Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
medrxiv; 2023.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2023.08.29.23294767

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented changes in behaviour. To estimate if these persisted a final new round of the CoMix survey was conducted in four countries at a time when all societal restrictions had been lifted for several months. We conducted a survey on a nationally representative sample in the UK, Netherlands (NL), Belgium (BE), and Switzerland (CH). Participants were asked about their contacts and behaviours on the previous day. We calculated contact matrices and compared the contact levels to a pre-pandemic baseline to estimate R0. Data collection occurred from 17 November to 7 December 2022. 7,477 participants were recruited. Some were asked to undertake the survey on behalf of their children. Only 14.4% of all participants reported wearing a facemask on the previous day, varying between 6.7% in NL to 17.8% in CH. Self-reported vaccination rates in adults were similar for each country at around 86%. Trimmed mean recorded contacts were highest in NL with 9.9 (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.0 to 10.8) contacts per person per day and lowest in CH at 6.0 (95% CI 5.4 to 6.6). The number of contacts at home were similar between the countries. Contacts at work were lowest in the UK (1.4 contacts per person per day) and highest in NL at 2.8 contacts per person per day. Other contacts were also lower in the UK at 1.6 per person per day (95% CI 1.4 to 1.9) and highest in NL at 3.4 recorded per person per day (95% CI 4.0 to 4.0). Using the next-generation approach suggests that R0 for a close-contact disease would be roughly half pre-pandemic levels in the UK, 80% in NL and intermediate in the other two countries. The pandemic appears to have resulted in lasting changes in contact patterns that would be expected to have an impact on the epidemiology of many different pathogens. Further post-pandemic surveys are necessary to confirm this finding.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
2.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.12.02.22282935

ABSTRACT

Short-term forecasts can provide predictions of how an epidemic will change in the near future and form a central part of outbreak mitigation and control. Renewal-equation based models are increasingly popular. They infer key epidemiological parameters from historical epidemiological data and forecast future epidemic dynamics without requiring complex mechanistic assumptions. However, these models typically ignore interaction between age-groups, partly due to challenges in parameterising a time varying interaction matrix. Social contact data collected regularly by the CoMix survey during the COVID-19 epidemic in England, provide a means to inform interaction between age-groups in real-time. We developed an age-specific forecasting framework and applied it to two age-stratified time-series: incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, estimated from a national infection and antibody prevalence survey; and, reported cases according to the UK national COVID-19 dashboard. Jointly fitting our model to social contact data from the CoMix study, we inferred a time-varying next generation matrix which we used to project infections and cases in the four weeks following each of 29 forecast dates between October 2021 and November 2022. We evaluated the forecasts using proper scoring rules and compared performance with three other models with alternative data and specifications alongside two naive baseline models. Overall, incorporating age-interaction improved forecasts of infections and the CoMix-data-informed model was the best performing model at time horizons between two and four weeks. However, this was not true when forecasting cases. We found that age-group-interaction was most important for predicting cases in children and older adults. The contact-data-informed models performed best during the winter months of 2020 - 2021, but performed comparatively poorly in other periods. We highlight challenges regarding the incorporation of contact data in forecasting and offer proposals as to how to extend and adapt our approach, which may lead to more successful forecasts in future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
3.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.02.12.22270851

ABSTRACT

Background Children play a key role in the transmission of many infectious diseases. They have many of their close social encounters at home or at school. We hypothesized that most of the transmission of respiratory infections among children occur in these two settings and that transmission patterns can be predicted by a bipartite network of schools and households. Aim and methods To confirm transmission over a school-household network, SARS-CoV-2 transmission pairs in children aged 4-17 years were analyzed by study year and primary/secondary school. Cases with symptom onset between the 1st of March 2021 and the 4th of April 2021 identified by source and contact-tracing in the Netherlands were included. In this period, primary schools were open and secondary school students attended class at least once per week. Within pairs, spatial distance between the postcodes was calculated as the Euclidean distance. Results A total of 4,059 transmission pairs were identified; 51.9% between primary schoolers; 19.6% between primary and secondary schoolers; 28.5% between secondary schoolers. Most (68.5%) of the transmission for children in the same study year occurred at school. In contrast, most of the transmission of children from different study years (64.3%) and most primary-secondary transmission (81.7%) occurred at home. The average spatial distance between infections was 1.2km (median 0.4) for primary school pairs, 1.6km (median 0) for primary-secondary school pairs and 4.1km (median 1.2) for secondary school pairs. Conclusion The results provide evidence of transmission on a bipartite school-household network. Schools play an important role in transmission within study years, and households play an important role in transmission between study years and between primary and secondary schools. Spatial distance between infections in a transmission pair reflects the smaller school catchment area of primary schools versus secondary schools. Many of these observed patterns likely hold for other respiratory pathogens.


Subject(s)
Respiratory Tract Infections , Communicable Diseases
4.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.10.18.21265046

ABSTRACT

Background: Forecasting healthcare demand is essential in epidemic settings, both to inform situational awareness and facilitate resource planning. Ideally, forecasts should be robust across time and locations. During the COVID-19 pandemic in England, it is an ongoing concern that demand for hospital care for COVID-19 patients in England will exceed available resources. Methods: We made weekly forecasts of daily COVID-19 hospital admissions for National Health Service (NHS) Trusts in England between August 2020 and April 2021 using three disease-agnostic forecasting models: a mean ensemble of autoregressive time series models, a linear regression model with 7-day-lagged local cases as a predictor, and a scaled convolution of local cases and a delay distribution. We compared their point and probabilistic accuracy to a mean-ensemble of them all, and to a simple baseline model of no change from the last day of admissions. We measured predictive performance using the Weighted Interval Score (WIS) and considered how this changed in different scenarios (the length of the predictive horizon, the date on which the forecast was made, and by location), as well as how much admissions forecasts improved when future cases were known. Results: All models outperformed the baseline in the majority of scenarios. Forecasting accuracy varied by forecast date and location, depending on the trajectory of the outbreak, and all individual models had instances where they were the top- or bottom-ranked model. Forecasts produced by the mean-ensemble were both the most accurate and most consistently accurate forecasts amongst all the models considered. Forecasting accuracy was improved when using future observed, rather than forecast, cases, especially at longer forecast horizons. Conclusions: Assuming no change in current admissions is rarely better than including at least a trend. Using confirmed COVID-19 cases as a predictor can improve admissions forecasts in some scenarios, but this is variable and depends on the ability to make consistently good case forecasts. However, ensemble forecasts can make forecasts that make consistently more accurate forecasts across time and locations. Given minimal requirements on data and computation, our admissions forecasting ensemble could be used to anticipate healthcare needs in future epidemic or pandemic settings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
5.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.05.28.21257973

ABSTRACT

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the UK government imposed public health policies in England to reduce social contacts in hopes of curbing virus transmission. We measured contact patterns weekly from March 2020 to March 2021 to estimate the impact of these policies, covering three national lockdowns interspersed by periods of lower restrictions. Methods: Data were collected using online surveys of representative samples of the UK population by age and gender. We calculated the mean daily contacts reported using a (clustered) bootstrap and fitted a censored negative binomial model to estimate age-stratified contact matrices and estimate proportional changes to the basic reproduction number under controlled conditions using the change in contacts as a scaling factor. Results: The survey recorded 101,350 observations from 19,914 participants who reported 466,710 contacts over 53 weeks. Contact patterns changed over time and by participants' age, personal risk factors, and perception of risk. The mean of reported contacts among adults have reduced compared to previous surveys with adults aged 18 to 59 reporting a mean of 2.39 (95% CI 2.20 - 2.60) contacts to 4.93 (95% CI 4.65 - 5.19) contacts, and the mean contacts for school-age children was 3.07 (95% CI 2.89 - 3.27) to 15.11 (95% CI 13.87 - 16.41). The use of face coverings outside the home has remained high since the government mandated use in some settings in July 2020. Conclusions: The CoMix survey provides a unique longitudinal data set for a full year since the first lockdown for use in statistical analyses and mathematical modelling of COVID-19 and other diseases. Recorded contacts reduced dramatically compared to pre-pandemic levels, with changes correlated to government interventions throughout the pandemic. Despite easing of restrictions in the summer of 2020, mean reported contacts only returned to about half of that observed pre-pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
6.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.03.06.21252964

ABSTRACT

Background Schools have been closed in England since the 4th of January 2021 as part of the national restrictions to curb transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The UK Government plans to reopen schools on the 8th of March. Although there is evidence of lower individual-level transmission risk amongst children compared to adults, the combined effects of this with increased contact rates in school settings are not clear. Methods We measured social contacts when schools were both open or closed, amongst other restrictions. We combined these data with estimates of the susceptibility and infectiousness of children compared with adults to estimate the impact of reopening schools on the reproduction number. Results Our results suggest that reopening all schools could increase R from an assumed baseline of 0.8 to between 1.0 and 1.5, or to between 0.9 and 1.2 reopening primary or secondary schools alone. Conclusion Our results suggest that reopening schools is likely to halt the fall in cases observed in recent months and risks returning to rising infections, but these estimates rely heavily on the current estimates or reproduction number and the current validity of the susceptibility and infectiousness profiles we use.

7.
Estee Y Cramer; Evan L Ray; Velma K Lopez; Johannes Bracher; Andrea Brennen; Alvaro J Castro Rivadeneira; Aaron Gerding; Tilmann Gneiting; Katie H House; Yuxin Huang; Dasuni Jayawardena; Abdul H Kanji; Ayush Khandelwal; Khoa Le; Anja Muhlemann; Jarad Niemi; Apurv Shah; Ariane Stark; Yijin Wang; Nutcha Wattanachit; Martha W Zorn; Youyang Gu; Sansiddh Jain; Nayana Bannur; Ayush Deva; Mihir Kulkarni; Srujana Merugu; Alpan Raval; Siddhant Shingi; Avtansh Tiwari; Jerome White; Spencer Woody; Maytal Dahan; Spencer Fox; Kelly Gaither; Michael Lachmann; Lauren Ancel Meyers; James G Scott; Mauricio Tec; Ajitesh Srivastava; Glover E George; Jeffrey C Cegan; Ian D Dettwiller; William P England; Matthew W Farthing; Robert H Hunter; Brandon Lafferty; Igor Linkov; Michael L Mayo; Matthew D Parno; Michael A Rowland; Benjamin D Trump; Sabrina M Corsetti; Thomas M Baer; Marisa C Eisenberg; Karl Falb; Yitao Huang; Emily T Martin; Ella McCauley; Robert L Myers; Tom Schwarz; Daniel Sheldon; Graham Casey Gibson; Rose Yu; Liyao Gao; Yian Ma; Dongxia Wu; Xifeng Yan; Xiaoyong Jin; Yu-Xiang Wang; YangQuan Chen; Lihong Guo; Yanting Zhao; Quanquan Gu; Jinghui Chen; Lingxiao Wang; Pan Xu; Weitong Zhang; Difan Zou; Hannah Biegel; Joceline Lega; Timothy L Snyder; Davison D Wilson; Steve McConnell; Yunfeng Shi; Xuegang Ban; Robert Walraven; Qi-Jun Hong; Stanley Kong; James A Turtle; Michal Ben-Nun; Pete Riley; Steven Riley; Ugur Koyluoglu; David DesRoches; Bruce Hamory; Christina Kyriakides; Helen Leis; John Milliken; Michael Moloney; James Morgan; Gokce Ozcan; Chris Schrader; Elizabeth Shakhnovich; Daniel Siegel; Ryan Spatz; Chris Stiefeling; Barrie Wilkinson; Alexander Wong; Sean Cavany; Guido Espana; Sean Moore; Rachel Oidtman; Alex Perkins; Zhifeng Gao; Jiang Bian; Wei Cao; Juan Lavista Ferres; Chaozhuo Li; Tie-Yan Liu; Xing Xie; Shun Zhang; Shun Zheng; Alessandro Vespignani; Matteo Chinazzi; Jessica T Davis; Kunpeng Mu; Ana Pastore y Piontti; Xinyue Xiong; Andrew Zheng; Jackie Baek; Vivek Farias; Andreea Georgescu; Retsef Levi; Deeksha Sinha; Joshua Wilde; Nicolas D Penna; Leo A Celi; Saketh Sundar; Dave Osthus; Lauren Castro; Geoffrey Fairchild; Isaac Michaud; Dean Karlen; Elizabeth C Lee; Juan Dent; Kyra H Grantz; Joshua Kaminsky; Kathryn Kaminsky; Lindsay T Keegan; Stephen A Lauer; Joseph C Lemaitre; Justin Lessler; Hannah R Meredith; Javier Perez-Saez; Sam Shah; Claire P Smith; Shaun A Truelove; Josh Wills; Matt Kinsey; RF Obrecht; Katharine Tallaksen; John C. Burant; Lily Wang; Lei Gao; Zhiling Gu; Myungjin Kim; Xinyi Li; Guannan Wang; Yueying Wang; Shan Yu; Robert C Reiner; Ryan Barber; Emmanuela Gaikedu; Simon Hay; Steve Lim; Chris Murray; David Pigott; B. Aditya Prakash; Bijaya Adhikari; Jiaming Cui; Alexander Rodriguez; Anika Tabassum; Jiajia Xie; Pinar Keskinocak; John Asplund; Arden Baxter; Buse Eylul Oruc; Nicoleta Serban; Sercan O Arik; Mike Dusenberry; Arkady Epshteyn; Elli Kanal; Long T Le; Chun-Liang Li; Tomas Pfister; Dario Sava; Rajarishi Sinha; Thomas Tsai; Nate Yoder; Jinsung Yoon; Leyou Zhang; Sam Abbott; Nikos I I Bosse; Sebastian Funk; Joel Hellewell; Sophie R Meakin; James D Munday; Katharine Sherratt; Mingyuan Zhou; Rahi Kalantari; Teresa K Yamana; Sen Pei; Jeffrey Shaman; Turgay Ayer; Madeline Adee; Jagpreet Chhatwal; Ozden O Dalgic; Mary A Ladd; Benjamin P Linas; Peter Mueller; Jade Xiao; Michael L Li; Dimitris Bertsimas; Omar Skali Lami; Saksham Soni; Hamza Tazi Bouardi; Yuanjia Wang; Qinxia Wang; Shanghong Xie; Donglin Zeng; Alden Green; Jacob Bien; Addison J Hu; Maria Jahja; Balasubramanian Narasimhan; Samyak Rajanala; Aaron Rumack; Noah Simon; Ryan Tibshirani; Rob Tibshirani; Valerie Ventura; Larry Wasserman; Eamon B O'Dea; John M Drake; Robert Pagano; Jo W Walker; Rachel B Slayton; Michael Johansson; Matthew Biggerstaff; Nicholas G Reich.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.02.03.21250974

ABSTRACT

Short-term probabilistic forecasts of the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States have served as a visible and important communication channel between the scientific modeling community and both the general public and decision-makers. Forecasting models provide specific, quantitative, and evaluable predictions that inform short-term decisions such as healthcare staffing needs, school closures, and allocation of medical supplies. In 2020, the COVID-19 Forecast Hub (https://covid19forecasthub.org/) collected, disseminated, and synthesized hundreds of thousands of specific predictions from more than 50 different academic, industry, and independent research groups. This manuscript systematically evaluates 23 models that regularly submitted forecasts of reported weekly incident COVID-19 mortality counts in the US at the state and national level. One of these models was a multi-model ensemble that combined all available forecasts each week. The performance of individual models showed high variability across time, geospatial units, and forecast horizons. Half of the models evaluated showed better accuracy than a naive baseline model. In combining the forecasts from all teams, the ensemble showed the best overall probabilistic accuracy of any model. Forecast accuracy degraded as models made predictions farther into the future, with probabilistic accuracy at a 20-week horizon more than 5 times worse than when predicting at a 1-week horizon. This project underscores the role that collaboration and active coordination between governmental public health agencies, academic modeling teams, and industry partners can play in developing modern modeling capabilities to support local, state, and federal response to outbreaks. f


Subject(s)
COVID-19
8.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.12.24.20248822

ABSTRACT

A novel SARS-CoV-2 variant, VOC 202012/01 (lineage B.1.1.7), emerged in southeast England in November 2020 and is rapidly spreading towards fixation. Using a variety of statistical and dynamic modelling approaches, we estimate that this variant has a 43-90% (range of 95% credible intervals 38-130%) higher reproduction number than preexisting variants. A fitted two-strain dynamic transmission model shows that VOC 202012/01 will lead to large resurgences of COVID-19 cases. Without stringent control measures, including limited closure of educational institutions and a greatly accelerated vaccine roll-out, COVID-19 hospitalisations and deaths across England in 2021 will exceed those in 2020. Concerningly, VOC 202012/01 has spread globally and exhibits a similar transmission increase (59-74%) in Denmark, Switzerland, and the United States.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
9.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.11.11.20220962

ABSTRACT

Background: Short-term forecasts of infectious disease can create situational awareness and inform planning for outbreak response. Here, we report on multi-model forecasts of Covid-19 in the UK that were generated at regular intervals starting at the end of March 2020, in order to monitor expected healthcare utilisation and population impacts in real time. Methods: We evaluated the performance of individual model forecasts generated between 24 March and 14 July 2020, using a variety of metrics including the weighted interval score as well as metrics that assess the calibration, sharpness, bias and absolute error of forecasts separately. We further combined the predictions from individual models to ensemble forecasts using a simple mean as well as a quantile regression average that aimed to maximise performance. We further compared model performance to a null model of no change. Results: In most cases, individual models performed better than the null model, and ensembles models were well calibrated and performed comparatively to the best individual models. The quantile regression average did not noticeably outperform the mean ensemble. Conclusions: Ensembles of multi-model forecasts can inform the policy response to the Covid-19 pandemic by assessing future resource needs and expected population impact of morbidity and mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases
10.
biorxiv; 2020.
Preprint in English | bioRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.11.12.379487

ABSTRACT

ObjectivesTo identify the level of Mental Health Status of Adolescents During the COVID-19 Pandemic among the Bangladeshi Graduate Student at Dhaka MethodA cross-sectional survey was conducted with 330 students from different public and Private Universities in Dhaka, Bangladesh between April 01, 2020 and July 31, 2020 amid the COVID-19 lockdown period in Bangladesh. A standard, self-administered online questionnaire consisting of questions on socio-demographic variables, mental health status, as well as stress management sent to the respondents through social networking platforms. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-test, one-way ANOVA and correlation tests. ResultsThe mean score of mental health status was 2.08 based on four points scale. They felt problem in decision making (3.04), in doing the things well (2.92), in enjoying normal day to day life (2.88), in playing a useful part in life (2.85), in doing their task (2.75), living in perfectly well and in good health (2.70). The respondents also developed a suicidal tendency (2.55), felt nervous in strung-up (2.24), took longer time to do things (2.14), felt tightness and pressure in head (2.12), and found themselves pressurized by various stuff (2.05). This study also found a significant positive relationship between mental health status and age, living with parents, and parents attitude. Finally, this study revealed that the respondents managed their stress by chatting with their friends, parents and siblings, and by sleeping. ConclusionMental health status of adolescents was found moderate in this study. This study suggests further large-scale study including different socio-economic settings in order to figure out the real scenario of adolescents mental health status of the country during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
11.
biorxiv; 2020.
Preprint in English | bioRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.11.12.379537

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S. has exhibited distinct waves, the first beginning in March 2020, the second beginning in early June, and additional waves currently emerging. Paradoxically, almost no county has exhibited this multi-wave pattern. We aim to answer three research questions: (1) How many distinct clusters of counties exhibit similar COVID-19 patterns in the time-series of daily confirmed cases?; (2) What is the geographic distribution of the counties within each cluster? and (3) Are county-level demographic, socioeconomic and political variables associated with the COVID-19 case patterns? We analyzed data from counties in the U.S. from March 1 to October 24, 2020. Time series clustering identified clusters in the daily confirmed cases of COVID-19. An explanatory model was used to identify demographic, socioeconomic and political variables associated the cluster patterns. Four patterns were identified from the timing of the outbreaks including counties experiencing a spring, an early summer, a late summer, and a fall outbreak. Several county-level demographic, socioeconomic, and political variables showed significant associations with the identified clusters. The timing of the outbreak is related both to the geographic location within the U.S. and several variables including age, poverty distribution, and political association. These results show that the reported pattern of cases in the U.S. is observed through aggregation of the COVID-19 cases, suggesting that local trends may be more informative. The timing of the outbreak varies by county, and is associated with important demographic, socioeconomic and geographic factors.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
12.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.10.18.20214585

ABSTRACT

The time-varying reproduction number (Rt: the average number secondary infections caused by each infected person) may be used to assess changes in transmission potential during an epidemic. Since new infections usually are not observed directly, it can only be estimated from delayed and potentially biased data. We estimated Rt using a model that mapped unobserved infections to observed test-positive cases, hospital admissions, and deaths with confirmed Covid-19, in seven regions of England over March through August 2020. We explored the sensitivity of Rt estimates of Covid-19 in England to different data sources, and investigated the potential of using differences in the estimates to track epidemic dynamics in population sub-groups. Our estimates of transmission potential varied for each data source. The divergence between estimates from each source was not consistent within or across regions over time, although estimates based on hospital admissions and deaths were more spatio-temporally synchronous than compared to estimates from all test-positives. We compared differences in Rt with the demographic and social context of transmission, and found the differences between Rt may be linked to biased representations of sub-populations in each data source: from uneven testing rates, or increasing severity of disease with age, seen via outbreaks in care home populations and changing age distributions of cases. We highlight that policy makers should consider the source populations of Rt estimates. Further work should clarify the best way to combine and interpret Rt estimates from different data sources based on the desired use.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Death
13.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.08.21.20167965

ABSTRACT

Background School closures are a well-established non-pharmaceutical intervention in the event of infectious disease outbreaks, and have been implemented in many countries across the world, including the UK, to slow down the spread of SARS-CoV-2. As governments begin to relax restrictions on public life there is a need to understand the potential impact that reopening schools may have on transmission. Methods We used data provided by the UK Department for Education to construct a network of English schools, connected through pairs of pupils resident at the same address. We used the network to evaluate the potential for transmission between schools, and for long range propagation across the network, under different reopening scenarios. Results Amongst the options evaluated we found that reopening only Reception, Year 1 and Year 6 (4-6 and 10-11 year olds) resulted in the lowest risk of transmission between schools, with outbreaks within a single school unlikely to result in outbreaks in adjacent schools in the network. The additional reopening of Years 10 and 12 (14-15 and 16-17 year olds) resulted in an increase in the risk of transmission between schools comparable to reopening all primary school years (4-11 year olds). However, the majority of schools presented low risk of initiating widespread transmission through the school system. Reopening all secondary school years (11-18 year olds) resulted in large potential outbreak clusters putting up to 50% of households connected to schools at risk of infection if sustained transmission within schools was possible. Conclusions Reopening secondary school years is likely to have a greater impact on community transmission than reopening primary schools in England. Keeping transmission within schools limited is essential for reducing the risk of large outbreaks amongst school-aged children and their household members.

14.
medrxiv; 2020.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2020.02.08.20021162

ABSTRACT

Background: To assess the viability of isolation and contact tracing to control onwards transmission from imported cases of 2019-nCoV. Methods: We developed a stochastic transmission model, parameterised to the 2019-nCoV outbreak. We used the model to quantify the potential effectiveness of contact tracing and isolation of cases at controlling a 2019 nCoV-like pathogen. We considered scenarios that varied in: the number of initial cases; the basic reproduction number R0; the delay from symptom onset to isolation; the probability contacts were traced; the proportion of transmission that occurred before symptom onset, and the proportion of subclinical infections. We assumed isolation prevented all further transmission in the model. Outbreaks were deemed controlled if transmission ended within 12 weeks or before 5000 cases in total. We measured the success of controlling outbreaks using isolation and contact tracing, and quantified the weekly maximum number of cases traced to measure feasibility of public health effort. Findings: While simulated outbreaks starting with only 5 initial cases, R0 of 1.5 and little transmission before symptom onset could be controlled even with low contact tracing probability, the prospects of controlling an outbreak dramatically dropped with the number of initial cases, with higher R0, and with more transmission before symptom onset. Across different initial numbers of cases, the majority of scenarios with an R0 of 1.5 were controllable with under 50% of contacts successfully traced. For R0 of 2.5 and 3.5, more than 70% and 90% of contacts respectively had to be traced to control the majority of outbreaks. The delay between symptom onset and isolation played the largest role in determining whether an outbreak was controllable for lower values of R0. For higher values of R0 and a large initial number of cases, contact tracing and isolation was only potentially feasible when less than 1% of transmission occurred before symptom onset. Interpretation: We found that in most scenarios contact tracing and case isolation alone is unlikely to control a new outbreak of 2019-nCov within three months. The probability of control decreases with longer delays from symptom onset to isolation, fewer cases ascertained by contact tracing, and increasing transmission before symptoms. This model can be modified to reflect updated transmission characteristics and more specific definitions of outbreak control to assess the potential success of local response efforts.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL