Suchergebnisse

Abstract
Past major epidemic events showed that when an infectious disease is perceived to cause severe health outcomes, individuals modify health behavior affecting epidemic dynamics. To investigate the effect of this feedback relationship on epidemic dynamics, we developed a compartmental model that couples a disease spread framework with competition of two mutually exclusive health opinions (health-positive and health-neutral) associated with different health behaviors. The model is based on the assumption that individuals switch health opinions as a result of exposure to opinions of others through interpersonal communications. To model opinion switch rates, we considered a family of functions and identified the ones that allow health opinions to coexist. Finally, the model includes assortative mixing by opinions. In the disease-free population, either the opinions cannot coexist and one of them is always dominating (mono-opinion equilibrium) or there is at least one stable coexistence of opinions equilibrium. In the latter case, there is multistability between the coexistence equilibrium and the two mono-opinion equilibria. When two opinions coexist, it depends on their distribution whether the infection can invade. If presence of the infection leads to increased switching to a health-positive opinion, the epidemic burden becomes smaller than indicated by the basic reproduction number. Additionally, a feedback between epidemic dynamics and health opinion dynamics may result in (sustained) oscillatory dynamics and a switch to a different stable opinion distribution. Our model captures feedback between spread of awareness through social interactions and infection dynamics and can serve as a basis for more elaborate individual-based models.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread to nearly every country in the world since it first emerged in China in December 2019. Many countries have implemented social distancing as a measure to "flatten the curve" of the ongoing epidemics. Evaluation of the impact of government-imposed social distancing and of other measures to control further spread of COVID-19 is urgent, especially because of the large societal and economic impact of the former. The aim of this study was to compare the individual and combined effectiveness of self-imposed prevention measures and of short-term government-imposed social distancing in mitigating, delaying, or preventing a COVID-19 epidemic. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We developed a deterministic compartmental transmission model of SARS-CoV-2 in a population stratified by disease status (susceptible, exposed, infectious with mild or severe disease, diagnosed, and recovered) and disease awareness status (aware and unaware) due to the spread of COVID-19. Self-imposed measures were assumed to be taken by disease-aware individuals and included handwashing, mask-wearing, and social distancing. Government-imposed social distancing reduced the contact rate of individuals irrespective of their disease or awareness status. The model was parameterized using current best estimates of key epidemiological parameters from COVID-19 clinical studies. The model outcomes included the peak number of diagnoses, attack rate, and time until the peak number of diagnoses. For fast awareness spread in the population, self-imposed measures can significantly reduce the attack rate and diminish and postpone the peak number of diagnoses. We estimate that a large epidemic can be prevented if the efficacy of these measures exceeds 50%. For slow awareness spread, self-imposed measures reduce the peak number of diagnoses and attack rate but do not affect the timing of the peak. Early implementation of short-term ...