Acceptance and Perception of Artificial Intelligence Usability in Eye Care (APPRAISE) for Ophthalmologists: A Multinational Perspective.

Background: Many artificial intelligence (AI) studies have focused on development of AI models, novel techniques, and reporting guidelines. However, little is understood about clinicians' perspectives of AI applications in medical fields including ophthalmology, particularly in light of recent regulatory guidelines. The aim for this study was to evaluate the perspectives of ophthalmologists regarding AI in 4 major eye conditions: diabetic retinopathy (DR), glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and cataract. Methods: This was a multi-national survey of ophthalmologists between March 1st, 2020 to February 29th, 2021 disseminated via the major global ophthalmology societies. The survey was designed based on microsystem, mesosystem and macrosystem questions, and the software as a medical device (SaMD) regulatory framework chaired by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Factors associated with AI adoption for ophthalmology analyzed with multivariable logistic regression random forest machine learning. Results: One thousand one hundred seventy-six ophthalmologists from 70 countries participated with a response rate ranging from 78.8 to 85.8% per question. Ophthalmologists were more willing to use AI as clinical assistive tools (88.1%, n = 890/1,010) especially those with over 20 years' experience (OR 3.70, 95% CI: 1.10-12.5, p = 0.035), as compared to clinical decision support tools (78.8%, n = 796/1,010) or diagnostic tools (64.5%, n = 651). A majority of Ophthalmologists felt that AI is most relevant to DR (78.2%), followed by glaucoma (70.7%), AMD (66.8%), and cataract (51.4%) detection. Many participants were confident their roles will not be replaced (68.2%, n = 632/927), and felt COVID-19 catalyzed willingness to adopt AI (80.9%, n = 750/927). Common barriers to implementation include medical liability from errors (72.5%, n = 672/927) whereas enablers include improving access (94.5%, n = 876/927). Machine learning modeling predicted acceptance from participant demographics with moderate to high accuracy, and area under the receiver operating curves of 0.63-0.83. Conclusion: Ophthalmologists are receptive to adopting AI as assistive tools for DR, glaucoma, and AMD. Furthermore, ML is a useful method that can be applied to evaluate predictive factors on clinical qualitative questionnaires. This study outlines actionable insights for future research and facilitation interventions to drive adoption and operationalization of AI tools for Ophthalmology.

Effectiveness and durability of BNT162b2 vaccine against hospital and emergency department admissions due to SARS-CoV-2 omicron sub-lineages BA.1 and BA.2 in a large health system in the USA: a test-negative, case-control study.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1.1.529 BA.1) lineage was first detected in November, 2021, and is associated with reduced vaccine effectiveness. By March, 2022, BA.1 had been replaced by sub-lineage BA.2 in the USA. As new variants evolve, vaccine performance must be continually assessed. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and durability of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) against hospital and emergency department admissions for BA.1 and BA.2. METHODS: In this test-negative, case-control study, we sourced data from the electronic health records of adult (aged ≥18 years) members of Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC), which is a health-care system in the USA, who were admitted to one of 15 KPSC hospitals or emergency departments (without subsequent hospitalisation) between Dec 27, 2021, and June 4, 2022, with an acute respiratory infection and were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Omicron sub-lineage was determined by use of sequencing, spike gene target failure, and the predominance of variants in certain time periods. Our main outcome was the effectiveness of two or three doses of BNT162b2 in preventing emergency department or hospital admission. Variant-specific vaccine effectiveness was evaluated by comparing the odds ratios from logistic regression models of vaccination between test-positive cases and test-negative controls, adjusting for the month of admission, age, sex, race and ethnicity, body-mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, previous influenza or pneumococcal vaccines, and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also assessed effectiveness by the time since vaccination. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04848584, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Of 65 813 total admissions during the study period, we included 16 994 in our analyses, of which 7435 were due to BA.1, 1056 were due to BA.2, and 8503 were not due to SARS-CoV-2. In adjusted analyses, two-dose vaccine effectiveness was 40% (95% CI 27 to 50) for hospitalisation and 29% (18 to 38) for emergency department admission against BA.1 and 56% (31 to 72) for hospitalisation and 16% (-5 to 33) for emergency department admission against BA.2. Three-dose vaccine effectiveness was 79% (74 to 83) for hospitalisation and 72% (67 to 77) for emergency department admission against BA.1 and 71% (55 to 81) for hospitalisation and 21% (1 to 37) for emergency department admission against BA.2. Less than 3 months after the third dose, vaccine effectiveness was 80% (74 to 84) for hospitalisation and 74% (69 to 78) for emergency department admission against BA.1. Vaccine effectiveness 3 months or more after the third dose was 76% (69 to 82) against BA.1-related hospitalisation and 65% (56 to 73) against BA.1-related emergency department admission. Against BA.2, vaccine effectiveness was 74% (47 to 87) for hospitalisation and 59% (40 to 72) for emergency department admission at less than 3 months after the third dose and 70% (53 to 81) for hospitalisation and 5% (-21 to 25) for emergency department admission at 3 months or more after the third dose. INTERPRETATION: Two doses of BNT162b2 provided only partial protection against BA.1-related and BA.2-related hospital and emergency department admission, which underscores the need for booster doses against omicron. Although three doses offered high levels of protection (≥70%) against hospitalisation, variant-adapted vaccines are probably needed to improve protection against less severe endpoints, like emergency department admission, especially for BA.2. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Acceptance and Perception of Artificial Intelligence Usability in Eye Care (APPRAISE) for Ophthalmologists: A Multinational Perspective

Background Many artificial intelligence (AI) studies have focused on development of AI models, novel techniques, and reporting guidelines. However, little is understood about clinicians' perspectives of AI applications in medical fields including ophthalmology, particularly in light of recent regulatory guidelines. The aim for this study was to evaluate the perspectives of ophthalmologists regarding AI in 4 major eye conditions: diabetic retinopathy (DR), glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and cataract. Methods This was a multi-national survey of ophthalmologists between March 1st, 2020 to February 29th, 2021 disseminated via the major global ophthalmology societies. The survey was designed based on microsystem, mesosystem and macrosystem questions, and the software as a medical device (SaMD) regulatory framework chaired by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Factors associated with AI adoption for ophthalmology analyzed with multivariable logistic regression random forest machine learning. Results One thousand one hundred seventy-six ophthalmologists from 70 countries participated with a response rate ranging from 78.8 to 85.8% per question. Ophthalmologists were more willing to use AI as clinical assistive tools (88.1%, n = 890/1,010) especially those with over 20 years' experience (OR 3.70, 95% CI: 1.10–12.5, p = 0.035), as compared to clinical decision support tools (78.8%, n = 796/1,010) or diagnostic tools (64.5%, n = 651). A majority of Ophthalmologists felt that AI is most relevant to DR (78.2%), followed by glaucoma (70.7%), AMD (66.8%), and cataract (51.4%) detection. Many participants were confident their roles will not be replaced (68.2%, n = 632/927), and felt COVID-19 catalyzed willingness to adopt AI (80.9%, n = 750/927). Common barriers to implementation include medical liability from errors (72.5%, n = 672/927) whereas enablers include improving access (94.5%, n = 876/927). Machine learning modeling predicted acceptance from participant demographics with moderate to high accuracy, and area under the receiver operating curves of 0.63–0.83. Conclusion Ophthalmologists are receptive to adopting AI as assistive tools for DR, glaucoma, and AMD. Furthermore, ML is a useful method that can be applied to evaluate predictive factors on clinical qualitative questionnaires. This study outlines actionable insights for future research and facilitation interventions to drive adoption and operationalization of AI tools for Ophthalmology.

Durability of BNT162b2 vaccine against hospital and emergency department admissions due to the omicron and delta variants in a large health system in the USA: a test-negative case-control study.

BACKGROUND: The duration of protection against the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant for current COVID-19 vaccines is not well characterised. Vaccine-specific estimates are especially needed. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and durability of two and three doses of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) mRNA vaccine against hospital and emergency department admissions due to the delta (B.1.617.2) and omicron variants. METHODS: In this case-control study with a test-negative design, we analysed electronic health records of members of Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC), a large integrated health system in California, USA, from Dec 1, 2021, to Feb 6, 2022. Vaccine effectiveness was calculated in KPSC patients aged 18 years and older admitted to hospital or an emergency department (without a subsequent hospital admission) with a diagnosis of acute respiratory infection and tested for SARS-CoV-2 via PCR. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness was estimated with odds ratios from adjusted logistic regression models. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04848584). FINDINGS: Analyses were done for 11 123 hospital or emergency department admissions. In adjusted analyses, effectiveness of two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine against the omicron variant was 41% (95% CI 21-55) against hospital admission and 31% (16-43) against emergency department admission at 9 months or longer after the second dose. After three doses, effectiveness of BNT162b2 against hospital admission due to the omicron variant was 85% (95% CI 80-89) at less than 3 months but fell to 55% (28-71) at 3 months or longer, although confidence intervals were wide for the latter estimate. Against emergency department admission, the effectiveness of three doses of BNT162b2 against the omicron variant was 77% (72-81) at less than 3 months but fell to 53% (36-66) at 3 months or longer. Trends in waning against SARS-CoV-2 outcomes due to the delta variant were generally similar, but with higher effectiveness estimates at each timepoint than those seen for the omicron variant. INTERPRETATION: Three doses of BNT162b2 conferred high protection against hospital and emergency department admission due to both the delta and omicron variants in the first 3 months after vaccination. However, 3 months after receipt of a third dose, waning was apparent against SARS-CoV-2 outcomes due to the omicron variant, including hospital admission. Additional doses of current, adapted, or novel COVD-19 vaccines might be needed to maintain high levels of protection against subsequent waves of SARS-CoV-2 caused by the omicron variant or future variants with similar escape potential. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Effectiveness Associated With BNT162b2 Vaccine Against Emergency Department and Urgent Care Encounters for Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Adolescents Aged 12 to 17 Years.

Importance: Data about the duration of protection of 2 and 3 doses of BNT162b2 in children and adolescents are needed to help inform recommendations for boosters in this age group. Objective: To evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE) and durability associated with 2 doses of BNT162b2 against Delta- and Omicron-related emergency department (ED) and urgent care (UC) encounters among adolescents aged 12 to 17 years and to estimate VE associated with 3 doses against these same outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This test-negative case-control study was conducted at Kaiser Permanente Southern California, an integrated health care system using electronic health records in the US. Participants included Kaiser Permanente Southern California members ages 12 to 17 years with an ED or UC encounter from November 1, 2021, through March 18, 2022, for acute respiratory infection who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 via a reverse transction-polymerase chain reaction test. Analyses were conducted from March 21 to June 22, 2022. Exposures: BNT162b2 vaccination status ascertained from electronic health records and state registry data. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was VE associated with BNT162b2 against ED and UC encounters related to Delta or Omicron variant SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results: Analyses were conducted among 3168 adolescents, including 1004 with ED visits and 2164 with UC visits. Median (IQR) age was 15 (13-16) years, and 1461 (46.1%) were boys. In adjusted analyses, VE associated with 2 doses of BNT162b2 against ED or UC encounters was highest within the first 2 months for both Delta (89% [95% CI, 69% to 96%]) and Omicron (73% [95% CI, 54% to 84%]) variants but waned to 49% (95% CI, 27% to 65%) for the Delta variant and 16% (95% CI, -7% to 34%) for the Omicron variant at 6 months and beyond. A third dose of BNT162b2 was associated with improved protection against the Omicron variant (87% [95% CI, 72% to 94%]) after a median (IQR) of 19 (9-32) days after dose 3. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that 2 doses of the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine were associated with high levels of protection against ED and UC encounters related to the Delta and Omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2 in the first few months after vaccination. However, effectiveness waned over time, especially against Omicron. A third dose of BNT162b2 was associated with improved protection against Omicron beyond that seen initially after 2 doses, underscoring the importance of boosters for adolescents aged 12 to 17 years.

A Smart Framework to Analyze Hotel Services after COVID-19

In the last decade, many websites have allowed customers to provide reviews about their experiences in dealing with different hotels like describing their opinions about different sides like cleanliness, food, employees, and other services. However, after COVID-19, new concerns have emerged linked to the health precautionary and preventive processes. At the same time, the amount of generated data (Textual Data) has become very huge (Big Data), and it needs to auto classifier for processing it where it is impossible to review manually. So, this research proposed a smart method to detect useful information from text by extracting the interesting services from comments automatically. The method depended on machine learning (ML) and compared between five different classification models (Spacy, Naïve Bayes (NB), Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD), Passive Aggressive, and AdaBoost) to determine which one provides the best results and accuracy. According to the experiment on a real dataset containing more than 1000 records, the NB was the best accurate with 98%, while the Spacy was less and that related to the small size of training data. © 2022 Bharati Vidyapeeth, New Delhi.

Effectiveness of a third dose of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in a large US health system: A retrospective cohort study.

Background: Globally, recommendations are expanding for third (booster) doses of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech). In the United States, as of November 19, 2021, boosters were recommended for all adults aged 18 years and older. We evaluated the effectiveness of a third dose of BNT162b2 among adults in a large US integrated health system. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed electronic health records from Kaiser Permanente Southern California between Dec 14, 2020 and Dec 5, 2021 to assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) of two and three doses of BNT162b2 against SARS-CoV-2 infections (without hospital admission) andCOVID-19-related hospital admission. VE was calculated using hazards ratios from adjusted Cox models. Findings: After only two doses, VE against infection declined from 85% (95% CI 83-86) during the first month to 49% (46-51) ≥ 7 months following vaccination. Overall VE against hospitalization was 90% (95% CI 86-92) within one month and did not wane, however, effectiveness against hospitalization appeared to wane among immunocompromised individuals but was not statistically significant (93% [72-98] at 1 month to 74% [45-88] after ≥ 7 months; p=0·490). Three-dose VE (median follow-up 1·3 months [SD 0·6]) was 88% (95% CI 86-89) against infection and 97% (95-98) against hospitalization. Effectiveness after three doses was higher than that seen one month after receiving only two doses for both outcomes. Relative VE of three doses compared to two (with at least six months after the second dose) was 75% (95% CI 71-78) against infections and 70% (48-83) against hospital admissions. Interpretation: These data support the benefit of broad BNT162b2 booster recommendations, as three doses confers comparable, if not better, protection against SARS-CoV-2 infections and hospital admission as was seen soon after receiving two doses. Funding: Pfizer Inc.

STRUCTURE PREDICTION AND EXAMINATION OF SPIKE PROTEIN FROM SARS-COV2 USING COMPUTATIONAL AND SIMULATION TOOLS

Recent emergence of COVID-19 corona virus has resulted in WHO-declared public health emergency of international concern. Research around the globe is working towards establishing a great understanding of this particular viruses and developing treatments and vaccines to prevent spread. Knowing structural properties of a protein provides an important resource for understanding how it functions. This paper provides structural details of Spike Protein(s) of novel corona virus. The Spike protein of nCOV2 is prominent for confining with a cell receptor which is act as a referee for the synthesis of virus and host membranes, and these activities being crucial for virus ingress in to host cell. This paper studies primary, secondary and tertiary structures of spike protein of SARS-COV2 predicted using Exapasy Program, PSIPRED, and Homology Modeling Methods respectively [1]. The predicted structure was validated using PROCHECK by Ramachandran plot and also validated through ProSAWeb tool. Finally, this predicted structure will helps to discovering efficient medicine against corona epidemic. In future, resultant structure of homology modeling would be energy minimized and can do MD (Molecular dynamics) simulations to examine how the expected model behave structurally, dynamically, using several computational and simulation tools.

Effectiveness of mRNA BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine up to 6 months in a large integrated health system in the USA: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine effectiveness studies have not differentiated the effect of the delta (B.1.617.2) variant and potential waning immunity in observed reductions in effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infections. We aimed to evaluate overall and variant-specific effectiveness of BNT162b2 (tozinameran, Pfizer-BioNTech) against SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19-related hospital admissions by time since vaccination among members of a large US health-care system. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we analysed electronic health records of individuals (≥12 years) who were members of the health-care organisation Kaiser Permanente Southern California (CA, USA), to assess BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19-related hospital admissions for up to 6 months. Participants were required to have 1 year or more previous membership of the organisation. Outcomes comprised SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive tests and COVID-19-related hospital admissions. Effectiveness calculations were based on hazard ratios from adjusted Cox models. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04848584. FINDINGS: Between Dec 14, 2020, and Aug 8, 2021, of 4 920 549 individuals assessed for eligibility, we included 3 436 957 (median age 45 years [IQR 29-61]; 1 799 395 [52·4%] female and 1 637 394 [47·6%] male). For fully vaccinated individuals, effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infections was 73% (95% CI 72-74) and against COVID-19-related hospital admissions was 90% (89-92). Effectiveness against infections declined from 88% (95% CI 86-89) during the first month after full vaccination to 47% (43-51) after 5 months. Among sequenced infections, vaccine effectiveness against infections of the delta variant was high during the first month after full vaccination (93% [95% CI 85-97]) but declined to 53% [39-65] after 4 months. Effectiveness against other (non-delta) variants the first month after full vaccination was also high at 97% (95% CI 95-99), but waned to 67% (45-80) at 4-5 months. Vaccine effectiveness against hospital admissions for infections with the delta variant for all ages was high overall (93% [95% CI 84-96]) up to 6 months. INTERPRETATION: Our results provide support for high effectiveness of BNT162b2 against hospital admissions up until around 6 months after being fully vaccinated, even in the face of widespread dissemination of the delta variant. Reduction in vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infections over time is probably primarily due to waning immunity with time rather than the delta variant escaping vaccine protection. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Atrial Fibrillation in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: Incidence, Predictors, Outcomes, and Comparison to Influenza.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study is to determine the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter (AFL) in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). BACKGROUND: COVID-19 results in increased inflammatory markers previously associated with atrial arrhythmias. However, little is known about their incidence or specificity in COVID-19 or their association with outcomes. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of 3,970 patients admitted with polymerase chain reaction-positive COVID-19 between February 4 and April 22, 2020, with manual review performed of 1,110. The comparator arm included 1,420 patients with influenza hospitalized between January 1, 2017, and January 1, 2020. RESULTS: Among 3,970 inpatients with COVID-19, the incidence of AF/AFL was 10% (n = 375) and in patients without a history of atrial arrhythmias it was 4% (n = 146). Patients with new-onset AF/AFL were older with increased inflammatory markers including interleukin 6 (93 vs. 68 pg/ml; p < 0.01), and more myocardial injury (troponin-I: 0.2 vs. 0.06 ng/ml; p < 0.01). AF and AFL were associated with increased mortality (46% vs. 26%; p < 0.01). Manual review captured a somewhat higher incidence of AF/AFL (13%, n = 140). Compared to inpatients with COVID-19, patients with influenza (n = 1,420) had similar rates of AF/AFL (12%, n = 163) but lower mortality. The presence of AF/AFL correlated with similarly increased mortality in both COVID-19 (relative risk: 1.77) and influenza (relative risk: 1.78). CONCLUSIONS: AF/AFL occurs in a subset of patients hospitalized with either COVID-19 or influenza and is associated with inflammation and disease severity in both infections. The incidence and associated increase in mortality in both cohorts suggests that AF/AFL is not specific to COVID-19, but is rather a generalized response to the systemic inflammation of severe viral illnesses.

Malignant Arrhythmias in Patients With COVID-19: Incidence, Mechanisms, and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who develop cardiac injury are reported to experience higher rates of malignant cardiac arrhythmias. However, little is known about these arrhythmias-their frequency, the underlying mechanisms, and their impact on mortality. METHODS: We extracted data from a registry (NCT04358029) regarding consecutive inpatients with confirmed COVID-19 who were receiving continuous telemetric ECG monitoring and had a definitive disposition of hospital discharge or death. Between patients who died versus discharged, we compared a primary composite end point of cardiac arrest from ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation or bradyarrhythmias such as atrioventricular block. RESULTS: Among 800 patients with COVID-19 at Mount Sinai Hospital with definitive dispositions, 140 patients had telemetric monitoring, and either died (52) or were discharged (88). The median (interquartile range) age was 61 years (48-74); 73% men; and ethnicity was White in 34%. Comorbidities included hypertension in 61%, coronary artery disease in 25%, ventricular arrhythmia history in 1.4%, and no significant comorbidities in 16%. Compared with discharged patients, those who died had elevated peak troponin I levels (0.27 versus 0.02 ng/mL) and more primary end point events (17% versus 4%, P=0.01)-a difference driven by tachyarrhythmias. Fatal tachyarrhythmias invariably occurred in the presence of severe metabolic imbalance, while atrioventricular block was largely an independent primary event. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who die experience malignant cardiac arrhythmias more often than those surviving to discharge. However, these events represent a minority of cardiovascular deaths, and ventricular tachyarrhythmias are mainly associated with severe metabolic derangement. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04358029.

Syncope and presyncope in patients with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Recent studies have described several cardiovascular manifestations of COVID-19 including myocardial ischemia, myocarditis, thromboembolism, and malignant arrhythmias. However, to our knowledge, syncope in COVID-19 patients has not been systematically evaluated. We sought to characterize syncope and/or presyncope in COVID-19. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 with either syncope or presyncope. This "study" group (n = 37) was compared with an age and gender-matched cohort of patients without syncope ("control") (n = 40). Syncope was attributed to various categories. We compared telemetry data, treatments received, and clinical outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS: Among 1000 COVID-19 patients admitted to the Mount Sinai Hospital, the incidence of syncope/presyncope was 3.7%. The median age of the entire cohort was 69 years (range 26-89+ years) and 55% were men. Major comorbidities included hypertension, diabetes, and coronary artery disease. Syncopal episodes were categorized as (a) unspecified in 59.4% patients, (b) neurocardiogenic in 15.6% patients, (c) hypotensive in 12.5% patients, and (d) cardiopulmonary in 3.1% patients with fall versus syncope and seizure versus syncope in 2 of 32 (6.3%) and 1 of 33 (3.1%) patients, respectively. Compared with the "control" group, there were no significant differences in both admission and peak blood levels of d-dimer, troponin-I, and CRP in the "study" group. Additionally, there were no differences in arrhythmias or death between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Syncope/presyncope in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 is uncommon and is infrequently associated with a cardiac etiology or associated with adverse outcomes compared to those who do not present with these symptoms.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: an update of current literature.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the etiologic agent for the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, has caused a public health emergency. The need for additional research in viral pathogenesis is essential as the number of cases and deaths rise. Understanding the virus and its ability to cause disease has been the main focus of current literature; however, there is much unknown. Studies have revealed new findings related to the full transmission potential of SARS-CoV-2 and its subsequent ability to cause infection by different means. The virus is hypothesized to be of increased virulence compared with previous coronavirus that caused epidemics, in part due to its overall structural integrity and resilience to inactivation. To date, many studies have discussed that the rationale behind its transmission potential is that viral RNA has unexpectedly been detected in multiple bodily fluids, with some samples having remained positive for extended periods of time. Additionally, the receptor by which the virus gains cellular entry, ACE2, has been found to be expressed in different human body systems, thereby potentiating its infection in those locations. In this evidence-based comprehensive review, we discuss various potential routes of transmission of SARS-CoV-2-respiratory/droplet, indirect, fecal-oral, vertical, sexual, and ocular. Understanding these different routes is important as they pertain to clinical practice, especially in taking preventative measures to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2.