Cited by 251COVID-19 epidemiological studiesMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology ModelsSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research

Assessment of the SARS-CoV-2 basic reproduction number, R0, based on the early phase of COVID-19 outbreak in Italy

Open access
D'Arienzo, Marco, Coniglio, Angela·2020·Biosafety and Health

Abstract

As of March 12th Italy has the largest number of SARS-CoV-2 cases in Europe as well as outside China. The infections, first limited in Northern Italy, have eventually spread to all other regions. When controlling an emerging outbreak of an infectious disease it is essential to know the key epidemiological parameters, such as the basic reproduction number R0, i.e. the average number of secondary infections caused by one infected individual during his/her entire infectious period at the start of an outbreak. Previous work has been limited to the assessment of R0 analyzing data from the Wuhan region or Mainland China. In the present study the R0 value for SARS-CoV-2 was assessed analyzing data derived from the early phase of the outbreak in Italy. In particular, the spread of SARS-CoV-2 was analyzed in 9 cities (those with the largest number of infections) fitting the well-established SIR-model to available data in the interval between February 25–March 12, 2020. The findings of this study suggest that R0 values associated with the Italian outbreak may range from 2.43 to 3.10, confirming previous evidence in the literature reporting similar R0 values for SARS-CoV-2.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bsheal.2020.03.004

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. [1]Kermack W.O. McKendrick A.G. A contribution to the mathematical theory of epidemics Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 115 1927 700 721 10.1098/rspa.1927.0118 · DOI
  2. [2]Hethcote H.W. The mathematics of infectious diseases SIAM Rev. 42 4 2000 599 653 10.1137/S0036144500371907 · DOI
  3. [4]Majumder M.S. Mandl K.D. Early transmissibility assessment of a novel coronavirus in Wuhan SSRN 2020 10.2139/ssrn.3524675 · DOI
  4. [6]Fanelli D. Piazza F. Analysis and forecast of COVID-19 spreading in China, Italy and France Chaos, Solitons Fractals 134 2020 109761 10.1016/j.chaos.2020.109761 32308258 PMC7156225 · DOI
  5. [7]Wu J.T. Leung K. Leung G.M. Nowcasting and forecasting the potential domestic and international spread of the 2019-nCoV outbreak originating in Wuhan, China: a modelling study Lancet 395 2020 689 697 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30260-9 32014114 PMC7159271 · DOI · Paper page
  6. [8]Zhao S. Lin Q. Ran J. Preliminary estimation of the basic reproduction number of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in China, from 2019 to 2020: a data-driven analysis in the early phase of the outbreak Int. J. Infect. Dis. 92 2020 214 217 10.1016/j.ijid.2020.01.050 32007643 PMC7110798 · DOI
  7. [9]Chen T.M. Rui J. Wang Q.P. A mathematical model for simulating the phase-based transmissibility of a novel coronavirus Infect. Dis. Poverty 9 24 2020 10.1186/s40249-020-00640-3 PMC7047374 32111262 · DOI
  8. [10]Muniz-Rodriguez K. Chowell G. Cheung C.H. Epidemic doubling time of the COVID-19 epidemic by Chinese province Medrχv 2020 10.1101/2020.02.05.20020750 PMC7392464 32330410 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
D'Arienzo, M., & Coniglio, A.
Affiliations
Fatebenefratelli Hospital (IT)
Venue
Biosafety and Health
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-06
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
57-59
ISSN
2590-0536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3013907808
Cited by
251
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 90 · 2020: 62
FWCI
8.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biosafety and Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Mathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Keywords
SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 pandemic, basic reproduction number, R0 estimation, SIR model, Italy, epidemic spread, secondary infection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review