVID-19 has had a serious impact on the Caribbean region's health system, economy, and psychology. This review presents the Caribbean perspective of COVID-19, detailing the epidemiology, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, management, and preventive and surveillance measures. Vaccine hesitancy was found to be a major challenge that needs appropriate health education strategies to address the public. Strong leadership and regional collaboration among the Caribbean member states are necessary to provide optimal real-time data to the public and implement appropriate and effective guidelines in the island states.



    On December 31, 2019, a highly contagious pneumonia case with unknown origin was reported in Wuhan City, Hubei Province of China. Wuhan has been the focus of worldwide attention due to the outbreak of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The number of infections and deaths has been growing rapidly since then. COVID-19 has become a pandemic [1] and disease is creating unprecedented public health challenges worldwide. As of August 30, 2020, the disease has caused over 12.5 million confirmed cases and 843 thousand deaths in at least 188 countries and territories.

    COVID-19 is a new disease. The origin and etiology of the infection is still uncertain. There were likely substantial proportions of undetected cases in early periods [2,3,4]. Moreover, the disease incubation period ranges from 2 to 14 days [5]. During this period of time, infected individuals may not show any symptoms; thus, they may not have awareness of the infection, but they are capable of transmitting the disease to other people. Therefore, we are facing unprecedented challenges in the prevention and control of the disease. To that end, a large number of mathematical models have being proposed to improve our understanding in mitigating the pandemic (see, e.g., [1,3,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20] and the references therein). Some of these works are summarized below. Chen et al. [13] cataloged the symptoms and physical characteristics of the first 425 laboratory-confirmed cases in Wuhan. Their study shows that the basic reproduction number R0 is 2.2 and the incubation period of these early cases to be 7.5±3.4 days. Wu et al. [4] presented a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) model in which the reported value of R0 is 2.68 and they estimated that the COVID-19 epidemic was doubling every 6.4 days. Their study helped to forecast the potential domestic and international spread of COVID-19. Ndairou et al. [18] used a compartmental epidemic model to study the spread of the COVID-19 with an inclusion of super spreaders. In their case study of Wuhan, the reported value of the basic reproduction number is 0.945, indicating that the containment within Wuhan was well-controlled by the Chinese authorities. A modeling study in [4] inferred the basic reproduction number, outbreak size in Wuhan, exported cases from Wuhan, forecasting the spread in China. In [21], a modified SEIR model and an AI trained model on SARS 2003 data were proposed to predict the epidemic curve and promise for future prediction of epidemics. Lin et al. [22] used a variation of the SEIR model to study the outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan by incorporating individual behavioral change and governmental actions towards the spread of the disease. Hao et al. [23] employed a more detailed epidemic model to help understand the vigorous non-pharmaceutical intervention that has helped in keeping infection spread at the lowest in Wuhan. However, most of these mathematical models of COVID-19 dynamics are deterministic. To capture the discrete nature of human population and heterogeneity among individual hosts, a stochastic modeling approach may be more appropriate, particularly during the initiation of the infection. That motivates our work.

    The goal of this article is to develop deterministic and stochastic models to study the evolution of the disease in both short and long terms. Our focus is mathematical modeling and analysis of disease epidemic, which aims to address the important questions such as how long will it take to disease extinction and how likely the second wave of the pandemic would occur if the reopening of Wuhan is not well contained?

    The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents the deterministic ordinary differential equation (ODE) model and performs a detailed analysis on the local and global dynamics of the ODE model with constant parameters. Section 3 is dedicated to the formulation of the stochastic model and a theoretical estimate of the probability of disease extinction. In Section 4, parameter estimation is carried out to fit the publicly reported data and numerical simulations of deterministic and stochastic models are performed. Finally we conclude the paper with some discussion in Section 5.

    To study the transmission dynamics of the COVID-19 epidemic, we employ the classical SEIR epidemic modeling framework where the total human population is composed of four compartments: the susceptible, the exposed, the infected and the recovered. Let S, E, I, R denote the number of human individuals in each of the classes; thus, our deterministic model takes the form:

    dSdt=bβ(t)ISNdS,dEdt=β(t)ISN(d+α)E,dIdt=αE(d+τ+γI)I,dRdt=τIdR. (2.1)

    Here N=N(t) is the total population size at time t. The parameter b and d are the natural birth and death rates, respectively. Let N0=b/d denote the initial population size. The function β(t) is the transmission rate. This function is time dependent and assumed to be piecewise constant, which is to capture the dramatic change in the prevention and control policy in Wuhan, such as city lockdown, hospitalization and quarantine. Parameter α1 denotes the latent period, τ1 is the (mean) infectious period and γI is the disease-induced mortality rate. For simplicity of analysis, in the rest of this section, we assume that β(t)=β is constant.

    The basic reproduction number R0 in epidemic models is an important threshold parameter to understand the extinction and persistence of a disease. It is defined as the expected number of secondary infectious cases produced by a primary infected individual in an otherwise susceptible population. Using the next generation matrix method [24], we compute R0 and it is given by

    R0=αβ(d+α)(d+τ+γI).

    It is easy to verify that the deterministic model (2.1) admits at most two biologically feasible equilibrium solutions which depends on the value of R0.

    The disease-free equilibrium (DFE) E0=(N0,0,0,0) always exists and E0 is the only feasible equilibrium when R01. An endemic equilibrium (EE)

    E1=(S,E,I,R)=(N01R0βdI,d+τ+γIαI,I,τdI) (2.2)

    for which I=bβγI(R01) exists when R0>1. Note that R0>1 implies β>γI.

    The local stability of the DFE is an immediate consequence of [24,Theorem 2]. More specifically, the DFE is locally asymptotically stable for R0<1 and unstable for R0>1. The following theorem establishes the local stability of the EE of model (2.1).

    Theorem 2.1. The EE, E1, of the system (2.1) is locally asymptotically stable for R0>1.

    Proof. Let S,E,I,R be as defined above as in (2.2). Note that the Jacobian matrix of the linearized system of (2.1) at the EE E1 is

    J=(βIN+βIS(N)2dβIS(N)2βSN+βIS(N)2βIS(N)2βINβIS(N)2βIS(N)2(d+α)βSNβIS(N)2βIS(N)20α(d+τ+γI)000τd).

    Hence the corresponding characteristic equation is

    (λ+d)(λ3+a1λ2+a2λ+a3)=0,

    where

    a1=α+d+d+γI+τ+bS,a2=bS(α+d+d+γI+τ),a3=αβbR0N(R01).

    By the Routh-Hurwitz criterion, the EE is locally stable when a1>0, a3>0 and a1a2>a3. Clearly a1>0, since α,d,τ,b,γI, and S>0. Similarly, a3>0, for α,β,b,N>0 and R0>1. Now it remains to show that a1a2a3>0. Let u=α+d and v=d+τ+γI. Thus,

    a1a2a3=(u+v+bS)(bS(u+v))uvbS(11R0)=bS(u+v)2+(bS)2(u+v)uvbS(11R0)=bS(u2+v2)+(bS)2(u+v)+bSuv(1+1R0).

    This shows that a1a2a3>0.

    Thus, the local stability result of the EE follows when R0>1.

    It is clear that the biologically feasible region

    Ω={(S,E,I,R)R4+:S+E+I+RN0}

    is the positive invariant for model (2.1). The global stability of the DFE and the EE is established in the following two theorems.

    Theorem 2.2. If R01, then the DFE E0 is globally asymptotically stable in Ω.

    Proof. One can verify that

    [dEdtdIdt](FV)[EI]

    where

    F=[0β00],V=[d+α0αd+γI+τ].

    Define x=[EI]T, and u=(0,β). Consider a Lyapunov function L=uV1x. Taking the derivative of L along the solution of model (2.1) in Ω leads to

    ˙L:=dLdt=uV1dxdtuV1(FV)xu(V1FI)x.

    Note that u is the left eigenvector of the matrix V1F corresponding to the spectral radius of V1F. Since R0=ρ(FV1)=ρ(V1F), uV1F=R0u. Thus,

    ˙Lu(R01)x

    If R0<1, ˙L0 and ˙L=0 implies that ux=0. This shows that I=0. Using the second, fourth and the first equations of model (2.1), we have E=0, R=0 and S=N0. This shows that the largest invariant set on which ˙L=0 is the singleton E0.

    If R0=1, ˙L=0 and the fact uV1>0 yield S=N. By the definition of N=S+E+I+R and E,I,R0, E=I=R=0. In view of the first equation of model (2.1), S=N0=b/d. Hence, the largest invariant set on which ˙L=0 is the singleton E0. Therefore, by LaSalle's invariance principle [25], the DFE is globally asymptotically stable in Ω when R01.

    Theorem 2.3. If R0>1 and γI=0, then the unique endemic equilibrium E1 is globally asymptotically stable in the interior of Ω.

    Proof. By γI=0, dN/dt=bdN. Since N(0)=N0=b/d, N(t)N0 for all t0. Recall that E1=(S,E,I,R). Consider a Lyapunov function V as follows:

    V=(SSSlnSS)+(EEElnEE)+c(IIIlnII) (2.3)

    where c=βSIαEN. It is clear that V0 and V=0 if and only if U=U for U=S,E,I. Taking the derivative of (2.3) along the solutions of model (2.1), we have the following,

    ˙V:=dVdt=˙S(1SS)+˙E(1EE)+c˙I(1II)

    Using the equilibrium equations of model (2.1) yields

    ˙V=(bβSNIdS)(1SS)+(βSNI(d+α)E)(1EE)+c(αE(d+τ+γI)I)(1II)=dS(2SSSS)+βSNI(3SSIIEESSIIEE)

    By the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality,

    SS+SS2,SS+IEIE+SSIIEE3

    and the quantities hold if and only if S=S, E=mE and I=mI for some m>0. Substituting I=mI into the fourth equation of model (2.1) yields R=mR. Using the first equations leads to m=1. Hence the largest invariant set where ˙V=0 is the singleton E1=(S,E,I,R). It follows from the LaSalle's Invariance Principle [25], the EE E1 is globally asymptotically stable in the interior of Ω when R0>1.

    Theorems 2.2 and 2.3 show that R0 serves as a sharp threshold for disease dynamics. More specifically, the disease will die out if R0<1 and persist if R0>1.

    Epidemic ODE models typically assume that the sizes of the compartments are large enough that the mixing of members is homogeneous, or at least that there is homogeneous mixing in each subetaoup if the population is stratified by activity levels. However, at the beginning of a disease outbreak, there is a very small number of infectious individuals and the transmission of infection is indeed a stochastic event depending on heterogeneity among individuals in the population (e.g., variations in individual health conditions and disease transmissibility) and patterns of contacts between them. This suggests that the homogeneous mixing at the beginning of an epidemic may not be a good assumption and hence the ODE models may not be appropriate when the initial infection is small. To that end, we use a continuous time Markov chain (CTMC) model to study the variability of the disease dynamic, and then we apply the theory of the multitype branching process (e.g., see [26,27,28] and references therein) to approximate the dynamics of the CTMC model near the DFE.

    We use the ODE model (2.1) with constant parameters as a framework to formulate a CTMC model, which is composed of nine independent events. For simplicity, we use the same notation as in the ODE model (2.1). Let Z(t)=(S(t),E(t),I(t),R(t)) be a discrete random vector and ΔZ(t)=Z(t+Δt)Z(t) denote the change during [t,t+Δt], for t[0,). The infinitesimal transition probabilities are defined based on the ODE rates. The changes and the corresponding transition probabilities are summarized in Table 1.

    Table 1.  Transition probabilities of the CTMC model.
    Event Description ΔZ(t) Transition probability
    1 Birth of S (1, 0, 0, 0) bΔt+o(Δt)
    2 Death of S (-1, 0, 0, 0) dS(t)Δt+o(Δt)
    3 Infection of S (-1, 1, 0, 0) (βS(t)N(t)I(t))Δt+o(Δt)
    4 Natural death of E (0, -1, 0, 0) dE(t)Δt+o(Δt)
    5 Incubation loss of E (0, -1, 1, 0) αE(t)Δt+o(Δt)
    6 Natural death of I (0, 0, -1, 0) dI(t)Δt+o(Δt)
    7 Disease-induced death (0, 0, -1, 0) γII(t)Δt+o(Δt)
    8 Recovery of I (0, 0, -1, 1) τI(t)Δt+o(Δt)
    9 Natural death of R (0, 0, 0, -1) dR(t)Δt+o(Δt)

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    To investigate the dynamics of the CTMC model near the DFE (i.e., SN0), we employ the multitype branching process theory by approximating the "birth and death'' of the infection process near the origin. Assume that S=N0 and R=0 and consider only the events in Table 2. The transition rates in this table follow directly from the rates in the linearized ODE model (2.1). This leads to a multitype branching process for the exposed and infected human individuals, where a transition occurs in one of the infectious random variables, E or I.

    Table 2.  Transition probabilities riΔt+o(Δt) for the branching process approximation, where ΔX(t)=X(t+Δt)X(t).
    Event Description ΔX(t) Rate ri
    1 Infection (1, 0) βI(t)
    2 Natural death of E (-1, 0) dE(t)
    3 Incubation loss of E (-1, 1) αE(t)
    4 Loss of I (-1, 0) (d+τ+γI)I(t)

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    In general, let X=(X1,X2,,Xn) denote a vector of discrete-state random variables where Xi is the random variable corresponding to the infectious group i for i=1,2,,n. Let Xi(0)=δij where δij is the Kronecker delta with δij=1 if i=j and zero otherwise, for 1i,jn. The offspring pgf for the infectious individuals of type i is a function fi:[0,1]n[0,1] and

    fi(x1,x2,,xn)=k1=0k2=0kn=0pi(k1,k2,,kn)xk11xk22xknn

    where pi(k1,k2,,kn) denotes the probability that the individual of type i gives "birth" to kj individuals of type j, for j=1,2,,n. In our case, X=(X1,X2)=(E,I) and n=2.

    By Table 2, the offspring pgf for E is given (E(0),I(0))=(1,0) is

    f1(x1,x2)=d+αx2d+α

    and the offspring pgf for I given (E(0),I(0))=(0,1) is

    f2(x1,x2)=βx1x2+τ+γI+dβ+τ+γI+d.

    It follows from branching process theory that the key of estimating the probability of disease extinction is to determine the fixed point of the offspring pgf on [0,1]. Solving fi(q1,q2)=qi for i=1,2 on [0,1] leads to

    q1=d+αq2d+α,(q21)(c1q2+c2)=0,

    where c1=αβ and c2=(d+α)(τ+γI+d).

    Thus fixed points in terms of q2 on [0,1] are 1 and q2=c2/c1=1/R0. It is clear that 0<q2<1 if and only if R0>1, which shows that the minimal fixed point of q2 is q2=min. Thus the fixed point of () in is given by

    (3.1)

    when .

    By the theory of the multitype branching process approximation, an estimate of the probability of disease extinction is given by

    (3.2)

    and consequently, the probability of an outbreak is

    (3.3)

    where corresponds to the initial population size of the exposed class and the infected class respectively. This particularly shows that the outbreak probability is (resp. ) when the infection is initiated by one exposed (resp. infected) individual.

    The above results highlight the difference between the deterministic and stochastic dynamics; i.e., unlike the deterministic dynamics showing that the disease persists and reaches an endemic equilibrium when , the stochastic model indicates there is a positive probability of disease extinction when .

    In this section, we fit our ODE model to the public reported data, conduct a sensitivity analysis for the model parameters and predict the second wave of the pandemic in terms of the time, duration and strength. On the other hand, numerical simulations of the CTMC model are performed. In particular, we use the stochastic model to investigate the disease extinction and the first and second waves of the disease epidemics in terms of the time and the likelihood.

    Using the method of iterated filtering [29], we fit our ODE model to COVID-19 data published daily by WHO and other sources [30,31,32,33,34] from December 31, 2019 to June 28, 2020. It has been estimated that the population of Wuhan was approximately 9,000,000 people [35], so that we set in our model. The model parameters are taken from [36,37,38], which is summarized in Table 3. The other initial compartment values are set as and .

