WHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
WHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Lancet Public Health. 2020 May;5(5):e289-e296. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30089-X. Epub 2020 Apr 21.
When a new infectious disease emerges, appropriate case definitions are important for clinical diagnosis and for public health surveillance. Tracking case numbers over time is important to establish the speed of spread and the effectiveness of interventions. We aimed to assess whether changes in case definitions affected inferences on the transmission dynamics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China.
We examined changes in the case definition for COVID-19 in mainland China during the first epidemic wave. We used exponential growth models to estimate how changes in the case definitions affected the number of cases reported each day. We then inferred how the epidemic curve would have appeared if the same case definition had been used throughout the epidemic.
From Jan 15 to March 3, 2020, seven versions of the case definition for COVID-19 were issued by the National Health Commission in China. We estimated that when the case definitions were changed, the proportion of infections being detected as cases increased by 7·1 times (95% credible interval [CrI] 4·8-10·9) from version 1 to 2, 2·8 times (1·9-4·2) from version 2 to 4, and 4·2 times (2·6-7·3) from version 4 to 5. If the fifth version of the case definition had been applied throughout the outbreak with sufficient testing capacity, we estimated that by Feb 20, 2020, there would have been 232 000 (95% CrI 161 000-359 000) confirmed cases in China as opposed to the 55 508 confirmed cases reported.
The case definition was initially narrow and was gradually broadened to allow detection of more cases as knowledge increased, particularly milder cases and those without epidemiological links to Wuhan, China, or other known cases. These changes should be taken into account when making inferences on epidemic growth rates and doubling times, and therefore on the reproductive number, to avoid bias.
Health and Medical Research Fund, Hong Kong.
当一种新的传染病出现时,适当的病例定义对于临床诊断和公共卫生监测都很重要。随着时间的推移跟踪病例数量对于确定传播速度和干预措施的效果非常重要。我们旨在评估病例定义的变化是否会影响对中国 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)传播动态的推断。
我们检查了中国在第一波疫情期间 COVID-19 病例定义的变化。我们使用指数增长模型来估计病例定义的变化如何影响每天报告的病例数量。然后,我们推断如果在整个疫情期间使用相同的病例定义,疫情曲线会是什么样子。
从 2020 年 1 月 15 日至 3 月 3 日,中国国家卫生健康委员会发布了七版 COVID-19 病例定义。我们估计,当病例定义发生变化时,被检测为病例的感染比例从第 1 版到第 2 版增加了 7.1 倍(95%可信区间[CrI]4.8-10.9),从第 2 版到第 4 版增加了 2.8 倍(1.9-4.2),从第 4 版到第 5 版增加了 4.2 倍(2.6-7.3)。如果在有足够检测能力的情况下,第五版病例定义适用于整个疫情,我们估计到 2020 年 2 月 20 日,中国将有 232000 例(95%CrI 161000-359000)确诊病例,而不是报告的 55508 例确诊病例。
病例定义最初较窄,随着知识的增加,逐渐扩大以检测到更多的病例,特别是症状较轻的病例和与中国武汉或其他已知病例没有流行病学联系的病例。在进行疫情增长率和倍增时间的推断,以及因此对繁殖数的推断时,应考虑这些变化,以避免出现偏差。
香港卫生与医疗研究基金。