Analysis of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Pelotas
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X66994Keywords:
COVID-19, Epidemiological models, Mathematical modelingAbstract
This work presents an analysis of the cases contamination situation by the SARS-CoV-2 virus during the pandemic COVID-19, in the city of Pelotas, in the south of Rio Grande do Sul. Using a simple compartmentalized mathematical model and deterministic, a projection of the number cases until the end is presented, year 2020, considering 3 different scenarios. The evolution of pandemic considering curves of accumulated, recovered, active and Deaths; the occupation of COVID exclusive ICU beds; cases and deaths per epidemiological week and the variation in the effective number of reproduction and the percentage of social isolation in Pelotas will also be presented.
Downloads
References
Cori, N. M. F. C., A. Ferguson, Cauchemez, S. A. (2013). New framework and software to estimate time-varying reproduction numbers during epididemics. American Journal of Epidemiology, 178, 1505–1512.
Delamater, S. E. J. L. T. F. Y. Y. T., P. L., Jacobsen, K. H. (2019). Complexity of the basic reproduction number (r0). American Association for the advancement of Science, 25, 1–4.
Governo do Rio Grande do Sul (2020). Modelo de distanciamento controlado do RS. Governo do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brasil, URL https://sistema3as.rs.gov.br/inicial.
Kermack, W., Mckendrick, A. (1991a). Contributions to the matehmatical thoeory of epidemics-i. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 53, 33–55.
Kermack, W., Mckendrick, A. (1991b). Contributions to the matehmatical thoeory of epidemics-ii. the problem of endemicity.Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 53, 57–87.
Kermack, W., Mckendrick, A. (1991c). Contributions to the matehmatical thoeory of epidemics-iii. further studies of the problem of endemicity. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 53, 89–118.
Kissler, T. C. G. E. G. Y., S. M., Lipsitch, M. (2020). Projecting the transmission dynamics of sars-cov-2 through the post pandemic period. American Association for the advancement of Science, 138, 860–868.
Published
Versions
- 2022-07-14 (2)
- 2021-11-08 (1)
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Ciência e Natura
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
