Ukraine vs Russia: Indicators of the coronavirus COVID-19 outbreak development
(A.B. Alyokhin, B.V. Burkynskyi, A.N. Grabovoi, V.A, Dilenko, N.I. Khumarova)
19/07/2020. No 124.
Today we will conduct a comparative analysis of statistical portraits of epidemics in Ukraine and Russia. Such a comparison usually allows you to give a more complete assessment of the epidemiological situation in a particular country and, first of all, its development trends.
The diagrams (Fig. 1, 2) characterize the general properties of epidemics. This is the dynamics of the total number of infected, deaths, recovered and active patients (Fig. 1), mortality rates I (TC) and I (CC), as well as the IP progress indicator (Fig. 2).
When comparing the diagrams of Fig. 1 and fig. 1b draws attention to the exceptional similarity of the trajectories of all indicators, as well as their features.
In both countries, indicators of the total number of infected (TC) and recovered (R) from a certain point in time are growing synchronously. Both there, and there, at a certain point, the growth in the number of active cases stopped. The difference between Ukraine in this regard is that it had two attempts to stabilize the level of this indicator (within the framework of the first and second waves of the epidemic). We can say that in Russia they approached this more strictly.
The same similarities and differences are observing in Fig. 2 and fig. 2b. Russia did not allow a high mortality rate in the number of closed cases I (CC), and as a result, a drop in the IP progress indicator. Naturally, according to statistics, it is impossible to determine how this is achieved.
The dynamics of the statistical reproductive number in Ukraine (Fig. 3) is not yet encouraging and suggests that coronavirus finds growth reserves.
It is opposing by the dynamics of the growth rate of the number of infected (Fig. 4), which in recent days has been showing a downward trend. We will further study this phenomenon.
Russia demonstrates similar trends (Fig. 4b). Interesting in this regard is Fig. 4'b, which on a larger (time) scale shows the graph that in Fig. 4b. In contrast to the similar figure for Ukraine (Fig. 4 ‘), in Russia the statistical data are strong smoothing. Many experts associate this phenomenon with the preliminary processing of this or, in other words, with the manipulation of statistics.
In general, the nature of the dynamics of the average absolute increase in the number of infected people in both countries is identical. However, in Russia, unlike Ukraine, stabilization of its level is obvious. Again, in this connection, questions about the mechanisms for achieving similar results, which so far remain unanswered, are interesting.
Strikingly similar in both countries and trends in the dynamics of daily indicators of the epidemic (in logarithmic representation): the number of new infections, deaths and recovered (Fig. 6).
Both in Ukraine and in Russia, as we have already noted, the above achieving equality in the growth rate of the number of infected and recovered, which predetermined the stabilization of the number of active cases (Fig. 1).
A comparison of the dynamics of daily indicators in absolute terms for Ukraine and Russia (Fig. 7, 8) shows the presence of two epidemic waves in Ukraine, one in Russia. Regardless of this, the nature of the dynamics of the deceased in both countries is almost identical. This is also an interesting question for researchers.
Fig. 9 and fig. 10 indicate that Ukraine is demonstrating active efforts to stabilize the number of active cases (Fig. 10), achieving a rapid increase in the number of recovered cases (Fig. 9). In Russia, this goal has long been achieving, and therefore the graph of Fig. 9b has recently shown a consistent increase in new infections.
Because of the last two statistical comparisons (Ukraine and Italy, Ukraine and Russia), the following can be noted. To become a part of Europe, you have to be like Europe, i.e. act in a European way. In the meantime, the coronavirus epidemic in Ukraine is like the twin sister of the epidemic in Russia.
A progress indicator (IP) of 1.00 indicates the end of the epidemic in the relevant region, i.e. at the time when there are no new infected, current patients are absent, all previously infected have replenished the lists of recovered and deceased.
Figure 1 shows the values of the IP progress indicator for all countries of the world together taken, China, countries of the world with the exception of China and a number of other countries.
Diagram 2 shows the “leaders” from among the analyzed regions and countries.
Diagram 3 shows the “average”.
The terms “leaders” and “average” are used solely to differentiate countries and regions according to the level of the IP epidemic progress index and assign them to different diagrams for easy viewing and visual comparison.
At the time of the end of the epidemic, the values of both mortality rates should be equal.
Mortality indicators widely used in medical statistics are not capable of sufficient informative reflecting the dynamics of the process of the development of epidemics at the initial stage. In contrast, the progress indicator IP captures changes in the development of epidemics quite accurately and informatively throughout the entire life cycle of the epidemic.
Sources of statistical data:
Our materials also:
Accuracy of our forecasts:
https://www.facebook.com/ab.alyokhin/posts/152284093081161 (South Korea)
Publications on case fatality rates and progress indicator: