Dataset Information

Multivariate visualization of the global COVID-19 pandemic: A comparison of 161 countries.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The aim of the study was to visualize the global spread of the COVID-19 pandemic over the first 90 days, through the principal component analysis approach of dimensionality reduction.

Methods

This study used data from the Global COVID-19 Index provided by PEMANDU Associates. The sample, representing 161 countries, comprised the number of confirmed cases, deaths, stringency indices, population density and GNI per capita (USD). Correlation matrices were computed to reveal the association between the variables at three time points: day-30, day-60 and day-90. Three separate principal component analyses were computed for similar time points, and several standardized plots were produced.

Results

Confirmed cases and deaths due to COVID-19 showed positive but weak correlation with stringency and GNI per capita. Through principal component analysis, the first two principal components captured close to 70% of the variance of the data. The first component can be viewed as the severity of the COVID-19 surge in countries, whereas the second component largely corresponded to population density, followed by GNI per capita of countries. Multivariate visualization of the two dominating principal components provided a standardized comparison of the situation in the161 countries, performed on day-30, day-60 and day-90 since the first confirmed cases in countries worldwide.

Conclusion

Visualization of the global spread of COVID-19 showed the unequal severity of the pandemic across continents and over time. Distinct patterns in clusters of countries, which separated many European countries from those in Africa, suggested a contrast in terms of stringency measures and wealth of a country. The African continent appeared to fare better in terms of the COVID-19 pandemic and the burden of mortality in the first 90 days. A noticeable worsening trend was observed in several countries in the same relative time frame of the disease's first 90 days, especially in the United States of America.

SUBMITTER: Teh JKL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8162616 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To date, non-pharmacological interventions (NPI) have been the mainstay for controlling the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. While NPIs are effective in preventing health systems overload, these long-term measures are likely to have significant adverse economic consequences. Therefore, many countries are currently considering to lift the NPIs-increasing the likelihood of disease resurgence. In this regard, dynamic NPIs, with intervals of relaxed social distancing, may provide a more suitable alternative. However, the ideal frequency and duration of intermittent NPIs, and the ideal "break" when interventions can be temporarily relaxed, remain uncertain, especially in resource-poor settings. We employed a multivariate prediction model, based on up-to-date transmission and clinical parameters, to simulate outbreak trajectories in 16 countries, from diverse regions and economic categories. In each country, we then modelled the impacts on intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and deaths over an 18-month period for following scenarios: (1) no intervention, (2) consecutive cycles of mitigation measures followed by a relaxation period, and (3) consecutive cycles of suppression measures followed by a relaxation period. We defined these dynamic interventions based on reduction of the mean reproduction number during each cycle, assuming a basic reproduction number (R0) of 2.2 for no intervention, and subsequent effective reproduction numbers (R) of 0.8 and 0.5 for illustrative dynamic mitigation and suppression interventions, respectively. We found that dynamic cycles of 50-day mitigation followed by a 30-day relaxation reduced transmission, however, were unsuccessful in lowering ICU hospitalizations below manageable limits. By contrast, dynamic cycles of 50-day suppression followed by a 30-day relaxation kept the ICU demands below the national capacities. Additionally, we estimated that a significant number of new infections and deaths, especially in resource-poor countries, would be averted if these dynamic suppression measures were kept in place over an 18-month period. This multi-country analysis demonstrates that intermittent reductions of R below 1 through a potential combination of suppression interventions and relaxation can be an effective strategy for COVID-19 pandemic control. Such a "schedule" of social distancing might be particularly relevant to low-income countries, where a single, prolonged suppression intervention is unsustainable. Efficient implementation of dynamic suppression interventions, therefore, confers a pragmatic option to: (1) prevent critical care overload and deaths, (2) gain time to develop preventive and clinical measures, and (3) reduce economic hardship globally.