Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Characteristics of the data sets used for the sequential calibration and forecasting of the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico and Mexico City (2020).

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 1.

Upper panel: Epidemic curve for the COVID-19 deaths in Mexico and Mexico City from March 20-November 11, 2020.

The blue line depicts the confirmed deaths in Mexico and the green line depicts the confirmed deaths in Mexico City. Lower panel: The mobility trends for Mexico from February 28-December 5, 2020. The orange line shows the driving trend, the blue line shows the transit trend, and the black line shows the walking trend.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Calibration performance for each of the thirteen sequential calibration phases for GLM (magenta), Richards (red), and sub-epidemic (blue) model for Mexico. High 95% PI coverage and lower mean interval score (MIS), root mean square error (RMSE), and mean absolute error (MAE) indicate better performance.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Calibration performance for each of the thirteen sequential calibration phases for GLM (magenta), Richards (red), and sub-epidemic (blue) model for Mexico City. High 95% PI coverage and lower mean interval score (MIS), root mean square error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE) indicate better performance.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Forecasting period performance metrics for each of the thirteen sequential forecasting phases for GLM (magenta), Richards (red) and sub-epidemic (blue) model for Mexico. High 95% PI coverage and lower mean interval score (MIS), root mean square error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE) indicate better performance.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Forecasting period performance metrics for each of the thirteen sequential forecasting phases for GLM (magenta), Richards (red) and sub-epidemic (blue) model for the Mexico City. High 95% PI coverage and lower mean interval score (MIS), root mean square error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE) indicate better performance.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Systematic comparison of six models (GLM, Richards, sub-epidemic model, IHME current projections (IHME C.P), IHME universal masks (IHME U.M) and IHME mandates easing (IHME M.E) to predict the cumulative COVID-19 deaths for Mexico in the thirteen sequential forecasts.

The blue circles represent the mean deaths, and the magenta vertical line indicates the 95% PI around the mean death count. The horizontal dashed line represents the actual death count reported by that date as published in the November 11, 2020, IHME estimates file.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Systematic comparison of six models (GLM, Richards, sub-epidemic model, IHME current projections (IHME C.P), IHME universal masks (IHME U.M) and IHME mandates easing (IHME M.E) to predict the cumulative COVID-19 deaths for the Mexico City in the thirteen sequential forecasts.

The blue circles represent the mean deaths, and the magenta vertical line indicates the 95% PI around the mean death count. The horizontal dashed line represents the actual death count reported by that date as published in the November 11, 2020, IHME estimates file.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Table 2.

Cumulative mortality estimates obtained from the six models (GLM, Richards model, sub-epidemic model, IHME current projections, IHME universal mask and IHME mandates easing) at the end of each forecasting period for the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico (2020).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Cumulative mortality estimates obtained from the six models (GLM, Richards model, sub-epidemic model, IHME current projections, IHME universal mask, and IHME mandates easing) at the end of each forecasting period for the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico City (2020).

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 8.

Upper panel: Reproduction number with 95% CI estimated using the GGM model.

The estimated reproduction number of the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico as of May 29, 2020, is 1.1 (95% CI: [1.1, 1.1]). The growth rate parameter, r, is estimated at 1.2 (95% CI: [1.1, 1.4]) and the deceleration of growth parameter, p, is estimated at 0.7 (95% CI: [0.68, 0.71]). Lower panel: The lower panel shows the GGM fit to the case incidence data for the first 90 days.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

Upper panel: Epidemiological curve (by the dates of symptom onset) for Mexico (left panel) and Mexico City (right panel) as of September 27, 2020. Lower panel: Instantaneous reproduction number with 95% credible intervals for the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico as of September 27, 2020. The red solid line represents the mean reproduction number for Mexico and the red shaded area represents the 95% credible interval around it. The blue solid line represents the mean reproduction number for Mexico City and the blue shaded region represents the 95% credible interval around it.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Fig 10.

Global ML tree for SARS-CoV-2 genomic data from February 27- May 29, 2020.

Sequences sampled in Mexico are highlighted in red.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Fig 11.

Clusters of states by their growth rates.

Cluster 1 in blue, cluster 2 in orange, cluster 3 in yellow, and cluster 4 in purple. The right panel shows the average growth rate curves for each cluster (solid curves) and their overall average (black broken curve).

More »

Fig 11 Expand

Fig 12.

Color scale image of daily COVID-19 cases by region.

More »

Fig 12 Expand