重庆市新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情风险分区分级评估方法比较研究  

Comparative study on assessment methods of epidemic risk of COVID-19 in Chongqing

作　　者：李辉智[1] 易大莉 李高明 Li Huizhi;Yi Dali;Li Gaoming(.Teaching and Research Section of Network Security,Southwest University of Political Science and Law;Department of Journal Editorial,Army Medical University;Teaching and Research Section of Biostatistics,Army Medical University)

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学网络安全教研室,重庆401120 [2]陆军军医大学学报编辑部,重庆400038 [3]陆军军医大学卫生统计学教研室,重庆400038

出　　处：《重庆医科大学学报》2020年第7期870-875,共6页Journal of Chongqing Medical University

摘　　要：目的:探讨新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情风险分区分级评估方法。方法:以重庆市为研究对象,收集疫情风险评价的5个重要影响因素,包括累计确诊病例数、前14 d累计新增病例、人口密度、人口流动强度和GDP;采用单指标评价方法、层次分析方法和系统聚类方法,分别在2月17日、2月26日,对重庆市38个区县的风险等级进行评估;并对这3种方法的评估结果进行比较。结果:总体上,3种方法的评价结果基本一致,如万州区属于风险特高地区,2月17日有6个低风险地区,2月26日有14个低风险地区,主城区(除北碚区)均属于高风险地区。相对于单指标评价方法,层次分析方法增加了一些低风险地区,系统聚类方法的结果差别相对较大。结论:单指标评价方法简单明确,但仅考虑了疫情指标;层次分析方法综合了各领域专家智慧,且可对各地区危险程度进行排序,但操作稍复杂;系统聚类方法强调整体上的相似性,但可解释性欠缺。总之,3种评价方法的结果都具有一定的合理性。相对而言,层次分析方法分类结果更合理,建议作为新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情风险综合研判的首选方法。Objective:To explore the assessment method of epidemic risk of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19).Methods:Chongqing was taken as study object and five vital influencing factors,including cumulative number of confirmed cases,cumulative new cases in the first 14 days,population density,intensity of population movement,and GDP,were collected.The risk level of 38 districts in Chongqing on February 17th and 26th were evaluated by using single index evaluation method,analytic hierarchy process(AHP)and hierarchical clustering method.Evaluation results of these three methods were compared.Results:On the whole,evaluation results of three methods were basically consistent.For example,Wanzhou District was a particularly high-risk area.On February17 th,there were six low-risk areas.On February 26 th,there were 14 low-risk areas.Main urban areas(except Beibei District)were high-risk areas.There were more low-risk areas through AHP method when compared with single index evaluation method.However,results of clustering analysis method were quite different.Conclusion:The single index evaluation method is simple and clear,but only the epidemic index is considered.The AHP method,which is slightly more complex,integrates opinions of experts in various fields and can be used to rank the risk degree of each region.The systematic clustering method emphasizes the similarity of overall feature,but lack of interpretability.In a word,results of three evaluation methods are reasonable.Relatively speaking,results of AHP is more reasonable,which is suggested to be the preferred method for the comprehensive analysis of COVID-19 epidemic risk.

关 键 词：新型冠状病毒肺炎 疫情风险 分区分级 评估方法 

分 类 号：R181.81[医药卫生—流行病学]