Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 45
Filter
1.
medrxiv; 2023.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2023.08.11.23293400

ABSTRACT

Background: Recurring COVID-19 waves highlight the need for tools able to quantify transmission risk, and identify geographical areas at risk of outbreaks. Local outbreak risk depends on complex immunity patterns resulting from previous infections, vaccination, waning and immune escape, alongside other factors (population density, social contact patterns). Immunity patterns are spatially and demographically heterogeneous, and are challenging to capture in country-level forecast models. Methods: We used a spatiotemporal regression model to forecast subnational case and death counts and applied it to three EU countries as test cases: France, Czechia, and Italy. Cases in local regions arise from importations or local transmission. Our model produces age-stratified forecasts given age-stratified data, and links reported case counts to routinely collected covariates (test number, vaccine coverage..). We assessed the predictive performance of our model up to four weeks ahead using proper scoring rules and compared it to the European COVID-19 Forecast Hub ensemble model. Using simulations, we evaluated the impact of variations in transmission on the forecasts. We developed an open-source RShiny App to visualise the forecasts and scenarios. Results: At a national level, the median relative difference between our median weekly case forecasts and the data up to four weeks ahead was 25% (IQR: 12-50%) over the prediction period. The accuracy decreased as the forecast horizon increased (on average 24% increase in the median ranked probability score per added week), while the accuracy of death forecasts remained stable. Beyond two weeks, the model generated a narrow range of likely transmission dynamics. The median national case forecasts showed similar accuracy to forecasts from the European COVID-19 Forecast Hub ensemble model, but the prediction interval was narrower in our model. Generating forecasts under alternative transmission scenarios was therefore key to capturing the range of possible short-term transmission dynamics. Discussion: Our model captures changes in local COVID-19 outbreak dynamics, and enables quantification of short-term transmission risk at a subnational level. The outputs of the model improve our ability to identify areas where outbreaks are most likely, and are available to a wide range of public health professionals through the Shiny App we developed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Death
2.
medrxiv; 2023.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2023.07.12.23292451

ABSTRACT

Background. Defining healthcare facility catchment areas is a key step in predicting future healthcare demand in epidemic settings. Forecasts of hospitalisations can be informed by leading indicators measured at the community level. However, this relies on the definition of so-called catchment areas, or the geographies whose populations make up the patients admitted to a given hospital, and which are often not well-defined. Little work has been done to quantify the impact of hospital catchment area definitions on healthcare demand forecasting. Methods. We made forecasts of Trust-level hospital admissions using a scaled convolution of local cases (as defined by the hospital catchment area) and a delay distribution. Hospital catchment area definitions were derived from either simple heuristics (in which people are admitted to their nearest hospital or any nearby hospital) or historical admissions data (all emergency or elective admissions in 2019, or COVID-19 admissions), plus a marginal baseline definition based on the distribution of all hospital admissions. We evaluated predictive performance using each hospital catchment area definition using the Weighted Interval Score (WIS) and considered how this changed by the length of the predictive horizon, the date on which the forecast was made, and by location. We also considered the change, if any, on the relative performance of each definition in retrospective vs. real-time settings, or at different spatial scales. Results. The choice of hospital catchment area definition affected the accuracy of hospital admission forecasts. The definition based on COVID-19 admissions data resulted in the most accurate forecasts at both a 7- and 14-day horizon, and was one of the top two best-performing definitions across forecast dates and locations. The nearby heuristic also performed well, but less consistently than the COVID-19 data definition. The marginal distribution baseline, which did not include any spatial information, was the lowest-ranked definition. The relative performance of the definitions was larger when using case forecasts compared to future observed cases. All results were consistent across spatial scales of the catchment area definitions. Conclusions. Using catchment area definitions derived from context-specific data can improve local-level hospital admissions forecasts. Where context-specific data is not available, using catchment areas defined by carefully-chosen heuristics are a sufficiently-good substitute. There is clear value in understanding what drives local admissions patterns, and further research is needed to understand the impact of different catchment area definitions on forecast performance where case trends are more heterogeneous.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
3.
biorxiv; 2023.
Preprint in English | bioRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2023.06.12.544667

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic both relied and placed significant burdens on the experts involved from research and public health sectors. The sustained high pressure of a pandemic on responders, such as healthcare workers, can lead to lasting psychological impacts including acute stress disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, burnout, and moral injury, which can impact individual wellbeing and productivity. As members of the infectious disease modelling community, we convened a reflective workshop to understand the professional and personal impacts of response work on our community and to propose recommendations for future epidemic responses. The attendees represented a range of career stages, institutions, and disciplines. This piece was collectively produced by those present at the session based on our collective experiences. Key issues we identified at the workshop were lack of institutional support, insecure contracts, unequal credit and recognition, and mental health impacts. Our recommendations include rewarding impactful work, fostering academia-public health collaboration, decreasing dependence on key individuals by developing teams, increasing transparency in decision-making, and implementing sustainable work practices. Despite limitations in representation, this workshop provided valuable insights into the UK COVID-19 modelling experience and guidance for future public health crises. Recognising and addressing the issues highlighted here is crucial, in our view, for ensuring the effectiveness of epidemic response work in the future.


Subject(s)
Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury , Communicable Diseases , Tooth, Impacted , COVID-19 , Stress Disorders, Traumatic , Stress Disorders, Traumatic, Acute
4.
medrxiv; 2023.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2023.04.27.23289109

ABSTRACT

The effective reproductive number Rt has taken a central role in the scientific, political, and public discussion during the COVID-19 pandemic, with numerous real-time estimates of this quantity routinely published. Disagreement between estimates can be substantial and may lead to confusion among decision-makers and the general public. In this work, we compare different estimates of the national-level effective reproductive number of COVID-19 in Germany in 2020 and 2021. We consider the agreement between estimates from the same method but published at different time points (within-method agreement) as well as retrospective agreement across different approaches (between-method agreement). Concerning the former, estimates from some methods are very stable over time and hardly subject to revisions, while others display considerable fluctuations. To evaluate between-method agreement, we reproduce the estimates generated by different groups using a variety of statistical approaches, standardizing analytical choices to assess how they contribute to the observed disagreement. These analytical choices include the data source, data pre-processing, assumed generation time distribution, statistical tuning parameters, and various delay distributions. We find that in practice, these auxiliary choices in the estimation of Rt may affect results at least as strongly as the selection of the statistical approach. They should thus be communicated transparently along with the estimates.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Confusion
5.
medrxiv; 2023.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2023.04.17.23288668

ABSTRACT

Real-time surveillance is a crucial element in the response to infectious disease outbreaks. However, the interpretation of incidence data is often hampered by delays occurring at various stages of data gathering and reporting. As a result, recent values are biased downward, which obscures current trends. Statistical nowcasting techniques can be employed to correct these biases, allowing for accurate characterization of recent developments and thus enhancing situational awareness. In this paper, we present a preregistered real-time assessment of eight nowcasting approaches, applied by independent research teams to German 7-day hospitalization incidences. This indicator played an important role in the management of the pandemic in Germany and was linked to levels of non-pharmaceutical interventions via certain thresholds. Due to its definition, in which hospitalization counts are aggregated by the date of case report rather than admission, German hospitalization incidences are particularly affected by delays and can take several weeks or months to fully stabilize. For this study, all methods were applied from 22 November 2021 to 29 April 2022, with probabilistic nowcasts produced each day for the current and 28 preceding days. Nowcasts at the national, state, and age-group levels were collected in the form of quantiles in a public repository and displayed in a dashboard. Moreover, a mean and a median ensemble nowcast were generated. We find that overall, the compared methods were able to remove a large part of the biases introduced by delays. Most participating teams underestimated the importance of very long delays, though, resulting in nowcasts with a slight downward bias. The accompanying uncertainty intervals were also too narrow for almost all methods. Averaged over all nowcast horizons, the best performance was achieved by a model using case incidences as a covariate and taking into account longer delays than the other approaches. For the most recent days, which are often considered the most relevant in practice, a mean ensemble of the submitted nowcasts performed best. We conclude by providing some lessons learned on the definition of nowcasting targets and practical challenges.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases
6.
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
7.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.11.14.22282286

ABSTRACT

Many countries affected by the global outbreak of monkeypox in 2022 have observed a decline in cases. Our mathematical model incorporating empirical estimates of the heavy-tailed sexual partnership distribution among men who have sex with men (MSM) suggests that monkeypox epidemics can hit the infection-derived herd immunity threshold and begin to decline with less than 1% of sexually active MSM population infected regardless of interventions or behavioural changes. Consistently, we found that many countries and US states experienced an epidemic peak with cumulative cases of around 0.1–0.7% of MSM population. The observed decline in cases may not necessarily be attributable to interventions or behavioural changes primarily, although continuing these approaches in the most effective manner is still warranted to minimise total epidemic size.

8.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.10.12.22280917

ABSTRACT

Multi-model and multi-team ensemble forecasts have become widely used to generate reliable short-term predictions of infectious disease spread. Notably, various public health agencies have used them to leverage academic disease modelling during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, ensemble forecasts are difficult to interpret and require extensive effort from numerous participating groups as well as a coordination team. In other fields, resource usage has been reduced by training simplified models that reproduce some of the observed behaviour of more complex models. Here we used observations of the behaviour of the European COVID-19 Forecast Hub ensemble combined with our own forecasting experience to identify a set of properties present in current ensemble forecasts. We then developed a parsimonious forecast model intending to mirror these properties. We assess forecasts generated from this model in real time over six months (the 15th of January 2022 to the 19th o July 2022) and for multiple European countries. We focused on forecasts of cases one to four weeks ahead and compared them to those by the European forecast hub ensemble. We find that the surrogate model behaves qualitatively similarly to the ensemble in many instances, though with increased uncertainty and poorer performance around periods of peak incidence (as measured by the Weighted Interval Score). The performance differences, however, seem to be partially due to a subset of time points, and the proposed model appears better probabilistically calibrated than the ensemble. We conclude that our simplified forecast model may have captured some of the dynamics of the hub ensemble, but more work is needed to understand the implicit epidemiological model that it represents.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Learning Disabilities , Communicable Diseases
9.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.07.02.22277186

ABSTRACT

Estimating the differences in the incubation-period, serial-interval, and generation-interval distributions of SARS-CoV-2 variants is critical to understanding their transmission and control. However, the impact of epidemic dynamics is often neglected in estimating the timing of infection and transmission---for example, when an epidemic is growing exponentially, a cohort of infected individuals who developed symptoms at the same time are more likely to have been infected recently. Here, we re-analyze incubation-period and serial-interval data describing transmissions of the Delta and Omicron variants from the Netherlands at the end of December 2021. Previous analysis of the same data set reported shorter mean observed incubation period (3.2 days vs 4.4 days) and serial interval (3.5 days vs 4.1 days) for the Omicron variant, but the number of infections caused by the Delta variant decreased during this period as the number of Omicron infections increased. When we account for growth-rate differences of two variants during the study period, we estimate similar mean incubation periods (3.8--4.5 days) for both variants but a shorter mean generation interval for the Omicron variant (3.0 days; 95\% CI: 2.7--3.2 days) than for the Delta variant (3.8 days; 95\% CI: 3.7--4.0 days). We further note that the differences in estimated generation intervals may be driven by the "network effect"---higher effective transmissibility of the Omicron variant can cause faster susceptible depletion among contact networks, which in turn prevents late transmission (therefore shortening realized generation intervals). Using up-to-date generation-interval distributions is critical to accurately estimating the reproduction advantage of the Omicron variant.

10.
Katharine Sherratt; Hugo Gruson; Rok Grah; Helen Johnson; Rene Niehus; Bastian Prasse; Frank Sandman; Jannik Deuschel; Daniel Wolffram; Sam Abbott; Alexander Ullrich; Graham Gibson; Evan L Ray; Nicholas G Reich; Daniel Sheldon; Yijin Wang; Nutcha Wattanachit; Lijing Wang; Jan Trnka; Guillaume Obozinski; Tao Sun; Dorina Thanou; Loic Pottier; Ekaterina Krymova; Maria Vittoria Barbarossa; Neele Leithauser; Jan Mohring; Johanna Schneider; Jaroslaw Wlazlo; Jan Fuhrmann; Berit Lange; Isti Rodiah; Prasith Baccam; Heidi Gurung; Steven Stage; Bradley Suchoski; Jozef Budzinski; Robert Walraven; Inmaculada Villanueva; Vit Tucek; Martin Smid; Milan Zajicek; Cesar Perez Alvarez; Borja Reina; Nikos I Bosse; Sophie Meakin; Pierfrancesco Alaimo Di Loro; Antonello Maruotti; Veronika Eclerova; Andrea Kraus; David Kraus; Lenka Pribylova; Bertsimas Dimitris; Michael Lingzhi Li; Soni Saksham; Jonas Dehning; Sebastian Mohr; Viola Priesemann; Grzegorz Redlarski; Benjamin Bejar; Giovanni Ardenghi; Nicola Parolini; Giovanni Ziarelli; Wolfgang Bock; Stefan Heyder; Thomas Hotz; David E. Singh; Miguel Guzman-Merino; Jose L Aznarte; David Morina; Sergio Alonso; Enric Alvarez; Daniel Lopez; Clara Prats; Jan Pablo Burgard; Arne Rodloff; Tom Zimmermann; Alexander Kuhlmann; Janez Zibert; Fulvia Pennoni; Fabio Divino; Marti Catala; Gianfranco Lovison; Paolo Giudici; Barbara Tarantino; Francesco Bartolucci; Giovanna Jona Lasinio; Marco Mingione; Alessio Farcomeni; Ajitesh Srivastava; Pablo Montero-Manso; Aniruddha Adiga; Benjamin Hurt; Bryan Lewis; Madhav Marathe; Przemyslaw Porebski; Srinivasan Venkatramanan; Rafal Bartczuk; Filip Dreger; Anna Gambin; Krzysztof Gogolewski; Magdalena Gruziel-Slomka; Bartosz Krupa; Antoni Moszynski; Karol Niedzielewski; Jedrzej Nowosielski; Maciej Radwan; Franciszek Rakowski; Marcin Semeniuk; Ewa Szczurek; Jakub Zielinski; Jan Kisielewski; Barbara Pabjan; Kirsten Holger; Yuri Kheifetz; Markus Scholz; Marcin Bodych; Maciej Filinski; Radoslaw Idzikowski; Tyll Krueger; Tomasz Ozanski; Johannes Bracher; Sebastian Funk.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.06.16.22276024

ABSTRACT

Background: Short-term forecasts of infectious disease burden can contribute to situational awareness and aid capacity planning. Based on best practice in other fields and recent insights in infectious disease epidemiology, one can maximise the predictive performance of such forecasts if multiple models are combined into an ensemble. Here we report on the performance of ensembles in predicting COVID-19 cases and deaths across Europe between 08 March 2021 and 07 March 2022. Methods: We used open-source tools to develop a public European COVID-19 Forecast Hub. We invited groups globally to contribute weekly forecasts for COVID-19 cases and deaths reported from a standardised source over the next one to four weeks. Teams submitted forecasts from March 2021 using standardised quantiles of the predictive distribution. Each week we created an ensemble forecast, where each predictive quantile was calculated as the equally-weighted average (initially the mean and then from 26th July the median) of all individual models predictive quantiles. We measured the performance of each model using the relative Weighted Interval Score (WIS), comparing models forecast accuracy relative to all other models. We retrospectively explored alternative methods for ensemble forecasts, including weighted averages based on models past predictive performance. Results: Over 52 weeks we collected and combined up to 28 forecast models for 32 countries. We found a weekly ensemble had a consistently strong performance across countries over time. Across all horizons and locations, the ensemble performed better on relative WIS than 84% of participating models forecasts of incident cases (with a total N=862), and 92% of participating models forecasts of deaths (N=746). Across a one to four week time horizon, ensemble performance declined with longer forecast periods when forecasting cases, but remained stable over four weeks for incident death forecasts. In every forecast across 32 countries, the ensemble outperformed most contributing models when forecasting either cases or deaths, frequently outperforming all of its individual component models. Among several choices of ensemble methods we found that the most influential and best choice was to use a median average of models instead of using the mean, regardless of methods of weighting component forecast models. Conclusions: Our results support the use of combining forecasts from individual models into an ensemble in order to improve predictive performance across epidemiological targets and populations during infectious disease epidemics. Our findings further suggest that median ensemble methods yield better predictive performance more than ones based on means. Our findings also highlight that forecast consumers should place more weight on incident death forecasts than incident case forecasts at forecast horizons greater than two weeks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Death , Communicable Diseases
11.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.06.13.22276321

ABSTRACT

IntroductionSince the start of the pandemic SARS-CoV-2 infection has most commonly been confirmed using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), with results translated into a binary positive/negative outcomes. Previous studies have found that there is additional useful information in the level of the Cycle threshold (Ct value) of positive cases. Here we characterise variation in Ct values as a proxy for viral loads in more than 3 million test-positive COVID-19 cases in England with the aim of better quantifying the utility of such data. MethodsWe used individual N gene Ct values from symptomatic PCR positive (with Ct value less than 30) Pillar 2 cases in England who self-reported the date of symptom onset, and for whom age, reinfection status, variant status, and the number of vaccines received was available. Those with a positive test result more than 6 days after their reported symptom onset were excluded to mitigate the potential impact of recall bias. We used a generalised additive model, to estimate Ct values empirical mean Ct values for each strata of interest independently as well as to predict Ct values using a model that adjusted for a range of demographic and epidemiological covariates jointly. We present empirical Ct values and compare them to predicted mean Ct values. ResultsWe found that mean Ct values varied by vaccine status, and reinfection status with the number of vaccine doses having little apparent effect. Modelling Ct values as a smooth function of time since onset and other variables struggled to reproduce the individual variation in the data but did match the population-level variation over time relatively well with this being apparently dominated by large differences between variants. Other variation over time was also captured to some degree though their remained several periods where the model could not capture the empirical means with a potential explanation being epidemic phase bias. ConclusionsAnalysing a large dataset of routine Ct values from symptomatic COVID-19 cases in England we found variation based on time since symptom onset, vaccine status, age, and variant. Ct values were highest 1-3 days after symptom onset and differed most due to variant status. We found no clear correlation between previously estimated differences in intrinsic transmissibility and Ct values indicating that this is potentially mediated at least partly by factors other than viral load as estimated using Ct values. We found evidence that a model adjusting for a range of covariates could explain some of the population-level variation over time but systematically underestimated Ct values when incidence was increasing, and overestimated them when incidence was decreasing. This indicates the utility of Ct values from this data source as a tool for surveillance, potentially avoiding some of the biases of aggregated positive counts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Memory Disorders
12.
arxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-ARXIV | ID: ppzbmed-2205.07090v1

ABSTRACT

Evaluating forecasts is essential in order to understand and improve forecasting and make forecasts useful to decision-makers. Much theoretical work has been done on the development of proper scoring rules and other scoring metrics that can help evaluate forecasts. In practice, however, conducting a forecast evaluation and comparison of different forecasters remains challenging. In this paper we introduce scoringutils, an R package that aims to greatly facilitate this process. It is especially geared towards comparing multiple forecasters, regardless of how forecasts were created, and visualising results. The package is able to handle missing forecasts and is the first R package to offer extensive support for forecasts represented through predictive quantiles, a format used by several collaborative ensemble forecasting efforts. The paper gives a short introduction to forecast evaluation, discusses the metrics implemented in scoringutils and gives guidance on when they are appropriate to use, and illustrates the application of the package using example data of forecasts for COVID-19 cases and deaths submitted to the European Forecast Hub between May and September 2021


Subject(s)
COVID-19
13.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.03.29.22273101

ABSTRACT

Background Repeated measurements of cross-sectional prevalence of Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) positivity or seropositivity provide rich insight into the dynamics of an infection. The UK Office for National Statistics (ONS) Community Infection Survey publishes such measurements for SARS-CoV-2 on a weekly basis based on testing enrolled households, contributing to situational awareness in the country. Here we present estimates of time-varying and static epidemiological quantities that were derived from the estimates published by ONS. Methods We used a gaussian process to model the incidence of infections and then estimated observed PCR prevalence by convolving our modelled incidence estimates with a previously published PCR detection curve describing the probability of a positive test as a function of the time since infection. We refined our incidence estimates using time-varying estimates of antibody prevalence combined with a model of antibody positivity and waning that moved individuals between compartments with or without antibodies based on estimates of new infections, vaccination, probability of seroconversion and waning. Results We produced incidence curves of infection describing the UK epidemic from late April 2020 until early 2022. We used these estimates of incidence to estimate the time-varying growth rate of infections and combined them with estimates of the generation interval to estimate time-varying reproduction numbers. Biological parameters describing seroconversion and waning, while based on a simple model, were broadly in line with plausible ranges from individual-level studies. Conclusions Beyond informing situational awareness and allowing for estimates using individual-level data, repeated cross-sectional studies make it possible to estimate epidemiological parameters from population-level models. Studies or public health surveillance methods based on similar designs offer opportunities for further improving our understanding of the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 or other pathogens and their interaction with population-level immunity.

14.
researchsquare; 2022.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-RESEARCHSQUARE | ID: ppzbmed-10.21203.rs.3.rs-1140332.v1

ABSTRACT

Background: SARS-CoV-2 is known to transmit in hospital settings, but the contribution of infections acquired in hospitals to the epidemic at a national scale is unknown. Methods: We used comprehensive national English datasets to determine the number of COVID-19 patients with identified hospital-acquired infections (with symptom onset >7 days after admission and before discharge) in acute English hospitals up to August 2020. As patients may leave the hospital prior to detection of infection or have rapid symptom onset, we combined measures of the length of stay and the incubation period distribution to estimate how many hospital-acquired infections may have been missed. We used simulations to estimate the total number (identified and unidentified) of symptomatic hospital-acquired infections, as well as infections due to onward community transmission from missed hospital-acquired infections, to 31 st July 2020. Results: In our dataset of hospitalised COVID-19 patients in acute English hospitals with a recorded symptom onset date (n = 65,028), 7% were classified as hospital-acquired. We estimated that only 30% (range across weeks and 200 simulations: 20-41%) of symptomatic hospital-acquired infections would be identified, with up to 15% (mean, 95% range over 200 simulations: 14.1%-15.8%) of cases currently classified as community-acquired COVID-19 potentially linked to hospital transmission. We estimated that 26,600 (25,900 to 27,700) individuals acquired a symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in an acute Trust in England before 31st July 2020, resulting in 15,900 (15,200-16,400) or 20.1% (19.2%-20.7%) of all identified hospitalised COVID-19 cases. Conclusions: Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to hospitalised patients likely caused approximately a fifth of identified cases of hospitalised COVID-19 in the “first wave” in England, but less than 1% of all infections in England. Using time to symptom onset from admission for inpatients as a detection method likely misses a substantial proportion (>60%) of hospital-acquired infections.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
15.
arxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-ARXIV | ID: ppzbmed-2201.12387v2

ABSTRACT

The U.S. COVID-19 Forecast Hub aggregates forecasts of the short-term burden of COVID-19 in the United States from many contributing teams. We study methods for building an ensemble that combines forecasts from these teams. These experiments have informed the ensemble methods used by the Hub. To be most useful to policy makers, ensemble forecasts must have stable performance in the presence of two key characteristics of the component forecasts: (1) occasional misalignment with the reported data, and (2) instability in the relative performance of component forecasters over time. Our results indicate that in the presence of these challenges, an untrained and robust approach to ensembling using an equally weighted median of all component forecasts is a good choice to support public health decision makers. In settings where some contributing forecasters have a stable record of good performance, trained ensembles that give those forecasters higher weight can also be helpful.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
16.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.01.08.22268920

ABSTRACT

Background Early estimates from South Africa indicated that the Omicron COVID-19 variant may be both more transmissible and have greater immune escape than the previously dominant Delta variant. The rapid turnover of the latest epidemic wave in South Africa as well as initial evidence from contact tracing and household infection studies has prompted speculation that the generation time of the Omicron variant may be shorter in comparable settings than the generation time of the Delta variant. Methods We estimated daily growth rates for the Omicron and Delta variants in each UKHSA region from the 23rd of November to the 23rd of December 2021 using surveillance case counts by date of specimen and S-gene target failure status with an autoregressive model that allowed for time-varying differences in the transmission advantage of the Delta variant where the evidence supported this. By assuming a gamma distributed generation distribution we then estimated the generation time distribution and transmission advantage of the Omicron variant that would be required to explain this time varying advantage. We repeated this estimation process using two different prior estimates for the generation time of the Delta variant first based on household transmission and then based on its intrinsic generation time. Results Visualising our growth rate estimates provided initial evidence for a difference in generation time distributions. Assuming a generation time distribution for Delta with a mean of 2.5-4 days (90% credible interval) and a standard deviation of 1.9-3 days we estimated a shorter generation time distribution for Omicron with a mean of 1.5-3.2 days and a standard deviation of 1.3-4.6 days. This implied a transmission advantage for Omicron in this setting of 160%-210% compared to Delta. We found similar relative results using an estimate of the intrinsic generation time for Delta though all estimates increased in magnitude due to the longer assumed generation time. Conclusions We found that a reduction in the generation time of Omicron compared to Delta was able to explain the observed variation over time in the transmission advantage of the Omicron variant. However, this analysis cannot rule out the role of other factors such as differences in the populations the variants were mixing in, differences in immune escape between variants or bias due to using the test to test distribution as a proxy for the generation time distribution.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
17.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.12.01.21266598

ABSTRACT

Forecasts based on epidemiological modelling have played an important role in shaping public policy throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. This modelling combines knowledge about infectious disease dynamics with the subjective opinion of the researcher who develops and refines the model and often also adjusts model outputs. Developing a forecast model is difficult, resource- and time-consuming. It is therefore worth asking what modelling is able to add beyond the subjective opinion of the researcher alone. To investigate this, we analysed different real-time forecasts of cases of and deaths from COVID-19 in Germany and Poland over a 1-4 week horizon submitted to the German and Polish Forecast Hub. We compared crowd forecasts elicited from researchers and volunteers, against a) forecasts from two semi-mechanistic models based on common epidemiological assumptions and b) the ensemble of all other models submitted to the Forecast Hub. We found crowd forecasts, despite being overconfident, to outperform all other methods across all forecast horizons when forecasting cases (weighted interval score relative to the Hub ensemble 2 weeks ahead: 0.89). Forecasts based on computational models performed comparably better when predicting deaths (rel. WIS 1.26), suggesting that epidemiological modelling and human judgement can complement each other in important ways.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
18.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.11.30.21267056

ABSTRACT

Background: Local estimates of the time-varying effective reproduction number (Rt) of COVID-19 in England became increasingly heterogeneous during April and May 2021. This may have been attributable to the spread of the Delta SARS-CoV-2 variant. This paper documents real-time analysis that aimed to investigate the association between changes in the proportion of positive cases that were S-gene positive, an indicator of the Delta variant against a background of the previously predominant Alpha variant, and the estimated time-varying Rt at the level of upper-tier local authorities (UTLA). Method: We explored the relationship between the proportion of samples that were S-gene positive and the Rt of test-positive cases over time from the 23 February 2021 to the 25 May 2021. Effective reproduction numbers were estimated using the EpiNow2 R package independently for each local authority using two different estimates of the generation time. We then fit a range of regression models to estimate a multiplicative relationship between S-gene positivity and weekly mean Rt estimate. Results: We found evidence of an association between increased mean Rt estimates and the proportion of S-gene positives across all models evaluated with the magnitude of the effect increasing as model flexibility was decreased. Models that adjusted for either national level or NHS region level time-varying residuals were found to fit the data better, suggesting potential unexplained confounding. Conclusions: Our results indicated that even after adjusting for time-varying residuals between NHS regions, S-gene positivity was associated with an increase in the effective reproduction number of COVID-19. These findings were robust across a range of models and generation time assumptions, though the specific effect size was variable depending on the assumptions used. The lower bound of the estimated effect indicated that the reproduction number of Delta was above 1 in almost all local authorities throughout the period of investigation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
19.
researchsquare; 2021.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-RESEARCHSQUARE | ID: ppzbmed-10.21203.rs.3.rs-1098214.v1

ABSTRACT

Hospital-based transmission played a dominant role in MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV epidemics but large-scale studies of its role in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic are lacking. Such transmission risks spreading the virus to the most vulnerable individuals and can have wider-scale impacts through hospital-community interactions. Using data from acute hospitals in England we quantify within-hospital transmission, evaluate likely pathways of spread and factors associated with heightened transmission risk, and explore the wider dynamical consequences. We show that hospital transmission is likely to have been a major contributor to the burden of COVID-19 in England. We estimate that between June 2020 and March 2021 between 95,000 and 167,000 patients acquired SARS-CoV-2 in hospitals with nosocomially-infected patients likely to have been the main sources of transmission to other patients. Increased transmission to patients was associated with hospitals having fewer single rooms and lower heated volume per bed. Moreover, we show that reducing hospital transmission could substantially enhance the efficiency of punctuated lockdown measures in suppressing community transmission. These findings reveal the previously unrecognised scale of hospital transmission, have direct implications for targeting of hospital control measures, and highlight the need to design hospitals better-equipped to limit the transmission of future high consequence pathogens.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection
20.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.11.05.21265810

ABSTRACT

We report on the second and final part of a pre-registered forecasting study on COVID-19 cases and deaths in Germany and Poland. Fifteen independent research teams provided forecasts at lead times of one through four weeks from January through mid-April 2021. Compared to the first part (October--December 2020), the number of participating teams increased, and a number of teams started providing subnational-level forecasts. The addressed time period is characterized by rather stable non-pharmaceutical interventions in both countries, making short-term predictions more straightforward than in the first part of our study. In both countries, case counts declined initially, before rebounding due to the rise of the B.1.1.7 variant. Deaths declined through most of the study period in Germany while in Poland they increased after a prolonged plateau. Many, though not all, models outperformed a simple baseline model up to four weeks ahead, with ensemble methods showing very good relative performance. Major trend changes in reported cases, however, remained challenging to predict.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL