Performance of indicators used in regular risk assessments for COVID-19 in association with contextual factors
10.24171/j.phrp.2024.0141
- Author:
Sujin HONG
1
;
Jiyoung OH
;
Jia LEE
;
Yongmoon KIM
;
Bryan Inho KIM
;
Min Jei LEE
;
Hyunjung KIM
;
Sangwoo TAK
Author Information
1. Division of Risk Assessment, Bureau of Public Health Emergency Preparedness, Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency, Cheongju, Republic of Korea
- Publication Type:Original Article
- From:
Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives
2024;15(5):420-428
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Objectives:This study aimed to summarize the results of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) risk assessments and to examine the associations between risk levels and various indicators, including COVID-19 incidence, risk perception, community mobility, and government policy.
Methods:The results of the risk assessment and the indicators utilized were summarized. From November 2021 to May 2022, the COVID-19 risk level was evaluated on a weekly basis, and its correlation with these indicators was analyzed. Data were obtained from press releases by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency, regular surveys conducted by Hankook Research, and information available on the Google and Oxford websites.
Results:Weekly risk assessments were conducted for 30 weeks, using different indices depending on the phases. Correlation analysis revealed the strongest positive correlation between risk level and risk perception (r=0.841). The risk level from “1-week lead” demonstrated a strong positive correlation with the time-varying reproduction number (Rt). Similarly, the risk level from “week lagged value” showed a strong positive correlation with the number of severe cases in the hospital.
Conclusion:At the time of risk assessment, the Rt precedes the risk level, while severe cases in hospitals follow. Therefore, the assessed risk level functioned as an early warning system. Risk perception demonstrated the strongest correlation with the risk level, suggesting consistency throughout the assessment period. Contextual indicators (e.g., risk perception) that consider time lags and implementation scales, could improve the evaluation of future risk assessment results, particularly when there are challenges in reflecting specific situations in coordinated emergency response.
