Social contact patterns during the early COVID-19 pandemic in Norway: insights from a panel study, April to September 2020 (preprint)

BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries adopted social distance measures and lockdowns of varying strictness. Social contact patterns are essential in driving the spread of respiratory infections, and country-specific measurements are needed. This study aimed to gain insights into changes in social contacts and behaviour during the early pandemic phase in Norway. MethodsWe conducted an online survey among a nationally representative sample of Norwegian adults, including six data collections/waves between April and September 2020, and used survey data from 2017 as baseline. We calculated mean daily contacts, and estimated age-stratified contact matrices that were used to estimate reproduction numbers during the study period. ResultsThe mean daily number of contacts varied between 3.2 (95% CI 3.0-3.4) to 3.9 (95% CI 3.6-4.2) across waves, representing a 67-73% decline compared to pre-pandemic levels. Fewer contacts in the community setting largely drove the reduction; the drop was most prominent among younger adults. Despite gradual easing of social distance measures during the survey period, population contact matrices remained relatively stable and displayed more inter-age group mixing than at baseline. Contacts within households and the community outside schools and workplaces contributed most to social encounters. ConclusionSocial contacts experienced a significant decline during the months following the March 2020 lockdown in Norway, aligning with the implementation of stringent social distancing measures. The findings contribute valuable empirical information into the social behaviour of the Norwegian population during the early pandemic, which can be used to enhance policy-relevant models for addressing future crises when mitigation measures might be implemented.

Dynamics of non-household contacts during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021 in the Netherlands (preprint)

The COVID-19 pandemic was in 2020 and 2021 for a large part mitigated by reducing contacts in the general population. To monitor how these contacts changed over the course of the pandemic in the Netherlands, a longitudinal survey was conducted where participants reported on their at-risk contacts every two weeks, as part of the European CoMix survey. The survey included 1659 participants from April to August 2020 and 2514 participants from December 2020 to September 2021. We categorized the number of unique contacted persons excluding household members, reported per participant per day into six activity levels, defined as 0, 1, 2, 3-4, 5-9 and 10 or more reported contacts. After correcting for age, vaccination status, risk status for severe outcome of infection, and frequency of participation, activity levels increased over time, coinciding with relaxation of COVID-19 control measures.

Shielding individuals at high risk of COVID-19: a micro-simulation study (preprint)

Background One of the proposed interventions for mitigating COVID-19 epidemics, particularly in low-income and crisis-affected settings, is to physically isolate individuals known to be at high risk of severe disease and death due to age or co-morbidities. This intervention, known as ‘shielding’, could be implemented in various ways. If shielded people are grouped together in residences and isolation is imperfect, any introduction of infections within the shielding group could cause substantial mortality and thus negate the intervention’s benefits. We explored the effectiveness of shielding under various modalities of implementation and considered mitigation measures to reduce its possible harms. Methods We used an individual-based mathematical model to simulate the evolution of a COVID-19 epidemic in a population of which a fraction above a given age cut-off are relocated to shielding residences, in which they have variable levels of contacts with their original household, the outside world and fellow shielding residents. We set our simulation with the context of an internally displaced persons’ camp in Somaliland, for which we had recently collected data on household demographics and social mixing patterns. We compared an unmitigated epidemic with a shielding intervention accompanied by various measures to reduce the risk of virus introduction and spread within the shielding residences. We did sensitivity analyses to explore parameters such as residence size, reduction in contacts, basic reproduction number, and prior immunity in the population. Results Shielded residences are likely to be breached with infection during the outbreak. Nonetheless, shielding can be effective in preventing COVID-19 infections in the shielded population. The effectiveness of shielding is mostly affected by the size of the shielded residence, and by the degree by which contacts between shielded and unshielded individuals are reduced. Reductions in contacts between shielded individuals could further increase the effectiveness of shielding, but is only effective in larger shielded residences. Large shielded residences increase the risk of infection, unless very large reductions in contacts can be achieved. In epidemics with a lower reproduction number, the effectiveness of shielding could be negative effectiveness. Discussion Shielding could be an effective method to protect the most at-risk individuals. It should be considered where other measures cannot easily be implemented, but with attention to the epidemiological situation. Shielding should only be implemented through small to medium-sized shielding residences, with appropriate mitigation measures such as reduced contact intensity between shielded individuals and self-isolation of cases to prevent subsequent spread.

Unexposed populations and potential COVID-19 burden in European countries as of 21st November 2021 (preprint)

We estimate the potential remaining COVID-19 burden in 19 European countries by estimating the proportion of each country’s population that has acquired immunity to severe disease through infection or vaccination. Our results suggest that many European countries could still face a substantial burden of hospitalisations and deaths, particularly those with lower vaccination coverage, less historical transmission, and/or older populations. Continued non-pharmaceutical interventions and efforts to achieve high vaccination coverage are required in these countries to limit severe COVID-19 outcomes.

CoMix: Changes in social contacts as measured by the contact survey during the 1 COVID-19 pandemic in England between March 2020 and March 2021 (preprint)

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

Estimating the impact of reopening schools on the reproduction number of SARS-CoV-2 in England, using weekly contact survey data (preprint)

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

Estimated transmissibility and severity of novel SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern 202012/01 in England (preprint)

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

The effectiveness of population-wide, rapid antigen test based screening in reducing SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence in Slovakia (preprint)

Non-pharmaceutical interventions have been extensively used worldwide to limit the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, but they also place an enormous social and economic burden on populations. We report the results of recent mass testing for SARS-CoV-2 in Slovakia where rapid antigen tests were used to screen the whole population and to isolate infectious cases together with their household members. Prevalence of detected infections decreased by 58% (95% CI: 57-58%) within one week in the 45 counties that were subject to two rounds of mass testing. Adjusting for geographical clustering and differences in attendance rates and the epidemiological situation at the time of the first round, this changed to 61% (95% CI: 50-70%). Adjusting for an estimated growth rate in infections of 4.4% (1.1-6.9%) per day in the week preceding the mass testing campaign and the corresponding expected growth in infection prevalence, the estimated decrease in prevalence compared to a scenario of unmitigated growth was 70% (67-73%). Using a microsimulation model we find that this decrease can not be explained solely by infection control measures that were introduced in the weeks preceding the intervention, but requires the additional impact of isolation as well as quarantine of household members of those testing positive during the mass testing campaign.

CoMix: comparing mixing patterns in the Belgian population during and after lockdown (preprint)

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has shown how a newly emergent communicable disease can lay considerable burden on public health. To avoid system collapse, governments have resorted to several social distancing measures. In Belgium, this included a lockdown and a following period of phased re-opening. Methods A representative sample of Belgian adults was asked about their contact behaviour from mid-April to mid-July, during different stages of the intervention measures in Belgium. Use of personal protection equipment (face masks) and compliance to hygienic measures was also reported. We estimated the expected reproduction number computing the ratio of R 0 with respect to pre-pandemic data. Findings During the first two waves (the first month) of the survey, the reduction in the average number of contacts was around 80% and was quite consistent across all age-classes. The average number of contacts increased over time, particularly for the younger age classes, still remaining significantly lower than pre-pandemic values. Since the end of May, the estimated reproduction number has a median value larger than one, although with a wide dispersion. Conclusions We have shown how a rapidly deployed survey can measure compliance to social distancing and assess its impact on COVID-19 spread. Monitoring the effectiveness of social distancing recommendations is of paramount importance to avoid further waves of COVID-19.

Projecting contact matrices in 177 geographical regions: an update and comparison with empirical data for the COVID-19 era (preprint)

Mathematical models have played a key role in understanding the spread of directly-transmissible infectious diseases such as Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), as well as the effectiveness of public health responses. As the risk of contracting directly-transmitted infections depends on who interacts with whom, mathematical models often use contact matrices to characterise the spread of infectious pathogens. These contact matrices are usually generated from diary-based contact surveys. However, the majority of places in the world do not have representative empirical contact studies, so synthetic contact matrices have been constructed using more widely available setting-specific survey data on household, school, classroom, and workplace composition combined with empirical data on contact patterns in Europe. In 2017, the largest set of synthetic contact matrices to date were published for 152 geographical locations. In this study, we update these matrices with the most recent data and extend our analysis to 177 geographical locations. Due to the observed geographic differences within countries, we also quantify contact patterns in rural and urban settings where data is available. Further, we compare both the 2017 and 2020 synthetic matrices to out-of-sample empirically-constructed contact matrices, and explore the effects of using both the empirical and synthetic contact matrices when modelling physical distancing interventions for the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that the synthetic contact matrices reproduce the main traits of the contact patterns in the empirically-constructed contact matrices. Models parameterised with the empirical and synthetic matrices generated similar findings with few differences observed in age groups where the empirical matrices have missing or aggregated age groups. This finding means that synthetic contact matrices may be used in modelling outbreaks in settings for which empirical studies have yet to be conducted.

Reconstructing the global dynamics of under-ascertained COVID-19 cases and infections (preprint)

BackgroundAsymptomatic or subclinical SARS-CoV-2 infections are often unreported, which means that confirmed case counts may not accurately reflect underlying epidemic dynamics. Understanding the level of ascertainment (the ratio of confirmed symptomatic cases to the true number of symptomatic individuals) and undetected epidemic progression is crucial to informing COVID-19 response planning, including the introduction and relaxation of control measures. Estimating case ascertainment over time allows for accurate estimates of specific outcomes such as seroprevalence, which is essential for planning control measures. MethodsUsing reported data on COVID-19 cases and fatalities globally, we estimated the proportion of symptomatic cases (i.e. any person with any of fever >= 37.5{degrees}C, cough, shortness of breath, sudden onset of anosmia, ageusia or dysgeusia illness) that were reported in 210 countries and territories, given those countries had experienced more than ten deaths. We used published estimates of the case fatality ratio (CFR) as an assumed baseline. We then calculated the ratio of this baseline CFR to an estimated local delay-adjusted CFR to estimate the level of under-ascertainment in a particular location. We then fit a Bayesian Gaussian process model to estimate the temporal pattern of under-ascertainment. ResultsWe estimate that, during March 2020, the median percentage of symptomatic cases detected across the 84 countries which experienced more than ten deaths ranged from 2.38% (Bangladesh) to 99.6% (Chile). Across the ten countries with the highest number of total confirmed cases as of 6th July 2020, we estimated that the peak number of symptomatic cases ranged from 1.4 times (Chile) to 17.8 times (France) larger than reported. Comparing our model with national and regional seroprevalence data where available, we find that our estimates are consistent with observed values. Finally, we estimated seroprevalence for each country. Despite low case detection in some countries, our results that adjust for this still suggest that all countries have had only a small fraction of their populations infected as of July 2020. ConclusionsWe found substantial under-ascertainment of symptomatic cases, particularly at the peak of the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, in many countries. Reported case counts will therefore likely underestimate the rate of outbreak growth initially and underestimate the decline in the later stages of an epidemic. Although there was considerable under-reporting in many locations, our estimates were consistent with emerging serological data, suggesting that the proportion of each countrys population infected with SARS-CoV-2 worldwide is generally low. FundingWellcome Trust, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, DFID, NIHR, GCRF, ARC.

The impact of COVID-19 control measures on social contacts and transmission in Kenyan informal settlements (preprint)

BackgroundMany low- and middle-income countries have implemented control measures against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, it is not clear to what extent these measures explain the low numbers of recorded COVID-19 cases and deaths in Africa. One of the main aims of control measures is to reduce respiratory pathogen transmission through direct contact with others. In this study we collect contact data from residents of informal settlements around Nairobi, Kenya to assess if control measures have changed contact patterns, and estimate the impact of changes on the basic reproduction number (R0). MethodsWe conducted a social contact survey with 213 residents of five informal settlements around Nairobi in early May 2020, four weeks after the Kenyan government introduced enhanced physical distancing measures and a curfew between 7pm and 5am. Respondents were asked to report all direct physical and non-physical contacts made the previous day, alongside a questionnaire asking about the social and economic impact of COVID-19 and control measures. We examined contact patterns by demographic factors, including socioeconomic status. We described the impact of COVID-19 and control measures on income and food security. We compared contact patterns during control measures to patterns from non-pandemic periods to estimate the change in R0. FindingsWe estimate that control measures reduced physical and non-physical contacts, reducing the R0 from around 2.6 to between 0.5 and 0.7, depending on the pre-COVID-19 comparison matrix used. Masks were worn by at least one person in 92% of contacts. Respondents in the poorest socioeconomic quintile reported 1.5 times more contacts than those in the richest. 86% of respondents reported a total or partial loss of income due to COVID-19, and 74% reported eating less or skipping meals due to having too little money for food. InterpretationCOVID-19 control measures have had a large impact on direct contacts and therefore transmission, but have also caused considerable economic and food insecurity. Reductions in R0 are consistent with the linear epidemic growth in Kenya and other sub-Saharan African countries that implemented similar, early control measures. However, negative and inequitable impacts on economic and food security may mean control measures are not sustainable in the longer term. Research in context Evidence before this studyWe conducted a PubMed search on 6 June 2020 with no language restrictions for studies published since inception, using the search terms ("social mix*" OR "social cont*" OR "contact pattern*) AND ("covid*"). The search yielded 53 articles, two of which reported changes in social contacts after COVID-19 control measures. The first study reported changes in contact patterns in Wuhan and Shanghai, and the second changes in contact patterns in the UK. We found no studies examining changes in contact patterns due to control measures in sub-Saharan Africa, and no studies disaggregating contacts by socioeconomic status. Added value of this studyThis is the first study to estimate the reproduction number of COVID-19 under control measures in sub-Saharan Africa using primary contact data. This study also moves beyond existing work to i) measure contacts in densely populated informal settlements, ii) explore how social contacts vary across socioeconomic status, and iii) assess the impact of control measures on economic and food security in these areas. Implications of all the evidenceCOVID-19 control measures have substantially reduced social contacts and disease transmission. People of lower socioeconomic status face greater transmission risk as they report more contacts. Control measures have led to considerable economic and food insecurity, and may not be sustainable in the long term without efforts to reduce the burden of control measures on households.

Benefit-risk analysis of health benefits of routine childhood immunisation against the excess risk of SARS-CoV-2 infections during the Covid-19 pandemic in Africa (preprint)

Background: National immunisation programmes globally are at risk of suspension due to the severe health system constraints and physical distancing measures in place to mitigate the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Our aim is to compare the health benefits of sustaining routine childhood immunisation in Africa against the risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infections through visiting routine vaccination service delivery points. Methods: We used two scenarios to approximate the child deaths that may be caused by immunisation coverage reductions during COVID-19 outbreaks. First, we used previously reported country-specific child mortality impact estimates of childhood immunisation for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type b, pneumococcal, rotavirus, measles, meningitis A, rubella, and yellow fever (DTP3, HepB3, Hib3, PCV3, RotaC, MCV1, MCV2, MenA, RCV, YFV) to approximate the future deaths averted before completing five years of age by routine childhood vaccination during a 6-month COVID-19 risk period without catch-up campaigns. Second, we analysed an alternative scenario that approximates the health benefits of sustaining routine childhood immunisation to only the child deaths averted from measles outbreaks during the COVID-19 risk period. The excess number of infections due to additional SARS-CoV-2 exposure during immunisation visits assumes that contact reducing interventions flatten the outbreak curve during the COVID-19 risk period, that 60% of the population will have been infected by the end of that period, that children can be infected by either vaccinators or during transport and that upon child infection the whole household would be infected. Country specific household age structure estimates and age dependent infection fatality rates are then applied to calculate the number of deaths attributable to the vaccination clinic visits. We present benefit-risk ratios for routine childhood immunisation alongside 95% uncertainty range estimates from probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Findings: For every one excess COVID-19 death attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infections acquired during routine vaccination clinic visits, there could be 84 (14-267) deaths in children prevented by sustaining routine childhood immunisation in Africa. The benefit-risk ratio for the vaccinated children, siblings, parents or adult care-givers, and older adults in the households of vaccinated children are 85,000 (4,900 - 546,000), 75,000 (4,400 - 483,000), 769 (148 - 2,700), and 96 (14 - 307) respectively. In the alternative scenario that approximates the health benefits to only the child deaths averted from measles outbreaks, the benefit-risk ratio to the households of vaccinated children is 3 (0 - 10) under these highly conservative assumptions and if the risk to only the vaccinated children is considered, the benefit-risk ratio is 3,000 (182 - 21,000). Interpretation: Our analysis suggests that the health benefits of deaths prevented by sustaining routine childhood immunisation in Africa far outweighs the excess risk of COVID-19 deaths associated with vaccination clinic visits, especially for the vaccinated children. However, there are other factors that must be considered for strategic decision making to sustain routine childhood immunisation in African countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. These include logistical constraints of vaccine supply chain problems caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, reallocation of immunisation providers to other prioritised health services, healthcare staff shortages caused by SARS-CoV-2 infections among the staff, decreased demand for vaccination arising from community reluctance to visit vaccination clinics for fear of contracting SARS-CoV-2 infections, and infection risk to healthcare staff providing immunisation services as well as to their households and onward SARS-CoV-2 transmission into the wider community.

Response strategies for COVID-19 epidemics in African settings: a mathematical modelling study (preprint)

BackgroundThe health impact of COVID-19 may differ in African settings as compared to countries in Europe or China due to demographic, epidemiological, environmental and socio-economic factors. We evaluated strategies to reduce SARS-CoV-2 burden in African countries, so as to support decisions that balance minimising mortality, protecting health services and safeguarding livelihoods. MethodsWe used a Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Recovered mathematical model, stratified by age, to predict the evolution of COVID-19 epidemics in three countries representing a range of age distributions in Africa (from oldest to youngest average age: Mauritius, Nigeria and Niger), under various effectiveness assumptions for combinations of different non-pharmaceutical interventions: self-isolation of symptomatic people, physical distancing, and shielding (physical isolation) of the high-risk population. We adapted model parameters to better represent uncertainty about what might be expected in African populations, in particular by shifting the distribution of severity risk towards younger ages and increasing the case-fatality ratio. ResultsWe predicted median clinical attack rates over the first 12 months of 17% (Niger) to 39% (Mauritius), peaking at 2-4 months, if epidemics were unmitigated. Self-isolation while symptomatic had a maximum impact of about 30% on reducing severe cases, while the impact of physical distancing varied widely depending on percent contact reduction and R0. The effect of shielding high-risk people, e.g. by rehousing them in physical isolation, was sensitive mainly to residual contact with low-risk people, and to a lesser extent to contact among shielded individuals. Response strategies incorporating self-isolation of symptomatic individuals, moderate physical distancing and high uptake of shielding reduced predicted peak bed demand by 46% to 54% and mortality by 60% to 75%. Lockdowns delayed epidemics by about 3 months. Estimates were sensitive to differences in age-specific social mixing patterns, as published in the literature. DiscussionIn African settings, as elsewhere, current evidence suggests large COVID-19 epidemics are expected. However, African countries have fewer means to suppress transmission and manage cases. We found that self-isolation of symptomatic persons and general physical distancing are unlikely to avert very large epidemics, unless distancing takes the form of stringent lockdown measures. However, both interventions help to mitigate the epidemic. Shielding of high-risk individuals can reduce health service demand and, even more markedly, mortality if it features high uptake and low contact of shielded and unshielded people, with no increase in contact among shielded people. Strategies combining self-isolation, moderate physical distancing and shielding will probably achieve substantial reductions in mortality in African countries. Temporary lockdowns, where socioeconomically acceptable, can help gain crucial time for planning and expanding health service capacity.

Quantifying the impact of physical distance measures on the transmission of COVID-19 in the UK (preprint)

Background: To mitigate and slow the spread of COVID-19, many countries have adopted unprecedented physical distancing policies, including the UK. We evaluate whether these measures might be sufficient to control the epidemic by estimating their impact on the reproduction number (R0, the average number of secondary cases generated per case). Methods: We asked a representative sample of UK adults about their contact patterns on the previous day. The questionnaire documents the age and location of contacts and as well as a measure of their intimacy (whether physical contact was made or not). In addition, we asked about adherence to different physical distancing measures. The first surveys were sent on Tuesday 24th March, one day after a "lockdown" was implemented across the UK. We compared measured contact patterns during the lockdown to patterns of social contact made during a non-epidemic period. By comparing these, we estimated the change in reproduction number as a consequence of the physical distancing measures imposed. We used a meta-analysis of published estimates to inform our estimates of the reproduction number before interventions were put in place. Findings: We found a 73% reduction in the average daily number of contacts observed per participant (from 10.2 to 2.9). This would be sufficient to reduce R0 from 2.6 prior to lockdown to 0.62 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37 - 0.89) after the lockdown, based on all types of contact and 0.37 (95% CI = 0.22 - 0.53) for physical contacts only. Interpretation: The physical distancing measures adopted by the UK public have substantially reduced contact levels and will likely lead to a substantial impact and a decline in cases in the coming weeks. However, this projected decline in incidence will not occur immediately as there are significant delays between infection, the onset of symptomatic disease and hospitalisation, as well as further delays to these events being reported. Tracking behavioural change can give a more rapid assessment of the impact of physical distancing measures than routine epidemiological surveillance.

Inferring the number of COVID-19 cases from recently reported deaths (preprint)

We estimate the number of COVID-19 cases from newly reported deaths in a population without previous reports. Our results suggest that by the time a single death occurs, hundreds to thousands of cases are likely to be present in that population. This suggests containment via contact tracing will be challenging at this point, and other response strategies should be considered. Our approach is implemented in a publicly available, user-friendly, online tool.

Estimating the infection and case fatality ratio for COVID-19 using age-adjusted data from the outbreak on the Diamond Princess cruise ship (preprint)

Adjusting for delay from confirmation-to-death, we estimated case and infection fatality ratios (CFR, IFR) for COVID-19 on the Diamond Princess ship as 1.2% (0.38-2.7%) and 2.3% (0.75%-5.3%). Comparing deaths onboard with expected deaths based on naive CFR estimates using China data, we estimate IFR and CFR in China to be 0.5% (95% CI: 0.2-1.2%) and 1.1% (95% CI: 0.3-2.4%) respectively.

Interventions targeting air travellers early in the pandemic may delay local outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 (preprint)

Background: We evaluated if interventions aimed at air travellers can delay local SARS-CoV-2 community transmission in a previously unaffected country. Methods: We simulated infected air travellers arriving into countries with no sustained SARS-CoV-2 transmission or other introduction routes from affected regions. We assessed the effectiveness of syndromic screening at departure and/or arrival & traveller sensitisation to the COVID-2019-like symptoms with the aim to trigger rapid self-isolation and reporting on symptom onset to enable contact tracing. We assumed that syndromic screening would reduce the number of infected arrivals and that traveller sensitisation reduces the average number of secondary cases. We use stochastic simulations to account for uncertainty in both arrival and secondary infections rates, and present sensitivity analyses on arrival rates of infected travellers and the effectiveness of traveller sensitisation. We report the median expected delay achievable in each scenario and an inner 50% interval. Results: Under baseline assumptions, introducing exit and entry screening in combination with traveller sensitisation can delay a local SARS-CoV-2 outbreak by 8 days (50% interval: 3-14 days) when the rate of importation is 1 infected traveller per week at time of introduction. The additional benefit of entry screening is small if exit screening is effective: the combination of only exit screening and traveller sensitisation can delay an outbreak by 7 days (50% interval: 2-13 days). In the absence of screening, with less effective sensitisation, or a higher rate of importation, these delays shrink rapidly to less than 4 days. Conclusion: Syndromic screening and traveller sensitisation in combination may have marginally delayed SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in unaffected countries.