Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Stat Sci ; 37(2): 183-206, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1862207

ABSTRACT

We present interoperability as a guiding framework for statistical modelling to assist policy makers asking multiple questions using diverse datasets in the face of an evolving pandemic response. Interoperability provides an important set of principles for future pandemic preparedness, through the joint design and deployment of adaptable systems of statistical models for disease surveillance using probabilistic reasoning. We illustrate this through case studies for inferring and characterising spatial-temporal prevalence and reproduction numbers of SARS-CoV-2 infections in England.

2.
Lancet Reg Health Eur ; 15: 100322, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1676851

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Ethnically diverse and socio-economically deprived communities have been differentially affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. METHOD: Using a multilevel regression model we assessed the time-varying association between SARS-CoV-2 infections and areal level deprivation and ethnicity from 1st of June 2020 to the 19th of September 2021. We separately considered weekly test positivity rate and estimated debiased prevalence at the Lower Tier Local Authority (LTLA) level, adjusting for confounders and spatio-temporal correlation structure. FINDINGS: Comparing the least deprived and predominantly White areas with most deprived and predominantly non-White areas over the whole study period, the weekly positivity rate increases from 2·977% (95% CrI 2.913%-3.029%) to 3·347% (95% CrI 3.300%-3.402%). Similarly, prevalence increases from 0·369% (95% CrI 0.361%-0.375%) to 0·405% (95% CrI 0.399%-0.412%). Deprivation has a stronger effect until October 2020, while the effect of ethnicity becomes more pronounced at the peak of the second wave and then again in May-June 2021. In the second wave of the pandemic, LTLAs with large South Asian populations were the most affected, whereas areas with large Black populations did not show increased values for either outcome during the entire period under analysis. INTERPRETATION: Deprivation and proportion of non-White populations are both associated with an increased COVID-19 burden in terms of disease spread and monitoring, but the strength of association varies over the course of the pandemic and for different ethnic subgroups. The consistency of results across the two outcomes suggests that deprivation and ethnicity have a differential impact on disease exposure or susceptibility rather than testing access and habits. FUNDINGS: EPSRC, MRC, The Alan Turing Institute, NIH, UKHSA, DHSC.

3.
Nat Microbiol ; 7(1): 97-107, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1596437

ABSTRACT

Global and national surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology is mostly based on targeted schemes focused on testing individuals with symptoms. These tested groups are often unrepresentative of the wider population and exhibit test positivity rates that are biased upwards compared with the true population prevalence. Such data are routinely used to infer infection prevalence and the effective reproduction number, Rt, which affects public health policy. Here, we describe a causal framework that provides debiased fine-scale spatiotemporal estimates by combining targeted test counts with data from a randomized surveillance study in the United Kingdom called REACT. Our probabilistic model includes a bias parameter that captures the increased probability of an infected individual being tested, relative to a non-infected individual, and transforms observed test counts to debiased estimates of the true underlying local prevalence and Rt. We validated our approach on held-out REACT data over a 7-month period. Furthermore, our local estimates of Rt are indicative of 1-week- and 2-week-ahead changes in SARS-CoV-2-positive case numbers. We also observed increases in estimated local prevalence and Rt that reflect the spread of the Alpha and Delta variants. Our results illustrate how randomized surveys can augment targeted testing to improve statistical accuracy in monitoring the spread of emerging and ongoing infectious disease.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Models, Statistical , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Basic Reproduction Number , Bias , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Testing/statistics & numerical data , Forecasting , Humans , Prevalence , Reproducibility of Results , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Spatio-Temporal Analysis , United Kingdom/epidemiology
5.
Environ Int ; 146: 106316, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-959765

ABSTRACT

Recent studies suggested a link between long-term exposure to air-pollution and COVID-19 mortality. However, due to their ecological design based on large spatial units, they neglect the strong localised air-pollution patterns, and potentially lead to inadequate confounding adjustment. We investigated the effect of long-term exposure to NO2 and PM2.5 on COVID-19 mortality in England using high geographical resolution. In this nationwide cross-sectional study in England, we included 38,573 COVID-19 deaths up to June 30, 2020 at the Lower Layer Super Output Area level (n = 32,844 small areas). We retrieved averaged NO2 and PM2.5 concentration during 2014-2018 from the Pollution Climate Mapping. We used Bayesian hierarchical models to quantify the effect of air-pollution while adjusting for a series of confounding and spatial autocorrelation. We find a 0.5% (95% credible interval: -0.2%, 1.2%) and 1.4% (95% CrI: -2.1%, 5.1%) increase in COVID-19 mortality risk for every 1 µg/m3 increase in NO2 and PM2.5 respectively, after adjusting for confounding and spatial autocorrelation. This corresponds to a posterior probability of a positive effect equal to 0.93 and 0.78 respectively. The spatial relative risk at LSOA level revealed strong patterns, similar for the different pollutants. This potentially captures the spread of the disease during the first wave of the epidemic. Our study provides some evidence of an effect of long-term NO2 exposure on COVID-19 mortality, while the effect of PM2.5 remains more uncertain.


Subject(s)
Air Pollutants , Air Pollution , COVID-19 , Air Pollutants/analysis , Air Pollutants/toxicity , Air Pollution/adverse effects , Air Pollution/analysis , Bayes Theorem , Cross-Sectional Studies , England/epidemiology , Environmental Exposure/adverse effects , Environmental Exposure/analysis , Humans , Nitrogen Dioxide/analysis , Nitrogen Dioxide/toxicity , Particulate Matter/analysis , Particulate Matter/toxicity , SARS-CoV-2 , Spatial Analysis
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL