Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Diana Rose E Ranoa; Robin L Holland; Fadi G Alnaji; Kelsie J Green; Leyi Wang; Richard L Fredrickson; Tong Wang; George N Wong; Johnny Uelmen; Sergei Maslov; Ahmed Elbanna; Zachary J Weiner; Alexei V Tkachenko; Hantao Zhang; Zhiru Liu; Sanjay J Patel; John M Paul; Nickolas P Vance; Joseph G Gulick; Sandeep P Satheesan; Isaac J Galvan; Andrew Miller; Joseph Grohens; Todd J Nelson; Mary P Stevens; P. Mark Hennessy; Robert C Parker; Edward Santos; Charles Brackett; Julie D Steinman; Melvin R Fenner Jr.; Kristin Dohrer; Kraig Wagenecht; Michael DeLorenzo; Laura Wilhelm-Barr; Brian R Brauer; Catherine Best-Popescu; Gary Durack; Nathan Wetter; David M Kranz; Jessica Breitbarth; Charlie Simpson; Julie A Pryde; Robin N Kaler; Chris Harris; Allison C Vance; Jodi L Silotto; Mark Johnson; Enrique Valera; Patricia K Anton; Lowa Mwilambwe; Stephen B Bryan; Deborah S Stone; Danita B Young; Wanda E Ward; John Lantz; John A Vozenilek; Rashid Bashir; Jeffrey S Moore; Mayank Garg; Julian C Cooper; Gillian Snyder; Michelle H Lore; Dustin L Yocum; Neal J Cohen; Jan E Novakofski; Melanie J Loots; Randy L Ballard; Mark Band; Kayla M Banks; Joseph D Barnes; Iuliana Bentea; Jessica Black; Jeremy Busch; Hannah Christensen; Abigail Conte; Madison Conte; Michael Curry; Jennifer Eardley; April Edwards; Therese Eggett; Judes Fleurimont; Delaney Foster; Bruce W Fouke; Nicholas Gallagher; Nicole Gastala; Scott A Genung; Declan Glueck; Brittani Gray; Andrew Greta; Robert M Healy; Ashley Hetrick; Arianna A Holterman; Nahed Ismail; Ian Jasenof; Patrick Kelly; Aaron Kielbasa; Teresa Kiesel; Lorenzo M Kindle; Rhonda L Lipking; Yukari C Manabe; Jade ? Mayes; Reubin McGuffin; Kenton G McHenry; Agha Mirza; Jada Moseley; Heba H Mostafa; Melody Mumford; Kathleen Munoz; Arika D Murray; Moira Nolan; Nil A Parikh; Andrew Pekosz; Janna Pflugmacher; Janise M Phillips; Collin Pitts; Mark C Potter; James Quisenberry; Janelle Rear; Matthew L Robinson; Edith Rosillo; Leslie N Rye; MaryEllen Sherwood; Anna Simon; Jamie M Singson; Carly Skadden; Tina H Skelton; Charlie Smith; Mary Stech; Ryan Thomas; Matthew A Tomaszewski; Erika A Tyburski; Scott Vanwingerden; Evette Vlach; Ronald S Watkins; Karriem Watson; Karen C White; Timothy L Killeen; Robert J Jones; Andreas C Cangellaris; Susan A Martinis; Awais Vaid; Christopher B Brooke; Joseph T Walsh; William C Sullivan; Rebecca L Smith; Nigel D Goldenfeld; Timothy M Fan; Paul J Hergenrother; Martin D Burke.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21261548

ABSTRACT

In the Fall of 2020, many universities saw extensive transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among their populations, threatening the health of students, faculty and staff, the viability of in-person instruction, and the health of surrounding communities.1, 2 Here we report that a multimodal "SHIELD: Target, Test, and Tell" program mitigated the spread of SARS-CoV-2 at a large public university, prevented community transmission, and allowed continuation of in-person classes amidst the pandemic. The program combines epidemiological modelling and surveillance (Target); fast and frequent testing using a novel and FDA Emergency Use Authorized low-cost and scalable saliva-based RT-qPCR assay for SARS-CoV-2 that bypasses RNA extraction, called covidSHIELD (Test); and digital tools that communicate test results, notify of potential exposures, and promote compliance with public health mandates (Tell). These elements were combined with masks, social distancing, and robust education efforts. In Fall 2020, we performed more than 1,000,000 covidSHIELD tests while keeping classrooms, laboratories, and many other university activities open. Generally, our case positivity rates remained less than 0.5%, we prevented transmission from our students to our faculty and staff, and data indicate that we had no spread in our classrooms or research laboratories. During this fall semester, we had zero COVID-19-related hospitalizations or deaths amongst our university community. We also prevented transmission from our university community to the surrounding Champaign County community. Our experience demonstrates that multimodal transmission mitigation programs can enable university communities to achieve such outcomes until widespread vaccination against COVID-19 is achieved, and provides a roadmap for how future pandemics can be addressed.

2.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20184473

ABSTRACT

We have performed detailed modeling of the COVID-19 epidemic within the State of Illinois at the population level, and within the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign at a more detailed level of description that follows individual students as they go about their educational and social activities. We ask the following questions: O_LIHow many COVID-19 cases are expected to be detected by entry screening? C_LIO_LIWill this initial "bump" in cases be containable using the mitigation steps being undertaken at UIUC? C_LI Our answers are: O_LIAssuming that there are approximately 45,000 students returning to campus in the week beginning August 15, 2020, our most conservative estimate predicts that a median of 270 {+/-} 90 (minimum-maximum range) COVID-19 positive cases will be detected by entry screening. The earliest estimate for entry screening that we report was made on July 24th and predicted 198 {+/-} 90 (68% CI) positive cases. C_LIO_LIIf the number of returning students is less, then our estimate just needs to be scaled proportionately. C_LIO_LIThis initial bump will be contained by entry screening initiated isolation and contact tracing, and once the semester is underway, by universal masking, a hybrid teaching model, twice-weekly testing, isolation, contact tracing, quarantining and the use of the Safer Illinois exposure notification app. C_LI

3.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20162420

ABSTRACT

Epidemics generally spread through a succession of waves that reflect factors on multiple time-scales. On short time-scales, superspreading events lead to burstiness and overdispersion, while long-term persistent heterogeneity in susceptibility is expected to lead to a reduction in the infection peak and the herd immunity threshold (HIT). Here, we develop a general approach to encompass both time-scales, including time variations in individual social activity, and demonstrate how to incorporate them phenomenologically into a wide class of epidemiological models through parameterization. We derive a non-linear dependence of the effective reproduction number Re on the susceptible population fraction S. We show that a state of transient collective immunity (TCI) emerges well below the HIT during early, high-paced stages of the epidemic. However, this is a fragile state that wanes over time due to changing levels of social activity, and so the infection peak is not an indication of herd immunity: subsequent waves can and will emerge due to behavioral changes in the population, driven (e.g.) by seasonal factors. Transient and long-term levels of heterogeneity are estimated by using empirical data from the COVID-19 epidemic as well as from real-life face-to-face contact networks. These results suggest that the hardest-hit areas, such as NYC, have achieved TCI following the first wave of the epidemic, but likely remain below the long-term HIT. Thus, in contrast to some previous claims, these reqions can still experience subsequent waves. O_TEXTBOXSignificance Statement Epidemics generally spread through a succession of waves that reflect factors on multiple time-scales. Here, we develop a general approach to encompass super-spreading and population heterogeneity, and demonstrate that a fragile state of transient collective immunity (TCI) emerges well below the HIT during early, high-paced stages of the epidemic. However, this is not an indication of herd immunity: subsequent waves can and will emerge due to behavioral changes in the population, driven (e.g.) by seasonal factors. Analysis of empirical data suggests that even in locations with strong first waves of COVID-19, subsequent waves will still emerge. C_TEXTBOX

4.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20147868

ABSTRACT

We present two different scenarios for a second wave of the COVID-19 epidemic in Illinois and simulate them using our previously described age-of-infection model, calibrated to real-time hospital and deaths data. In the first scenario we assume that the parameters of the second wave in Illinois would be similar to those currently observed in other states such as Arizona, Florida, and Texas. We estimate doubling times of hospitalizations and test positivity in all states with relevant publicly available data and calculate the corresponding effective reproduction numbers for Illinois. These parameters are remarkably consistent in states with rapidly growing epidemics. We conjecture that the emergence of the second wave of the epidemic in these states can be attributed to superspreading events at large parties, crowded bars, and indoor dining. In our second, more optimistic scenario we assume changes in Illinois state policy would result in successful mitigation of superspreading events and thus would lower the effective reproduction number to the value observed in late June 2020. In this case our calculations show effective suppression of the second wave in Illinois. Our analysis also suggests that the logarithmic time derivatives of COVID-19 hospitalizations and case positivity can serve as a simple but strong early-warning signal of the onset of a second wave.

5.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20120691

ABSTRACT

We present modeling of the COVID-19 epidemic in Illinois, USA, capturing the implementation of a Stay-at-Home order and scenarios for its eventual release. We use a non-Markovian age-of-infection model that is capable of handling long and variable time delays without changing its model topology. Bayesian estimation of model parameters is carried out using Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods. This framework allows us to treat all available input information, including both the previously published parameters of the epidemic and available local data, in a uniform manner. To accurately model deaths as well as demand on the healthcare system, we calibrate our predictions to total and in-hospital deaths as well as hospital and ICU bed occupancy by COVID-19 patients. We apply this model not only to the state as a whole but also its sub-regions in order to account for the wide disparities in population size and density. Without prior information on non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), the model independently reproduces a mitigation trend closely matching mobility data reported by Google and Unacast. Forward predictions of the model provide robust estimates of the peak position and severity and also enable forecasting the regional-dependent results of releasing Stay-at-Home orders. The resulting highly constrained narrative of the epidemic is able to provide estimates of its unseen progression and inform scenarios for sustainable monitoring and control of the epidemic.

6.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20040048

ABSTRACT

Executive SummaryWe estimate the growth in demand for ICU beds in Chicago during the emerging COVID-19 epidemic, using state-of-the-art computer simulations calibrated for the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The questions we address are these: O_LIWill the ICU capacity in Chicago be exceeded, and if so by how much? C_LIO_LICan strong mitigation strategies, such as lockdown or shelter in place order, prevent the overflow of capacity? C_LIO_LIWhen should such strategies be implemented? C_LI Our answers are as follows: O_LIThe ICU capacity may be exceeded by a large amount, probably by a factor of ten. C_LIO_LIStrong mitigation can avert this emergency situation potentially, but even that will not work if implemented too late. C_LIO_LIIf the strong mitigation precedes April 1st, then the growth of COVID-19 can be controlled and the ICU capacity could be adequate. The earlier the strong mitigation is implemented, the greater the probability that it will be successful. After around April 1 2020, any strong mitigation will not avert the emergency situation. In Italy, the lockdown occurred too late and the number of deaths is still doubling every 2.3 days. It is difficult to be sure about the precise dates for this window of opportunity, due to the inherent uncertainties in computer simulation. But there is high confidence in the main conclusion that it exists and will soon be closed. C_LI Our conclusion is that, being fully cognizant of the societal trade-offs, there is a rapidly closing window of opportunity to avert a worst-case scenario in Chicago, but only with strong mitigation/lockdown implemented in the next week at the latest. If this window is missed, the epidemic will get worse and then strong mitigation/lockdown will be required after all, but it will be too late.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...