Skip to main content

Table 1 Intervention parameters of each scenario

From: Assessing the feasibility of sustaining SARS-CoV-2 local containment in China in the era of highly transmissible variants

Nonpharmaceutical interventiona

Level 0

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Level 5

Symptom surveillance

 Fraction of detected symptomatic infections (%)

33.3

66.7

66.7

66.7

66.7

66.7

 Mean time delay from symptom onset to hospitalization (days)

3.7b

2.7c

2.7

2.7

2.7

2.7

Mask wearing (% of population)

 In the workplace

10

10

50

50

50

50

 In the community

30

30

80

80

80

80

Occupational screening (% of working-age populations)

 High risk

2.5

2.5

2.5

5

5

5

 Moderate risk

7.5

7.5

7.5

20

20

20

Mass testing

 Rounds

1

1

1

1

5

5

 Geographical ranged

Street/township

Street/township

Street/township

Street/township

District/county

District/county

Mobility restrictionse

 High-risk region

High

High

High

High

High

Lockdown

 Moderate-risk region

Moderate

Moderate

Moderate

Moderate

Moderate

High

 Low-risk region

Lowf

Low

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

  1. aIn addition to the interventions listed in the table, contact tracing and residential community confinement under baseline intervention intensity were considered across all simulated scenarios
  2. bThe time delay from symptom onset to hospitalization is taken from a Weibull distribution (shape = 2.38, scale = 4.17)
  3. cThe time delay from symptom onset to hospitalization is taken from a gamma distribution (shape = 0.69, rate = 0.26)
  4. dWe assume that RT-PCR testing is performed for all the individuals reside within the defined geographical range
  5. eThe hypothetical origin-destination mobility matrices of NPI intensity level 0–4 and level 5 are shown in Additional file 1: Table S3 and Table S4, respectively
  6. fWe assume a 20% reduction in human mobility between low risk areas after the official report of the first infection according to the mobile phone signaling data