The challenges of the coming mass vaccination and exit strategy in prevention and control of COVID-19, a modelling study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract With success in the development of COVID-19 vaccines, it is urgent and challenging to analyse how the coming large-scale vaccination in the population and the growing public desire of relaxation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) interact to impact the prevention and control of the COVID-19 pandemic. Using mathematical models, we focus on two aspects: 1) how the vaccination program should be designed to balance the dynamic exit of NPIs; 2) how much the vaccination coverage is needed to avoid a second wave of the epidemics when the NPIs exit in stages. We address this issue globally, and take six countries--China, Brazil, Indonesia, Russia, UK, and US—in our case study. We showed that a dynamic vaccination program in three stages can be an effective approach to balance the dynamic exit of the NPIs in terms of mitigating the epidemics. The vaccination rates and the accumulative vaccination coverage in these countries are estimated by fitting the model to the real data. We observed that the required effective vaccination coverages are greatly different to balance the dynamic exit of NPIs in these countries, providing a quantitative criterion for the requirement of an integrative package of NPIs. We predicted the epidemics under different vaccination rates for these countries, and showed that the vaccination can significantly decrease the peak value of a future wave. Furthermore, we found that a lower vaccination coverage can result in a subsequent wave once the NPIs exit. Therefore, there is a critical (minimum) vaccination coverage, depending on effectiveness of NPIs to avoid a subsequent wave. We estimated the critical vaccination coverages for China, Brazil, and Indonesia under different scenarios. In conclusion, we quantitatively showed that the dynamic vaccination program can be the effective approach to supplement or even eventually replace NPIs in mitigating the epidemics and avoiding future waves, and we suggest that country level-based exit strategies of the NPIs should be considered, according to the possible quarantine rate and testing ability, and the accessibility, affordability and efficiency of the vaccines.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".