Liangcai Zhou’s research while affiliated with Hubei Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (2)


Fig. 1 | Relative daily volume of outbound travellers from cities (prefecture level) across mainland China, January 23 -April 13, 2020. (a) All cities (n=340) in mainland China, presented with the median (solid line) and interquartile range (shading) of relative outbound flows. (b) Cities in Hubei province with Wuhan highlighted by using darker colours. Each red line represents the outflow of each city in 2020, standardized by the mean of daily outflows of each city on January 20 th -22 nd , 2020. Each blue line represents estimates of normal outflow by city under the scenario of no travel restrictions, following travel in previous years. The lines of relative volume in (b) were smoothed by using locally estimated scatterplot smoothing (LOESS) regression.
Figure 1: Relative daily volume of outbound travellers from cities (prefectural level) across mainland China during Chinese New Year (CNY) holiday, January 23 rd -February 29 th , 2020. (A) All cities in mainland China. (B) Cities in Hubei province with Wuhan highlighted by using dark colours. Each blue line represents estimates of normal outflow by city under the scenario without travel restriction, following travel in previous years. The lines of relative volume were smoothed by using locally estimated scatterplot smoothing (LOESS) regression.
Fig. 2 | Estimated epicurves of the COVID-19 outbreak under various scenarios with or without non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) by region. (a) -(c) Wuhan City. (d) -(f) Provinces outside of Hubei Province in mainland China. The blue lines present estimated transmission under current
Fig. 3 | Estimates of the COVID-19 outbreak under various scenarios of intervention timing and lifting of travel restrictions across China. (a) Estimated epicurves under interventions implemented earlier than actual timing. (b) Estimated epicurves under interventions implemented later than
Figure 3: Estimated epicurves of COVID-19 outbreak under various scenarios with or without non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) by region. The blue lines present estimated transmission under current NPIs, and each other line represents the scenario without one type of intervention. The median and interquartile range of estimates are provided here. The orange vertical line indicates the date of Wuhan's lockdown on January 23, 2020.

+12

Effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions to contain COVID-19 in China
  • Article
  • Full-text available

September 2020

·

880 Reads

·

1,256 Citations

Nature

·

Nick W. Ruktanonchai

·

Liangcai Zhou

·

[...]

·

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic1. The outbreak containment strategies in China based on non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) appear to be effective2, but quantitative research is still needed to assess the efficacy of NPIs and their timings3. Using epidemiological and anonymised human movement data4,5, here we develop a modelling framework that uses daily travel networks to simulate different outbreak and intervention scenarios across China. We estimated that there were a total of 114,325 COVID-19 cases (interquartile range 76,776 - 164,576) in mainland China as of February 29, 2020. Without NPIs, the COVID-19 cases would likely have shown a 67-fold increase (interquartile range 44 - 94) by February 29, 2020, with the effectiveness of different interventions varying. The early detection and isolation of cases was estimated to have prevented more infections than travel restrictions and contact reductions, but combined NPIs achieved the strongest and most rapid effect. The lifting of travel restrictions since February 17, 2020 does not appear to lead to an increase in cases across China if the social distancing interventions can be maintained, even at a limited level of 25% reduction on average through late April. Our findings contribute to an improved understanding of NPIs on COVID-19 and to inform response efforts across the World.

Download

Figure 1: Relative daily volume of outbound travellers from cities (prefectural level) across mainland China during Chinese New Year (CNY) holiday, January 23 rd -February 29 th , 2020. (A) All cities in mainland China. (B) Cities in Hubei province with Wuhan highlighted by using dark colours. Each blue line represents estimates of normal outflow by city under the scenario without travel restriction, following travel in previous years. The lines of relative volume were smoothed by using locally estimated scatterplot smoothing (LOESS) regression.
Figure 3: Estimated epicurves of COVID-19 outbreak under various scenarios with or without non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) by region. The blue lines present estimated transmission under current NPIs, and each other line represents the scenario without one type of intervention. The median and interquartile range of estimates are provided here. The orange vertical line indicates the date of Wuhan's lockdown on January 23, 2020.
Figure 5: Estimates of the COVID-19 epidemic under various scenarios of intervention timing, travel restriction and contact reduction. Vertical lines: orange -date of Wuhan's lockdown; purple -CNY's Day; green -date of lifting of travel restrictions. The epidemics under various intervention timings were estimated under current non-pharmaceutical interventions. We estimated the COVID-19 spread under different population contact rates after lifting inter-city travel restrictions across the country on Feburary 17, 2020.
Effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions for containing the COVID-19 outbreak: an observational and modelling study

March 2020

·

3,867 Reads

·

142 Citations

Background The COVID-19 outbreak containment strategies in China based on non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) appear to be effective. Quantitative research is still needed however to assess the efficacy of different candidate NPIs and their timings to guide ongoing and future responses to epidemics of this emerging disease across the World. Methods We built a travel network-based susceptible-exposed-infectious-removed (SEIR) model to simulate the outbreak across cities in mainland China. We used epidemiological parameters estimated for the early stage of outbreak in Wuhan to parameterise the transmission before NPIs were implemented. To quantify the relative effect of various NPIs, daily changes of delay from illness onset to the first reported case in each county were used as a proxy for the improvement of case identification and isolation across the outbreak. Historical and near-real time human movement data, obtained from Baidu location-based service, were used to derive the intensity of travel restrictions and contact reductions across China. The model and outputs were validated using daily reported case numbers, with a series of sensitivity analyses conducted. Results We estimated that there were a total of 114,325 COVID-19 cases (interquartile range [IQR] 76,776 - 164,576) in mainland China as of February 29, 2020, and these were highly correlated (p<0.001, R2=0.86) with reported incidence. Without NPIs, the number of COVID-19 cases would likely have shown a 67-fold increase (IQR: 44 - 94), with the effectiveness of different interventions varying. The early detection and isolation of cases was estimated to prevent more infections than travel restrictions and contact reductions, but integrated NPIs would achieve the strongest and most rapid effect. If NPIs could have been conducted one week, two weeks, or three weeks earlier in China, cases could have been reduced by 66%, 86%, and 95%, respectively, together with significantly reducing the number of affected areas. Results suggest that the social distancing intervention should be continued for the next few months in China to prevent case numbers increasing again after travel restrictions were lifted on February 17, 2020. Conclusion The NPIs deployed in China appear to be effectively containing the COVID-19 outbreak, but the efficacy of the different interventions varied, with the early case detection and contact reduction being the most effective. Moreover, deploying the NPIs early is also important to prevent further spread. Early and integrated NPI strategies should be prepared, adopted and adjusted to minimize health, social and economic impacts in affected regions around the World.

Citations (2)


... Tourists showed greater respect for destination values and norms than before the pandemic. The effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as travel restrictions, hand washing and the cancellation of gatherings, in impeding the spread of the pandemic has been verified 49 . Influenced by subjective norms and concerns about spreading the virus to others, tourists were even more inclined to postpone or cancel their leisure trips during the pandemic 50,51 . ...

Reference:

How COVID-19 has changed tourists’ behaviour
Effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions to contain COVID-19 in China

Nature

... A crucial factor contributing to the success of China's response to the COVID-19 pandemic was the implementation of prompt and decisive measures by the Chinese government. In the early stages of the outbreak, China effectively used robust containment strategies, resulting in a significant reduction in the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases [27]. When localized outbreaks emerged, stringent measures, such as rapid nucleic acid testing and rigorous control over transportation, were swiftly enforced, effectively curtailing the spread of the virus. ...

Effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions for containing the COVID-19 outbreak: an observational and modelling study