ABSTRACT
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) to generate automated early warnings in epidemic surveillance by harnessing vast open-source data with minimal human intervention has the potential to be both revolutionary and highly sustainable. AI can overcome the challenges faced by weak health systems by detecting epidemic signals much earlier than traditional surveillance. AI-based digital surveillance is an adjunct to-not a replacement of-traditional surveillance and can trigger early investigation, diagnostics and responses at the regional level. This narrative review focuses on the role of AI in epidemic surveillance and summarises several current epidemic intelligence systems including ProMED-mail, HealthMap, Epidemic Intelligence from Open Sources, BlueDot, Metabiota, the Global Biosurveillance Portal, Epitweetr and EPIWATCH. Not all of these systems are AI-based, and some are only accessible to paid users. Most systems have large volumes of unfiltered data; only a few can sort and filter data to provide users with curated intelligence. However, uptake of these systems by public health authorities, who have been slower to embrace AI than their clinical counterparts, is low. The widespread adoption of digital open-source surveillance and AI technology is needed for the prevention of serious epidemics.
Subject(s)
Biosurveillance , Epidemics , Humans , Public Health , Artificial Intelligence , Epidemics/prevention & controlABSTRACT
Importance: COVID-19 was the underlying cause of death for more than 940â¯000 individuals in the US, including at least 1289 children and young people (CYP) aged 0 to 19 years, with at least 821 CYP deaths occurring in the 1-year period from August 1, 2021, to July 31, 2022. Because deaths among US CYP are rare, the mortality burden of COVID-19 in CYP is best understood in the context of all other causes of CYP death. Objective: To determine whether COVID-19 is a leading (top 10) cause of death in CYP in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This national population-level cross-sectional epidemiological analysis for the years 2019 to 2022 used data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (WONDER) database on underlying cause of death in the US to identify the ranking of COVID-19 relative to other causes of death among individuals aged 0 to 19 years. COVID-19 deaths were considered in 12-month periods between April 1, 2020, and August 31, 2022, compared with deaths from leading non-COVID-19 causes in 2019, 2020, and 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cause of death rankings by total number of deaths, crude rates per 100â¯000 population, and percentage of all causes of death, using the National Center for Health Statistics 113 Selected Causes of Death, for ages 0 to 19 and by age groupings (<1 year, 1-4 years, 5-9 years, 10-14 years, 15-19 years). Results: There were 821 COVID-19 deaths among individuals aged 0 to 19 years during the study period, resulting in a crude death rate of 1.0 per 100â¯000 population overall; 4.3 per 100â¯000 for those younger than 1 year; 0.6 per 100â¯000 for those aged 1 to 4 years; 0.4 per 100â¯000 for those aged 5 to 9 years; 0.5 per 100â¯000 for those aged 10 to 14 years; and 1.8 per 100â¯000 for those aged 15 to 19 years. COVID-19 mortality in the time period of August 1, 2021, to July 31, 2022, was among the 10 leading causes of death in CYP aged 0 to 19 years in the US, ranking eighth among all causes of deaths, fifth in disease-related causes of deaths (excluding unintentional injuries, assault, and suicide), and first in deaths caused by infectious or respiratory diseases when compared with 2019. COVID-19 deaths constituted 2% of all causes of death in this age group. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that COVID-19 was a leading cause of death in CYP. It caused substantially more deaths in CYP annually than any vaccine-preventable disease historically in the recent period before vaccines became available. Various factors, including underreporting and not accounting for COVID-19's role as a contributing cause of death from other diseases, mean that these estimates may understate the true mortality burden of COVID-19. The findings of this study underscore the public health relevance of COVID-19 to CYP. In the likely future context of sustained SARS-CoV-2 circulation, appropriate pharmaceutical and nonpharmaceutical interventions (eg, vaccines, ventilation, air cleaning) will continue to play an important role in limiting transmission of the virus and mitigating severe disease in CYP.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases , Child , Humans , Adolescent , Cause of Death , Cross-Sectional Studies , SARS-CoV-2Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Guidelines as Topic , Schools , Humans , United Kingdom/epidemiologyABSTRACT
There has been substantial research on adult COVID-19 and how to treat it. But how do severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections afflict children? The COVID-19 pandemic has yielded many surprises, not least that children generally develop less severe disease than older adults, which is unusual for a respiratory disease. However, some children can develop serious complications from COVID-19, such as multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) and Long Covid, even after mild or asymptomatic COVID-19. Why this occurs in some and not others is an important question. Moreover, when children do contract COVID-19, understanding their role in transmission, especially in schools and at home, is crucial to ensuring effective mitigation measures. Therefore, in addition to nonpharmaceutical interventions, such as improved ventilation, there is a strong case to vaccinate children so as to reduce possible long-term effects from infection and to decrease transmission. But questions remain about whether vaccination might skew immune responses to variants in the long term. As the experts discuss below, more is being learned about these important issues, but much more research is needed to understand the long-term effects of COVID-19 in children.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Child , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/therapy , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/virology , Post-Acute COVID-19 SyndromeABSTRACT
Deepti Gurdasani and colleagues argue UK covid policy did not give children sufficient priority and question the evidence behind government decisions
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/complications , Child , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Post-Acute COVID-19 SyndromeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Long Covid is a public health concern that needs defining, quantifying, and describing. We aimed to explore the initial and ongoing symptoms of Long Covid following SARS-CoV-2 infection and describe its impact on daily life. METHODS: We collected self-reported data through an online survey using convenience non-probability sampling. The survey enrolled adults who reported lab-confirmed (PCR or antibody) or suspected COVID-19 who were not hospitalised in the first two weeks of illness. This analysis was restricted to those with self-reported Long Covid. Univariate comparisons between those with and without confirmed COVID-19 infection were carried out and agglomerative hierarchical clustering was used to identify specific symptom clusters, and their demographic and functional correlates. RESULTS: We analysed data from 2550 participants with a median duration of illness of 7.6 months (interquartile range (IQR) 7.1-7.9). 26.5% reported lab-confirmation of infection. The mean age was 46.5 years (standard deviation 11 years) with 82.8% females and 79.9% of participants based in the UK. 89.5% described their health as good, very good or excellent before COVID-19. The most common initial symptoms that persisted were exhaustion, chest pressure/tightness, shortness of breath and headache. Cognitive dysfunction and palpitations became more prevalent later in the illness. Most participants described fluctuating (57.7%) or relapsing symptoms (17.6%). Physical activity, stress, and sleep disturbance commonly triggered symptoms. A third (32%) reported they were unable to live alone without any assistance at six weeks from start of illness. 16.9% reported being unable to work solely due to COVID-19 illness. 37.0% reported loss of income due to illness, and 64.4% said they were unable to perform usual activities/duties. Acute systems clustered broadly into two groups: a majority cluster (n = 2235, 88%) with cardiopulmonary predominant symptoms, and a minority cluster (n = 305, 12%) with multisystem symptoms. Similarly, ongoing symptoms broadly clustered in two groups; a majority cluster (n = 2243, 88.8%) exhibiting mainly cardiopulmonary, cognitive symptoms and exhaustion, and a minority cluster (n = 283, 11.2%) exhibiting more multisystem symptoms. Belonging to the more severe multisystem cluster was associated with more severe functional impact, lower income, younger age, being female, worse baseline health, and inadequate rest in the first two weeks of the illness, with no major differences in the cluster patterns when restricting analysis to the lab-confirmed subgroup. CONCLUSION: This is an exploratory survey of Long Covid characteristics. Whilst this is a non-representative population sample, it highlights the heterogeneity of persistent symptoms, and the significant functional impact of prolonged illness following confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. To study prevalence, predictors and prognosis, research is needed in a representative population sample using standardised case definitions.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Cognitive Dysfunction/etiology , Dyspnea/etiology , Sleep Wake Disorders/etiology , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/pathology , COVID-19/virology , Cluster Analysis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Delivery of Health Care , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Self Report , Stress, Physiological , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To offer a quantitative risk-benefit analysis of two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among adolescents in England. SETTING: England. DESIGN: Following the risk-benefit analysis methodology carried out by the US Centers for Disease Control, we calculated historical rates of hospital admission, Intensive Care Unit admission and death for ascertained SARS-CoV-2 cases in children aged 12-17 in England. We then used these rates alongside a range of estimates for incidence of long COVID, vaccine efficacy and vaccine-induced myocarditis, to estimate hospital and Intensive Care Unit admissions, deaths and cases of long COVID over a period of 16 weeks under assumptions of high and low case incidence. PARTICIPANTS: All 12-17 year olds with a record of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in England between 1 July 2020 and 31 March 2021 using national linked electronic health records, accessed through the British Heart Foundation Data Science Centre. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hospitalisations, Intensive Care Unit admissions, deaths and cases of long COVID averted by vaccinating all 12-17 year olds in England over a 16-week period under different estimates of future case incidence. RESULTS: At high future case incidence of 1000/100,000 population/week over 16 weeks, vaccination could avert 4430 hospital admissions and 36 deaths over 16 weeks. At the low incidence of 50/100,000/week, vaccination could avert 70 hospital admissions and two deaths over 16 weeks. The benefit of vaccination in terms of hospitalisations in adolescents outweighs risks unless case rates are sustainably very low (below 30/100,000 teenagers/week). Benefit of vaccination exists at any case rate for the outcomes of death and long COVID, since neither have been associated with vaccination to date. CONCLUSIONS: Given the current (as at 15 September 2021) high case rates (680/100,000 population/week in 10-19 year olds) in England, our findings support vaccination of adolescents against SARS-CoV2.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , Hospitalization , Intensive Care Units , Public Health , Severity of Illness Index , Vaccination , Adolescent , Adolescent Health , Age Factors , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Child , Child Health , England , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Myocarditis/etiology , Risk , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome , Vaccination/adverse effects , Post-Acute COVID-19 SyndromeSubject(s)
COVID-19 , Civil Defense , Communicable Disease Control , Government Agencies , Government Regulation , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Civil Defense/legislation & jurisprudence , Civil Defense/organization & administration , Civil Defense/standards , Communicable Disease Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Government Agencies/legislation & jurisprudence , Government Agencies/organization & administration , Government Agencies/standards , Humans , Needs Assessment , Public Health Practice/legislation & jurisprudence , Public Health Practice/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has infected more than 231 million people globally, with more than 4.7 million deaths recorded by the World Health Organization as of 26 September 2021. In response to the pandemic, some countries (New Zealand, Vietnam, Taiwan, South Korea and others) have pursued suppression strategies, so-called Zero COVID policies, to drive and maintain infection rates as close to zero as possible and respond aggressively to new cases. In comparison, European countries and North America have adopted mitigation strategies (of varying intensity and effectiveness) that aim primarily to prevent health systems from being overwhelmed. With recent advances in our understanding of SARS-CoV-2 and its biology, and the increasing recognition there is more to COVID-19 beyond the acute infection, we offer a perspective on some of the long-term risks of mutational escape, viral persistence, reinfection, immune dysregulation and neurological and multi-system complications (Long COVID).
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To assess the potential impacts of successive lockdown-easing measures in England, at a point in the COVID-19 pandemic when community transmission levels were relatively high. DESIGN: We developed a Bayesian model to infer incident cases and reproduction number (R) in England, from incident death data. We then used this to forecast excess cases and deaths in multiple plausible scenarios in which R increases at one or more time points. SETTING: England. PARTICIPANTS: Publicly available national incident death data for COVID-19 were examined. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Excess cumulative cases and deaths forecast at 90 days, in simulated scenarios of plausible increases in R after successive easing of lockdown in England, compared with a baseline scenario where R remained constant. RESULTS: Our model inferred an R of 0.75 on 13 May when England first started easing lockdown. In the most conservative scenario modelled where R increased to 0.80 as lockdown was eased further on 1 June and then remained constant, the model predicted an excess 257 (95% CI 108 to 492) deaths and 26 447 (95% CI 11 105 to 50 549) cumulative cases over 90 days. In the scenario with maximal increases in R (but staying ≤1), the model predicts 3174 (95% CI 1334 to 6060) excess cumulative deaths and 421 310 (95% CI 177 012 to 804 811) cases. Observed data from the forecasting period aligned most closely to the scenario in which R increased to 0.85 on 1 June, and 0.9 on 4 July. CONCLUSIONS: When levels of transmission are high, even small changes in R with easing of lockdown can have significant impacts on expected cases and deaths, even if R remains ≤1. This will have a major impact on population health, tracing systems and healthcare services in England. Following an elimination strategy rather than one of maintenance of R ≤1 would substantially mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic within England.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Bayes Theorem , Communicable Disease Control , England/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BackgroundMany people are not recovering for months after being infected with COVID-19. Long Covid (LC) is a major public health problem that needs defining, quantifying and describing. We aimed to explore and develop understanding of LC symptoms following mild/moderate COVID-19 infection and describe its impact on daily life.MethodsThe survey was co-produced with people living with LC. Data was collected through an online social media survey mostly from online support groups using convenience non-probability sampling. The criteria for inclusion were adults with lab-confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection managed in the community (non-hospitalised) in the first two weeks of illness. We used agglomerative hierarchical clustering to identify specific symptom clusters, and their demographic, and functional correlates.ResultsData from 2550 participants with a median duration of illness of 7.7 months (interquartile range (IQR) 7.4–8.0) was analysed. The mean age was 46.5 years (standard deviation 11 years) with 82.8% females and 79.9% UK-based. 90% reported good, very good or excellent health prior to infection. Most participants described fluctuating (57.7%) or relapsing LC symptoms (17.6%). The most common initial symptoms that continued were exhaustion, headache, chest pressure/tightness and breathlessness. Cough, fever and chills were prevalent initial symptoms that became less so as the illness progressed. Cognitive dysfunction and palpitations became more common beyond the acute phase. 26.5% reported lab-confirmation of infection (NAAT or antibody). The biggest difference in symptoms between those who reported testing positive and those who did not was loss of smell/taste. Physical activity, stress and sleep disturbance were the most common symptom triggers. A third (32%) reported they were unable to live alone without any assistance at six weeks from start of illness. 66.4% reported taking time off sick, (median 60 days, IQR 20, 129). 37% reported loss of income due to illness. Eighty four percent of participants reported ongoing symptoms affecting at least three organ systems. There were two main ongoing symptoms clusters;the majority cluster (88.7%) exhibited mainly chest, cognitive symptoms and exhaustion, and the minority cluster (11.3%) exhibited multi-system symptoms which had persisted from the start. The multi-system cluster reported more severe functional impact.ConclusionThis is an exploratory survey of LC characteristics. Whilst it is a non-representative sample, it highlights the heterogeneity of persistent symptoms, and the significant functional impact. To better characterise ongoing illness and prognosis, research is needed in a representative population-sample using standardised case definitions (to include those not lab-confirmed in the first pandemic wave).