Additional file 1 of Optimal timing and effectiveness of COVID-19 outbreak responses in China: a modelling study
Creators: name: Zhang, Anthony Zhenhuan
name: Enns, Eva A.
Publisher: name: figshare
Year: 2022
Subjects: subject: Medicine
subject: Neuroscience
subject: 59999 Environmental Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Earth and related environmental sciences
subject: Sociology
subject: FOS: Sociology
subject: 69999 Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Biological sciences
subject: 80699 Information Systems not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Computer and information sciences
subject: 19999 Mathematical Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Mathematics
subject: Cancer
subject: Science Policy
subject: Computational Biology

description: Additional file 1 Technical appendix — fig s2. Varying social distancing start date only, maintaining initiation of other control measures on Jan 23, 2020. Technical appendix — fig s3. Varying social distancing start date only, maintaining initiation of other control measures on Jan 23, 2020. Wuhan is excluded from the plot to show greater detail in the other three cities. Technical appendix — fig s4. Varying start date for all control measures and doubled mortality rate for all age groups, maintaining initiation of other control measures on Jan 23, 2020. Technical appendix — fig s5. Varying Wuhan travel history screening start date, maintaining initiation of other control measures on Jan 23, 2020. Wuhan is excluded from the plot to show greater detail in the other three cities. Technical appendix — fig s6. Varying Wuhan quarantine and Wuhan travel history screening start date, maintaining social distancing initiation on Jan 23, 2020. Wuhan is excluded from the plot to show greater detail in the other three cities. Technical appendix — fig s7. Varying Wuhan travel history screening and social distancing start date, maintaining Wuhan city-wide quarantine initiation on Jan 23, 2020. Wuhan is excluded from the plot to show greater detail in the other three cities. Technical appendix — fig s8. One-way sensitivity analysis on contact rate during Chinese New Year (CNY). In the base case, we assumed contacts rates increase by 20% for all age categories. Technical appendix — fig s9. One-way sensitivity analysis on the relative contact rate reduction when practicing social distancing. In the base case, this is assumed to be 0.50. Technical appendix — fig s10. One-way sensitivity analysis on travel history screening effectiveness, α. In the base case, α=1.0. Technical appendix — fig s11. Two-way sensitivity analysis (subplot 1) on contact rate during Chinese New Year (CNY) and travel history screening effectiveness, α. For this subplot, α=1.0. Technical appendix — fig s12. Two-way sensitivity analysis (subplot 1) on contact rate during Chinese New Year (CNY) and travel history screening effectiveness, α. For this subplot, α=0.75. Technical appendix — fig s13. Two-way sensitivity analysis (subplot 1) on contact rate during Chinese New Year (CNY) and travel history screening effectiveness, α. For this subplot, α=0.50. Technical appendix — fig s14. Two-way sensitivity analysis (subplot 1) on contact rate during Chinese New Year (CNY) and relative contact rate reduction when practicing social distancing. For this subplot, contact rate reduction is 25%. Technical appendix — fig s15. Two-way sensitivity analysis (subplot 1) on contact rate during Chinese New Year (CNY) and relative contact rate reduction when practicing social distancing. For this subplot, contact rate reduction is 50%. Technical appendix — fig s16. Two-way sensitivity analysis (subplot 1) on contact rate during Chinese New Year (CNY) and relative contact rate reduction when practicing social distancing. For this subplot, contact rate reduction is 75%.