    Table 3.  Definition and value of the parameters. Here the unit of time is a day.
    Parameter Description Value
    latent period (days)
    mean infectious period (days)
    disease induced mortality rate
    crude death rate per 1000 people

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    We assume that is a piecewise constant function of time. We estimate by fitting to our data sets in five time intervals: days 0–17, days 17–28, days 28–37, days 37–42, and days greater than 42. These days were chosen as follows. Day 17 corresponds to January 23, 2020 which is the day that the citywide lockdown began in Wuhan, China [39]; Day 28 corresponds to February 2, 2020 which is the day that the centralized quarantine and treatment began [39] (and also this is the end of Period 1 in [2]); Day 37 corresponds to the first day in which clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 were included in the dataset on February 12, 2020 [40]; Day 42 corresponds to February 17, 2020 which is the day that the community universal symptom survey began and is the peak in daily active infected cases from our calculations [39]. It is well-known that the dataset of confirmed cases for COVID-19 is greatly underestimated due to various reasons such as high transmissibility, long incubation periods, low levels of testing, particularly, in the beginning and high levels of asymptomatic infections (e.g., see [2,41,42,43] and the references therein). To account for under-reported cases, we assume an ascertainment rate of before January 23, 2020 and then linearly increase the ascertainment rate from to until February 12, 2020 [2]. After February 12, 2020, the ascertainment rate is assumed to be [44]. The cumulative infections in Wuhan estimated from our model are 3049 people by January 18, 2020 and cumulative cases are estimated at 36,091 people by January 27, 2020, which is in line with the results from other studies [22,43].

    Figure 1 presents our fitted result to the data. It shows that (1) the onset of the epidemic occurs in January of 2020; (2) the epidemic lasts for about two months; (3) the situation of the epidemic is under control by March of 2020 and the disease tends to be extinct after July of 2020.

    Figure 1.  Fit to the confirmed cases for Wuhan from December 31, 2019 to June 28, 2020. Solid circles are the reported cases and the curve is the best fit to the data.

    Figure 2 plots the time-dependent effective reproduction number over the first 60 days, where

    Figure 2.  over the first 60 days.

    This indicates that the effective reproduction number is during days, and it is gradually reduced to by February 12, 2020 (Day 42) and and dropped to afterward. The details of the estimated and values are provided in Table 4.

    Table 4.  Estimated values of and .
    Parameter 0–17 17–28 28–37 37–42
    0.617 0.424 0.418 0.321 0.161
    2.4 1.65 1.625 1.25 0.625

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    As shown in Figure 3, the ODE model predicts the disease extinction after June of 2020, which is a direct consequence of the effective intervention, prevention and control strategies currently implemented in Wuhan. There arises a question: Will the second wave take place if these strategies can't be implemented properly, for instance due to economic reopening?

    Figure 3.  Impact of on the second wave of the pandemic.

    To address this question, we elevate the basic reproduction number by increasing after June 28, 2020 (175 days) at which . The simulated result of our ODE model is illustrated in Figure 3. Our fitted solution (based on the data until June 28, 2020) is displayed in black and the curves in blue (resp. orange, green, red) shows the evolution of the infected cases over time when the value of is increased to (resp. , , ) after June 28, 2020. The prediction of our ODE model shows that (a) the second wave may be much stronger than the first one; (b) the higher of the value, the sooner the second wave would take place with higher peak value. This result indicates the second wave of the pandemic would happen if the infection risk goes up, for instance, due to changes in control strategy or human behavior.

    Additionally, in this section, we conduct numerical simulations using stochastic models.

    First, we study the probability of a disease outbreak. The outbreak is assumed to be attained when the cumulative sum of and reaches . The outbreak probability is estimated from the proportion of the sample paths (out of ) of the CTMC model. Then the obtained estimate is compared to the theoretical approximation computed by the multitype branching process theory. Figure 4 displays the probability of a disease outbreak as a function of when the infection is initiated by an individual from the infected class (), where is changed by varying . In the case where the infection is initiated by an exposed individual (), the result is nearly identical to the case begun with an infected individual. This happens because of . Note that when , and and hence it follows from (3.1) that , which implies . This result indicates that the outbreak probability is (approximately) when , which is regardless of the initial condition of the infection (beginning with or ), since the human lifespan () is much longer than the disease latent period (). In both cases, (1) we find a strong agreement between the theoretical estimate (using branching process theory) and the numerical simulation of the CTMC model (using Gillespie simulation algorithm); (2) the chance of an outbreak increases as increases; (3) the disease extinction occurs with probability one (i.e., the probability of an outbreak is zero) when ; (4) unlike the deterministic model that predicts the persistence of the disease, the stochastic model indicates there is a positive chance for disease extinction.

    Figure 4.  Probability of an outbreak as a function of , where is changed by varying . The solid curve is the analytical estimate obtained by the multitype branching process approximation (i.e., ) and the stars are the result obtained from Monte Carlo simulation of the CTMC model for 10,000 simulation runs. The infection is initiated by one infected individual (i.e., ).

    Secondly, we study the time to the disease extinction and an outbreak by using the CTMC models for 10,000 simulation runs in each scenario. Figure 5 displays the conditional probability distribution of the extinction time given the extinction takes place during days, where the left (resp. right) panel displays the result when the infection starts with one exposed (resp. infected ) individual. It shows that there is a delay in the time to extinction when the infection is initiated by an exposed individual as compared to that by an infected individual . Besides, in the case of , the probability distribution of extinction time undergoes an immediate peak in the beginning and then declines rapidly as time increases. This indicates that disease extinction is expected to occur sooner with higher probability if the infection starts with one infected person. A biological interpretation of this result is that exposed individuals have to pass the incubation period to be capable of transmitting the disease to others and hence it delays the time to extinction. Figure 6 illustrates the conditional probability distribution of an outbreak given the occurrence of an outbreak during days. If we fix a time during this investigation period, we see the that the outbreak probability (the corresponding area in Figure 6) is higher in the case where infection is initiated by a person from the infected class, as compared to that initiated with a person from the exposed class.

    Figure 5.  The probability distribution of the time to disease extinction given the occurrence of the extinction during days when the infection is initiated by one individual in the (a) exposed class and (b) infected class.
    Figure 6.  The probability distribution of the time to an outbreak given the occurrence of an outbreak during days when the infection is initiated by one individual in the (a) exposed class and (b) infected class.

    Additionally, we investigate the time to the second wave of the pandemic. The current is below one (from our investigation on the ODE model). Hence, to account for the change in restrictions and intervention and human behavior after reopening, we consider four different scenarios by assuming that is elevated to , , and . Figure 7 shows the conditional probability distribution of time to the second outbreak under these four scenarios when the infection starts with one . Our result indicates that the second wave is likely to happen sooner with the higher value after reopening. The mean and standard derivation for the time to extinction and the time to the second outbreak that are associated with the two initial conditions (i.e., either or ) are summarized in Table 5 for the selected values. For instance, in the case where is elevated to after reopening, there would be about a chance of a second outbreak and the standard deviation of the time to extinction is about days. If we compare the infection initiated by an exposed individual to that initiated by an infected individual, as shown in Table 5, the average extinction time is reduced from to days, the average time to outbreak decreases from to days and the corresponding standard deviation is dropped slightly from to days. In these two scenarios, we see the difference in terms of time to extinction or outbreak is small. As increases, both disease extinction and outbreak are likely to occur sooner. More specifically, if is increased from to , the average time to the second outbreak (resp. extinction) is decreased from to days (resp. from to days) in the case of the infection starting with an infected individual. Nevertheless, our results from deterministic and stochastic models indicate that there is a possibility of the second wave if the reopening is not handled properly.

    Figure 7.  The probability distribution of the time to an outbreak given the occurrence of an outbreak during days when the infection is initiated by one individual in the infected class for (a) , (b) , (c) , and (d) .
    Table 5.  Mean and standard derivation of time to disease extinction and time to an outbreak for different values given that the occurrence of an extinction and an outbreak during days.
    Initial condition
    0.62 2.4 0.59 4.90 4.42 49.70 6.73
    0.51 2.0 0.50 5.72 5.60 64.39 8.68
    0.45 1.75 0.43 6.58 6.79 81.04 11.08
    0.39 1.5 0.34 8.03 9.11 113.57 16.11
    0.32 1.25 0.21 10.67 14.65 203.75 30.61
    0.62 2.4 0.59 2.96 4.04 47.38 6.18
    0.51 2.0 0.51 3.74 5.29 62.31 8.49
    0.45 1.75 0.43 4.62 6.57 79.28 11.04
    0.39 1.5 0.34 6.04 9.03 111.36 15.81
    0.32 1.25 0.20 9.05 15.08 201.85 30.23

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    In this paper, we propose a deterministic and stochastic modeling framework to study the ongoing epidemic dynamics of the COVID-19 in the city of Wuhan, China. The deterministic model is formulated by a system of ODEs model that is built upon the classical SEIR framework. The stochastic model is formulated by a CTMC that is derived based on the ODE model with constant parameters during the early stage of the infection. We obtain a theoretical estimate for the probability of a disease outbreak by using multitype branching process approximation. Then we conduct a detailed mathematical analysis to the ODE model with constant model parameters, and our result indicates that the basic reproduction number is served as a sharp disease threshold: the disease dies out if and persists if . In contrast, the stochastic dynamics indicate that the disease may not persist when . A parameter estimation and validation is performed to fit our ODE model to the public reported data that is corrected to address underestimation issue. Additionally, we use numerical simulations of the CTMC model to study the disease extinction and an outbreak. Our results show that if the non-pharmaceutical interventions such as quarantine and social distancing were not implemented properly, the second wave is likely to take place. There are several limitation of this work. First, our model is based on the classical SEIR epidemic framework. It would be more realistic if more compartments representing variations in the population (e.g., asymptomatic, symptomatic, hospitalized individuals and different age groups) are included. Second, it would be interesting to study the ongoing pandemic under various prevention and control strategies (e.g., the stay-at-home order, the reopening of schools and social distancing measures) with data available. Third, the epidemic patterns of COVID-19 vary significantly by countries and regions. The impact of spatial heterogeneity on the transmission and spread of COVID-19 will provide an interesting topic in future research.

    We thank the editor and reviewers for their helpful suggestions.

    The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

    All data can be supplied by the authors upon request.



    Author contributions



    Conceptualization, review of the literature, and initial draft preparation by SU, AC, MMG, PKS, and MB. Critical review, resource provision, editing, and final draft preparation by VKC. All the authors have approved the final draft before submission.

    Conflict of interest



    The authors declare no conflict of interest.

    [1] Singhal T (2020) A Review of Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19). Indian J Pediatr 87: 281-286. doi: 10.1007/s12098-020-03263-6
    [2]  Caribbean Public Health Agency (CARPHA) Available from: https://carpha.org/What-We-Do/Public-Health/Novel-Coronavirus.
    [3]  Caribbean Tourism Organization Available from: https://www.onecaribbean.org/resources/coronavirus/.
    [4] Wang C, Horby PW, Hayden FG, et al. (2020) A novel coronavirus outbreak of global health concern published correction appears in Lancet. Lancet 395: 470-473. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30185-9
    [5] World Health Organization Situation reports Available from: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports/.
    [6] World Health Organization Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Dashboard Available from: https://covid19.who.int/.
    [7] Surjit M, Liu B, Kumar P, et al. (2004) The nucleocapsid protein of the SARS coronavirus is capable of self-association through a C-terminal 209 amino acid interaction domain. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 317: 1030-1036. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2004.03.154
    [8] El Zowalaty ME, Jarhult JD (2020) From SARS to COVID-19: A previously unknown SARS-related coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) of pandemic potential infecting humans-Call for a one health approach. One Health 9: 100124. doi: 10.1016/j.onehlt.2020.100124
    [9] Peiris JS, Lai ST, Poon LL, et al. (2003) Coronavirus as a possible cause of severe acute respiratory syndrome. Lancet 361: 1319-1325. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13077-2
    [10] Zaki AM, van Boheeman S, Bestebroer TM, et al. (2012) Isolation of a novel coronavirus from a man with pneumonia in Saudi Arabia. N Engl J Med 367: 1814-1820. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1211721
    [11] Umakanthan S, Sahu P, Ranade AV, et al. (2020) Origin, transmission, diagnosis and management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Postgrad Med J 96: 753-758.
    [12] Coccia M (2021) The effects of atmospheric stability with low wind speed and of air pollution on the accelerated transmission dynamics of COVID-19. Int J Environ Stud 78: 1-27. doi: 10.1080/00207233.2020.1802937
    [13] Coccia M (2020) Factors determining the diffusion of COVID-19 and suggested strategy to prevent future accelerated viral infectivity similar to COVID. Sci Total Environ 729: 138474. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138474
    [14] Chattu VK, Chami G (2020) Global Health Diplomacy Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Strategic Opportunity for Improving Health, Peace, and Well-Being in the CARICOM Region—A Systematic Review. Soc Sci 9: 88. doi: 10.3390/socsci9050088
    [15] Coccia M (2021) Preparedness of countries to face covid-19 pandemic crisis: Strategic positioning and underlying structural factors to support strategies of prevention of pandemic threats. Environ Res 203: 111678. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2021.111678
    [16] Frederiksen L, Zhang Y, Foged C, et al. (2020) The long road toward COVID-19 herd immunity: vaccine platform technologies and mass immunization strategies. Front Immunol 11: 1817. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01817
    [17] Freed GL (2021) Actionable lessons for the US COVID vaccine program. Isr J Health Pol Res 10: 14. doi: 10.1186/s13584-021-00452-2
    [18] DeRoo Schaffer S, Pudalov NJ, Fu LY (2020) Planning for a COVID-19 vaccination program. J Am Med Assoc 323: 2458-2459. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.8711
    [19] Dooling K, McClung N, Chamberland M, et al. (2020) The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' interim recommendation for allocating initial supplies of COVID-19 vaccine—United States, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 69: 1857-1859. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6949e1
    [20] Murphy J, Vallières F, Bentall RP, et al. (2021) Psychological characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance in Ireland and the United Kingdom. Nat Commun 12: 29. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-20226-9
    [21] Verger P, Peretti-Watel P (2021) Understanding the determinants of acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines: a challenge in a fast-moving situation. Lancet Public Health 6: e195-e196. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(21)00029-3
    [22] Echoru I, Ajambo PD, Keirania E, et al. (2021) Sociodemographic factors associated with acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine and clinical trials in Uganda: a cross-sectional study in western Uganda. BMC Public Health 21: 1106. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11197-7
    [23] Viswanath K, Bekalu M, Dhawan D, et al. (2021) Individual and social determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. BMC Public Health 21: 818. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10862-1
    [24] James KH (2009) In situ origin of the Caribbean: discussion of data. Geological Society, London, Special Publications 328: 77-125. doi: 10.1144/SP328.3
    [25] Caribbean Public Health Agency (CARPHA) Situation reports Available from: https://carpha.org/Portals/0/Documents/COVID%20Situation%20Reports/Situation%20Report%2040%20-%20May%201,%202020.pdf.
    [26]  Government Dominican Republic Available from: https://www.dominicanrepublic.com/health-care/.
    [27]  Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Cuba Available from: http://www.minrex.gob.cu/en.
    [28] Talukdar D, Stojkovski K, Suarez DB, et al. (2021) Role of Information Technology in COVID-19 Vaccination Drive: An Analysis of the COVID-19 Global Beliefs, Behaviors, and Norms Survey. Cureus 13: e15922.
    [29] Guzik TJ, Mohiddin SA, Dimarco A, et al. (2020) COVID-19 and the cardiovascular system: implications for risk assessment, diagnosis, and treatment options. Cardiovasc Res 116: 1666-1687. doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvaa106
    [30] Felsenstein S, Herbert JA, McNamara PS, et al. (2020) COVID-19: Immunology and treatment options. Clin Immunol 215: 108448. doi: 10.1016/j.clim.2020.108448
    [31] Tobin NH, Aldrovandi GM (2013) Immunology of pediatric HIV infection. Immunol Rev 254: 143-169. doi: 10.1111/imr.12074
    [32] South AM, Diz DI, Chappell MC (2020) COVID-19, ACE2, and the cardiovascular consequences. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 318: H1084-H1090. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.00217.2020
    [33] Louten J (2016) Virus Transmission and Epidemiology. Essent Hum Virol 2016: 71-92.
    [34] Coccia M (2020) How do low wind speeds and high levels of air pollution support the spread of COVID-19? Atmos Pollut Res 12: 437-445. doi: 10.1016/j.apr.2020.10.002
    [35] Coccia M (2021) Effects of the spread of COVID-19 on public health of polluted cities: results of the first wave for explaining the dejà vu in the second wave of COVID-19 pandemic and epidemics of future vital agents. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 28: 19147-19154. doi: 10.1007/s11356-020-11662-7
    [36] Joynt GM, Wu WK (2020) Understanding COVID-19: what does viral RNA load really mean? Lancet Infect Dis 20: 635-636. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30237-1
    [37] Chen N, Zhou M, Dong X, et al. (2020) Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. Lancet 395: 507-513. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30211-7
    [38] Conti P, Ronconi G, Caraffa A, et al. (2020) Induction of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-1 and IL-6) and lung inflammation by Coronavirus-19 (COVI-19 or SARS-CoV-2): anti-inflammatory strategies. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents 34: 1.
    [39] Tahamtan A, Ardebili A (2020) Real-time RT-PCR in COVID-19 detection: issues affecting the results. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 20: 453-454. doi: 10.1080/14737159.2020.1757437
    [40] Shen M, Zhou Y, Ye J, et al. (2020) Recent advances and perspectives of nucleic acid detection for coronavirus. J Pharm Anal 10: 97-101. doi: 10.1016/j.jpha.2020.02.010
    [41] Mardani R, Ahmadi Vasmehjani A, Zali F, et al. (2020) Laboratory Parameters in Detection of COVID-19 Patients with Positive RT-PCR; a Diagnostic Accuracy Study. Arch Acad Emerg Med 8: e43.
    [42] Moldovan DA, Baghiu MD, Balas A, et al. (2015) The Value of the “Lab-Score” Method in Identifying Febrile Infants at Risk for Serious Bacterial Infections. J Crit Care Med (Targu Mures) 1: 11-17. doi: 10.1515/jccm-2015-0003
    [43] Zhou S, Wang Y, Zhu T, et al. (2020) CT features of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia in 62 patients in Wuhan, China. Am J Roentgenol 2020: 1-8.
    [44] Xu Z, Shi L, Wang Y (2020) Pathological findings of COVID-19 associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Lancet Respir Med 8: 420-422. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30076-X
    [45] Gupta MM (2021) Impact of Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic on classroom teaching: Challenges of online classes and solutions. J Educ Health Promot 10: 155.
    [46] Goh KJ, Choong MC, Cheong EH, et al. (2020) Rapid Progression to Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Review of Current Understanding of Critical Illness from COVID-19 Infection. Ann Acad Med Singap 49: 1-9. doi: 10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.2019252
    [47] Wujtewicz M, Dylczyk-Sommer A, Aszkiełowicz A, et al. (2020) COVID-19 - what should anaethesiologists and intensivists know about it? Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther 52: 34-41. doi: 10.5114/ait.2020.93756
    [48] Arabi YM, Mandourah Y, Hameed FA, et al. (2018) Corticosteroid therapy for critically ill patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 197: 757-767. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201706-1172OC
    [49] Fowler AA, Truwit JD, Hite RD, et al. (2019) Effect of vitamin C infusion on organ failure and biomarkers of inflammation and vascular injury in patients with sepsis and severe acute respiratory failure: the CITRIS-ALI randomized clinical trial. JAMA 322: 1261-1270. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.11825
    [50] Chattu VK, Singh B, Kaur J, et al. (2021) COVID-19 Vaccine, TRIPS, and Global Health Diplomacy: India's Role at the WTO Platform. Biomed Res Int 2021: 6658070. doi: 10.1155/2021/6658070
    [51] Singh B, Chattu VK (2021) Prioritizing ‘Equity’ in COVID-19 Vaccine Distribution through Global Health Diplomacy. Health Promot 11: 2.
    [52] Taghizade S, Chattu VK, Jaafaripooyan E, et al. (2021) COVID-19 pandemic as an excellent opportunity for Global Health Diplomacy. Front Public Health 9: 655021. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.655021
    [53] Syed Alwi S, Rafidah E, Zurraini A, et al. (2021) A survey onCOVID-19 vaccine acceptance and concern among Malaysians. BMC Public Health 21: 1129. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11071-6
    [54] Schwarzinger M, Watson V, Arwidson P, et al. (2021) COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in a representative working-age population in France: a survey experiment based on vaccine characteristics. Lancet Public Health 6: e210-e221. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(21)00012-8
    [55] Elhadi M, Alsoufi A, Alhadi A, et al. (2021) Knowledge, attitude, and acceptance of healthcare workers and the public regarding the COVID-19 vaccine: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health 21: 955. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10987-3
    [56] Seale H, Heywood AE, Leask J, et al. (2021) Examining Australian public perceptions and behaviors towards a future COVID-19 vaccine. BMC Infect Dis 21: 120. doi: 10.1186/s12879-021-05833-1
    [57] Harrison EA, Wu JW (2020) Vaccine confidence in the time of COVID-19. Eur J Epidemiol 35: 325-330. doi: 10.1007/s10654-020-00634-3
    [58] Bernard Stoecklin S, Rolland P, Silue Y, et al. (2020) First cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in France: surveillance, investigations and control measures, January 2020. Euro Surveill 25: 2000094. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.6.2000094
    [59] Ng Y, Li Z, Chua YX, et al. (2020) Evaluation of the effectiveness of surveillance and containment measures for the first 100 patients with COVID-19 in Singapore- January 2-February 29, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 69: 307-311. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6911e1
    [60] Umakanthan S, Chattu VK, Ranade AV, et al. (2021) A rapid review of recent advances in diagnosis, treatment and vaccination for COVID-19. AIMS Public Health 8: 137-153. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2021011
    [61] Tang B, Xia F, Tang S, et al. (2020) The effectiveness of quarantine and isolation determine the trend of the COVID-19 epidemics in the final phase of the current outbreak in China. Int J Infect Dis 95: 288-293. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.03.018
    [62] Wilder-Smith A, Chiew CJ, Lee VJ (2020) Can we contain the COVID-19 outbreak with the same measures as for SARS? Lancet Infect Dis 20: e102-e107. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30129-8
    [63] Armbruster B, Brandeau ML (2007) Contact tracing to control infectious disease: when enough is enough. Health Care Manag Sci 10: 341-355. doi: 10.1007/s10729-007-9027-6
    [64] Caricom Today COVID-19 update Available from: https://today.caricom.org/2020/04/21/covid-19-update-april-21-grenada-curfew-and-other-statutory-regulations/.
    [65] Mohsen AA, Al-Husseiny HF, Zhou X, et al. (2020) Global stability of COVID-19 model involving the quarantine strategy and media coverage effects. AIMS Public Health 7: 587-605. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020047
    [66] Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago Ministry of Health. Media Release Archive Available from: http://www.health.gov.tt/sitepages/default.aspx?id=292.
    [67] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations for Patients with Confirmed 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) or Patients Under Investigation for 2019-nCoV in Healthcare Settings Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nCoV/hcp/infection-control.html.
    [68] Coccia M (2021) High health expenditures and low exposure of population to air pollution as critical factors that can reduce fatality rate in COVID-19 pandemic crisis: a global analysis. Environ Res 199: 111339. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2021.111339
    [69] Ho CS, Chee CY, Ho RC (2020) Mental health strategies to combat the psychological impact of COVID-19 beyond paranoia and panic. Ann Acad Med Singap 49: 155-160. doi: 10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.202043
    [70] Shigemura J, Ursano RJ, Morganstein JC, et al. (2020) Public responses to the novel 2019 coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in Japan: Mental health consequences and target populations. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 74: 281-282. doi: 10.1111/pcn.12988
    [71] Chen H, Guo J, Wang C, et al. (2020) Clinical characteristics and intrauterine vertical transmission potential of COVID-19 infection in nine pregnant women: a retrospective review of medical records. Lancet 395: 809. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30360-3
    [72] Qiao J (2020) What are the risks of COVID-19 infection in pregnant women? Lancet 395: 760. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30365-2
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Akhil Kumar Srivastav, Nico Stollenwerk, Maíra Aguiar, Kuo Shou Chiu, Deterministic and Stochastic Dynamics of COVID-19: The Case Study of Italy and Spain, 2022, 2022, 2577-7408, 1, 10.1155/2022/5780719
    2. José Enrique Amaro, José Nicolás Orce, Monte Carlo simulation of COVID-19 pandemic using Planck’s probability distribution, 2022, 218, 03032647, 104708, 10.1016/j.biosystems.2022.104708
    3. Akhil Kumar Srivasrav, Nico Stollenwerk, Joseba Bidaurrazaga Van-Dierdonck, Javier Mar, Oliver Ibarrondo, Maíra Aguiar, Constantinos Siettos, Modeling the initial phase of COVID-19 epidemic: The role of age and disease severity in the Basque Country, Spain, 2022, 17, 1932-6203, e0267772, 10.1371/journal.pone.0267772
    4. Mengyue Wang, Jiabiao Yi, Wen Jiang, Study on the virulence evolution of SARS‐CoV‐2 and the trend of the epidemics of COVID‐19, 2022, 45, 0170-4214, 6515, 10.1002/mma.8184
    5. Roman Zúñiga Macías, Humberto Gutiérrez-Pulido, Edgar Alejandro Guerrero Arroyo, Abel Palafox González, Geographical network model for COVID-19 spread among dynamic epidemic regions, 2022, 19, 1551-0018, 4237, 10.3934/mbe.2022196
    6. Haile Habenom, Mulualem Aychluh, D.L. Suthar, Qasem Al-Mdallal, S.D. Purohit, Modeling and analysis on the transmission of covid-19 Pandemic in Ethiopia, 2022, 61, 11100168, 5323, 10.1016/j.aej.2021.10.054
    7. Xueying Wang, Sunpeng Wang, Jin Wang, Libin Rong, A Multiscale Model of COVID-19 Dynamics, 2022, 84, 0092-8240, 10.1007/s11538-022-01058-8
    8. Arti Awasthi, A mathematical model for transmission dynamics of COVID-19 infection, 2023, 138, 2190-5444, 10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-03866-w
    9. A. S. Fokas, N. Dikaios, Y. C. Yortsos, An algebraic formula, deep learning and a novel SEIR-type model for the COVID-19 pandemic, 2023, 10, 2054-5703, 10.1098/rsos.230858
    10. Nurul Anis Abdul Satar, Noor Amalina Nisa Ariffin, The Performance of Fixed Step Size and Adaptive Step Size Numerical Methods for Solving Deterministic Cell-Growth Models, 2024, 23, 2224-2880, 757, 10.37394/23206.2024.23.79
    11. Ryan Benjamin, Reproduction number projection for the COVID-19 pandemic, 2023, 2023, 2731-4235, 10.1186/s13662-023-03792-2
    12. Jiacheng Song, Wangyong Lv, Yaling Deng, Zhehao Sun, A double stochastic SIS network epidemic model with nonlinear contact rate and limited medical resources, 2024, 112, 0924-090X, 6743, 10.1007/s11071-024-09291-7
    13. Igor' Vladimirovich Derevich, Anastasiya Andreevna Panova, Моделирование инфицирования в локальной атмосфере, зараженной вирусом SARS-COV-2. Стационарная концентрация вирионов, 2024, 36, 0234-0879, 67, 10.20948/mm-2024-03-05
    14. I. V. Derevich, A. A. Panova, Modeling the Spread of Viral Infection in a Local Atmosphere Infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Virus: Constant Virion Concentration, 2024, 16, 2070-0482, 698, 10.1134/S2070048224700339
    15. Svetozar Margenov, Nedyu Popivanov, Tsvetan Hristov, Veneta Koleva, Computing the COVID-19 Basic and Effective Reproduction Numbers Using Actual Data: SEIRS Model with Vaccination and Hospitalization, 2024, 12, 2227-7390, 3998, 10.3390/math12243998
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2021 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

Metrics

Article views(3599) PDF downloads(118) Cited by(10)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog