Population migration, spread of COVID-19, and epidemic prevention and control: empirical evidence from China

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-39510/v3

PDF

Research article

Population migration, spread of COVID-19, and epidemic prevention and control: empirical evidence from China

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-39510/v3

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 17 Mar, 2021

Read the published version in BMC Public Health →

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background: This study applied the SEIR model to analyze and simulate the transmission mechanisms of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China.

Methods: The population migration was embedded in the SEIR model to simulate and analyze the effects of the amount of population inflow on the number of confirmed cases. Based on numerical simulations, this study used statistical data for the empirical validation of its theoretical deductions and discussed how to improve the effectiveness of epidemic prevention and control considering population migration variables. Statistics regarding the numbers of infected people in various provinces were obtained from the epidemic-related data reported by China’s National Health Commission.

Results: This study explored how the epidemic should be prevented and controlled from the perspective of population migration variables. It found that a combination of a susceptible population, an infected population, and transmission media was an important route affecting the number of infections and that the migration of a Hubei-related infected population played a key role in promoting epidemic spread. Epidemic prevention and control should focus on regions with better economic conditions than the epidemic region. Prevention and control efforts should focus on the more populated neighboring provinces having convenient transportation links with the epidemic region. To prevent and control epidemic spread, priority should be given to elucidating the destinations and directions of population migration from the domestic origin of infections, and then stemming population migration or human-to-human contact after such migration.

Conclusions: This study enriched and expanded on simulations of the effects of population migration on the COVID-19 epidemic and China-based empirical studies while offering an epidemic evaluation and warning mechanism to prevent and control similar public health emergencies in the future.

Health Economics & Outcomes Research

Health Policy

Infectious Diseases

Wuhan

COVID-19

population migration

epidemic prevention and control

Due to technical limitations, full-text HTML conversion of this manuscript could not be completed. However, the latest manuscript can be downloaded and

accessed as a PDF.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of variables

Variable	Definition	Obs	Mean	Std.	Min	Max
NCOV	Number of infected people (people)	31	2619.581	12164.41	1	68127
PHM	Number of people who migrated from Hubei to another province (10,000 people)	30	31.87	74.059	0.85	397.34
PMH	Number of people who migrated from another province to Hubei(10,000 people)	30	9.891	9.973	0.6	44.89
P	Number of permanent residents in each province (10,000 people)	31	4395.032	2797.833	318	10724
PD	Population density, number of people per km² (people)	31	453.376	705.27	2.59	3825.99
TD	Traffic density, mileage per km² (km)	31	0.955	0.571	0.06	2.46
neighbor	Whether it neighbors Hubei, yes=1, no=0	30	0.233	0.43	0	1
region	Whether it is in southern China, yes=1, no=0	30	0.467	0.507	0	1
QHrail	Number of high-speed trains between the provincial capital and Wuhan(trains)	30	21.1	26.61	0	99
distance	Distance from Hubei(km)	30	1230.333	721.342	327.1	3263.8
comparison	Whether the disposable income per capita is higher than that in Hubei, yes=1, no=0	31	0.387	0.495	0	1
Over65	the proportion of population over 65 years old	31	0.096	0.02	0.05	0.14
FiveA	the comparison of number of 5A-level scenic spots between the province and Hubei	31	0.226	0.425	0	1
Emergency	whether to start the first level response before January 24	31	0.581	0.502	0	1

Notes: Data were obtained from the National Health Commission of China (as of May 2, 2020), 2015 China 1% National Population Sample Survey, 2015 China Statistical Yearbook, Ministry of Land and Resources of China, official website of the China Railway Corporation, and local government website. The research area of this article covers 31 provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions in China.

Table 2 Hubei-related population migration and numbers of infected people

Rank	Province	PHM	Province	PMH	Province	P	Province	NCOV
1	Hubei	-	Hubei	-	Guangdong	10724	Hubei	68127
2	Guangdong	397.34	Henan	44.89	Shandong	9789	Guangdong	1395
3	Zhejiang	124.51	Hunan	28.8	Henan	9436	Henan	1273
4	Shanghai	73.55	Guangdong	20.79	Sichuan	8140	Zhejiang	1218
5	Jiangsu	60.77	Chongqing	20.65	Jiangsu	7960	Hunan	1018
6	Beijing	49.39	Anhui	20.6	Hebei	7384	Anhui	990
7	Fujian	43.96	Jiangxi	17.32	Hunan	6737	Jiangxi	935
8	Hunan	25.08	Sichuan	15.97	Anhui	6083	Shandong	763
9	Tianjin	23.51	Zhejiang	15.59	Hubei	5816	Jiangsu	631
10	Sichuan	15.04	Shandong	13.34	Zhejiang	5508	Chongqing	576
11	Jiangxi	12.49	Fujian	13.06	Guangxi	4754	Heilongjiang	558
12	Yunnan	12.25	Jiangsu	12.33	Yunnan	4714	Sichuan	540
13	Henan	10.93	Hebei	8.63	Jiangxi	4542	Beijing	419
14	Anhui	10.62	Guizhou	8.38	Liaoning	4391	Shanghai	339
15	Shaanxi	10.33	Shaanxi	7.26	Heilongjiang	3833	Hebei	318
16	Shandong	9.76	Guangxi	6.67	Fujian	3806	Fujian	296
17	Hebei	9.4	Yunnan	5.21	Shaanxi	3775	Guangxi	252
18	Shanxi	8.86	Shanxi	4.85	Shanxi	3648	Shaanxi	245
19	Guizhou	8.05	Gansu	4.85	Guizhou	3508	Yunnan	174
20	Guangxi	7.97	Xinjiang	4.38	Chongqing	2991	Hainan	168
21	Xinjiang	7.73	Shanghai	3.37	Jilin	2752	Guizhou	146
22	Chongqing	7.6	Heilongjiang	3.19	Gansu	2591	Tianjin	136
23	Hainan	7.15	Hainan	2.91	Inner Mongolia	2505	Shanxi	133
24	Gansu	4.24	Inner Mongolia	2.74	Shanghai	2426	Liaoning	125
25	Qinghai	3.23	Beijing	2.67	Xinjiang	2298	Jilin	93
26	Liaoning	2.85	Liaoning	2.11	Beijing	2152	Gansu	92
27	Heilongjiang	2.74	Jilin	1.92	Tianjin	1517	Inner Mongolia	77
28	Inner Mongolia	2.73	Tianjin	1.65	Hainan	903	Xinjiang	76
29	Jilin	2.18	Qinghai	1.23	Ningxia	662	Ningxia	75
30	Ningxia	0.99	Tibet	0.76	Qinghai	583	Qinghai	18
31	Tibet	0.85	Ningxia	0.6	Tibet	318	Tibet	1

Notes: PHM, number of people who migrated from Hubei to another province; PMH, number of people who migrated from another province to Hubei; P, number of permanent residents in each province; NCOV, number of infected people. “Rank” represents sorting the value of each variable from high to low. The data of PHM and PMH were obtained from the 2015 China 1% National Population Sample Survey, the data of P were obtained from the 2015 China Statistical Yearbook, and the data of NCOV were obtained from the China’s National Health Commission (as of May 2, 2020).

Table 3. Population migration-related factors for the number of infected people

Variable	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4
P	0.519 (0.462)
PHM		1.953^*** (0.452)
PMH		30.89^*** (3.438)
PPHM			0.000115^** (0.0000455)	0.0000973^*** (0.0000335)
PPMH			0.00324^*** (0.000649)	0.00265^*** (0.000401)
PD				-0.0992 (0.0632)
TD				202.2^* (99.99)
Over65				-628.6 (1773.9)
Emergency				150.1 (89.33)
_cons	339.2 (829.3)	60.64^* (34.48)	194.9^*** (43.71)	66.53 (129.0)
N	31	30	30	30
R2	0.014	0.831	0.721	0.801

Notes: *, **, and *** represent significance at 10%, 5%, and 1% respectively; bracketed values denote the standard errors.

Table 4. Factors affecting population migration

Variable

Model 5

Model 6

Model 7

PHM

PMH

PTH

0.00367

(0.00831)

0.000340

(0.000428)

0.00401

(0.00827)

neighbor

-42.48

(35.08)

8.464^***

(2.735)

-34.02

(33.64)

region

36.42

(22.87)

1.086

(2.184)

37.51

(22.07)

QHrail

1.124

(0.863)

0.138^**

(0.0582)

1.261

(0.847)

distan

0.0313

(0.0293)

-0.00154

(0.00132)

0.0298

(0.0287)

comparison

45.45^*

(25.08)

-1.818

(1.929)

43.63^*

(24.56)

FiveA

31.81

(34.85)

8.588^*

(4.186)

40.40

(34.77)

_cons

-76.44

(78.76)

3.877

(2.966)

-72.56

(77.56)

R²

0.477

0.863

0.526

Notes: *, **, and *** represent significance at 10%, 5%, and 1% respectively; bracketed values denote the standard errors.

PDF

Journal Publication

published 17 Mar, 2021

Read the published version in BMC Public Health →

Editorial decision: Minor revision
09 Feb, 2021
Review #2 received at journal
01 Feb, 2021
Reviewer #2 agreed at journal
21 Jan, 2021
Review #1 received at journal
16 Jan, 2021
Reviewers invited by journal
07 Jan, 2021
Reviewer #1 agreed at journal
07 Jan, 2021
Editor assigned by journal
20 Dec, 2020
Submission checks completed at journal
20 Dec, 2020
Editor invited by journal
20 Dec, 2020

You are reading this latest preprint version

Population migration, spread of COVID-19, and epidemic prevention and control: empirical evidence from China

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 3

Abstract

Figures

Full Text

Tables

Supplementary Files

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 3