Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 71
Filter
1.
J Travel Med ; 31(4)2024 Jun 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38630887

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The international flight network creates multiple routes by which pathogens can quickly spread across the globe. In the early stages of infectious disease outbreaks, analyses using flight passenger data to identify countries at risk of importing the pathogen are common and can help inform disease control efforts. A challenge faced in this modelling is that the latest aviation statistics (referred to as contemporary data) are typically not immediately available. Therefore, flight patterns from a previous year are often used (referred to as historical data). We explored the suitability of historical data for predicting the spatial spread of emerging epidemics. METHODS: We analysed monthly flight passenger data from the International Air Transport Association to assess how baseline air travel patterns were affected by outbreaks of Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), Zika and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) over the past decade. We then used a stochastic discrete time susceptible-exposed-infected-recovered (SEIR) metapopulation model to simulate the global spread of different pathogens, comparing how epidemic dynamics differed in simulations based on historical and contemporary data. RESULTS: We observed local, short-term disruptions to air travel from South Korea and Brazil for the MERS and Zika outbreaks we studied, whereas global and longer-term flight disruptions occurred during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. For outbreak events that were accompanied by local, small and short-term changes in air travel, epidemic models using historical flight data gave similar projections of the timing and locations of disease spread as when using contemporary flight data. However, historical data were less reliable to model the spread of an atypical outbreak such as SARS-CoV-2, in which there were durable and extensive levels of global travel disruption. CONCLUSION: The use of historical flight data as a proxy in epidemic models is an acceptable practice, except in rare, large epidemics that lead to substantial disruptions to international travel.


Subject(s)
Air Travel , COVID-19 , Disease Outbreaks , SARS-CoV-2 , Zika Virus Infection , Humans , Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/prevention & control , Zika Virus Infection/epidemiology , Zika Virus Infection/transmission , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Communicable Diseases/epidemiology , Communicable Diseases/transmission , Travel/statistics & numerical data , Aircraft , Global Health
2.
Nature ; 600(7887): 127-132, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34695837

ABSTRACT

Considerable uncertainty surrounds the timeline of introductions and onsets of local transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) globally1-7. Although a limited number of SARS-CoV-2 introductions were reported in January and February 2020 (refs.8,9), the narrowness of the initial testing criteria, combined with a slow growth in testing capacity and porous travel screening10, left many countries vulnerable to unmitigated, cryptic transmission. Here we use a global metapopulation epidemic model to provide a mechanistic understanding of the early dispersal of infections and the temporal windows of the introduction of SARS-CoV-2 and onset of local transmission in Europe and the USA. We find that community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was likely to have been present in several areas of Europe and the USA by January 2020, and estimate that by early March, only 1 to 4 in 100 SARS-CoV-2 infections were detected by surveillance systems. The modelling results highlight international travel as the key driver of the introduction of SARS-CoV-2, with possible introductions and transmission events as early as December 2019 to January 2020. We find a heterogeneous geographic distribution of cumulative infection attack rates by 4 July 2020, ranging from 0.78% to 15.2% across US states and 0.19% to 13.2% in European countries. Our approach complements phylogenetic analyses and other surveillance approaches and provides insights that can be used to design innovative, model-driven surveillance systems that guide enhanced testing and response strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Epidemiological Models , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/virology , China/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks/statistics & numerical data , Europe/epidemiology , Humans , Population Density , Time Factors , United States/epidemiology
3.
Ann Med ; 53(1): 1569-1575, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34463165

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To explore the potential of SARS-CoV-2 spread during air travel and the risk of in-flight transmission. METHODS: We enrolled all passengers and crew suspected of being infected with SARS-CoV-2, who bounded for Beijing on international flights. We specified the characteristics of all confirmed cases of COVID-19 infection and utilised Wells-Riley equation to estimate the infectivity of COVID-19 during air travel. RESULTS: We screened 4492 passengers and crew with suspected COVID-19 infection, verified 161 confirmed cases (mean age 28.6 years), and traced two confirmed cases who may have been infected in the aircraft. The estimated infectivity was 375 quanta/h (range 274-476), while the effective infectivity was only 4 quanta/h (range 2-5). The risk of per-person infection during a 13 h air travel in economy class was 0.56‰ (95% CI 0.41‰-0.72‰). CONCLUSION: We found that the universal use of face masks on the flight, together with the plane's ventilation system, significantly decreased the infectivity of COVID-19.KEY MESSAGESThe COVID-19 pandemic is changing the lifestyle in the world, especially air travel which has the potential to spread SARS-CoV-2.The universal use of face masks on the flight, together with the plane's ventilation system, significantly decreased the infectivity of COVID-19 on an aircraft.Our findings suggest that the risk of infection in aircraft was negligible.


Subject(s)
Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Transmission, Infectious/statistics & numerical data , Environmental Exposure/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/prevention & control , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , Models, Theoretical , Risk Factors , Risk Reduction Behavior , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
4.
Travel Med Infect Dis ; 42: 102097, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34082087

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Public transportation is a major facilitator of the spread of infectious diseases and has been a focus of policy interventions aiming to suppress the current COVID-19 epidemic. METHODS: We use a random-effects panel data model and a Difference-in-Differences in Reverse (DDR) model to examine how air and rail transport links with Wuhan as well as the suspension of these transport links influenced the development of the epidemic in China. RESULTS: We find high-speed rail (HSR) and air connectivity with Wuhan resulted in 25.4% and 21.2% increases in the average number of daily new confirmed cases, respectively, while their suspension led to 18.6% and 13.3% decreases in that number. We also find that the suspension effect was dynamic, growing stronger over time and peaking 20-23 days after the Wuhan lockdown, then gradually wearing off. It took approximately four weeks for this effect to fully materialize, roughly twice the maximum incubation period, and similar dynamic patterns were seen in both HSR and air models. Overall, HSR had a greater impact on COVID-19 development than air transport. CONCLUSIONS: Our research provides important evidence for implementing transportation-related policies in controlling future infectious diseases.


Subject(s)
Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Railroads/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/prevention & control , China/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
6.
BMC Infect Dis ; 21(1): 393, 2021 Apr 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33910507

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: International air travel plays an important role in the global spread of SARS-CoV-2, and tracing of close contacts is an integral part of the public health response to COVID-19. We aimed to assess the timeliness of contact tracing among airline passengers arriving in Vietnam on flights containing COVID-19 cases and investigated factors associated with timeliness of contact tracing. METHODS: We included data from 2228 passengers on 22 incoming flights between 2 and 19 March 2020. Contact tracing duration was assessed separately for the time between the date of index case confirmation and date of contact tracing initiation (interval I), and the date of contact tracing initiation and completion (interval II). We used log-rank tests and multivariable Poisson regression models to identify factors associated with timeliness. RESULTS: The median duration of interval I and interval II was one (IQR: 1-2) and 3 days (IQR: 2-5), respectively. The contact tracing duration was shorter for passengers from flights where the index case was identified through mandatory testing directly upon arrival (median = 4; IQR: 3-5) compared to flights with index case detection through self-presentation at health facilities after arrival (median = 7; IQR: 5-8) (p-value = 0.018). Cumulative hazards for successful tracing were higher for Vietnamese nationals compared to non-Vietnamese nationals (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Contact tracing among flight passengers in the early stage of the COVID-19 epidemic in Vietnam was timely though delays occurred on high workload days. Mandatory SARS-CoV-2 testing at arrival may reduce contact tracing duration and should be considered as an integrated screening tool for flight passengers from high-risk areas when entering low-transmission settings with limited contact tracing capacity. We recommend a standardized risk-based contact tracing approach for flight passengers during the ongoing COVID-19 epidemic.


Subject(s)
Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/transmission , Contact Tracing , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Time Factors , Vietnam/epidemiology
7.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 7(3): e27317, 2021 03 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33711799

ABSTRACT

Communicable diseases including COVID-19 pose a major threat to public health worldwide. To curb the spread of communicable diseases effectively, timely surveillance and prediction of the risk of pandemics are essential. The aim of this study is to analyze free and publicly available data to construct useful travel data records for network statistics other than common descriptive statistics. This study describes analytical findings of time-series plots and spatial-temporal maps to illustrate or visualize pandemic connectedness. We analyzed data retrieved from the web-based Collaborative Arrangement for the Prevention and Management of Public Health Events in Civil Aviation dashboard, which contains up-to-date and comprehensive meta-information on civil flights from 193 national governments in accordance with the airport, country, city, latitude, and the longitude of flight origin and the destination. We used the database to visualize pandemic connectedness through the workflow of travel data collection, network construction, data aggregation, travel statistics calculation, and visualization with time-series plots and spatial-temporal maps. We observed similar patterns in the time-series plots of worldwide daily flights from January to early-March of 2019 and 2020. A sharp reduction in the number of daily flights recorded in mid-March 2020 was likely related to large-scale air travel restrictions owing to the COVID-19 pandemic. The levels of connectedness between places are strong indicators of the risk of a pandemic. Since the initial reports of COVID-19 cases worldwide, a high network density and reciprocity in early-March 2020 served as early signals of the COVID-19 pandemic and were associated with the rapid increase in COVID-19 cases in mid-March 2020. The spatial-temporal map of connectedness in Europe on March 13, 2020, shows the highest level of connectedness among European countries, which reflected severe outbreaks of COVID-19 in late March and early April of 2020. As a quality control measure, we used the aggregated numbers of international flights from April to October 2020 to compare the number of international flights officially reported by the International Civil Aviation Organization with the data collected from the Collaborative Arrangement for the Prevention and Management of Public Health Events in Civil Aviation dashboard, and we observed high consistency between the 2 data sets. The flexible design of the database provides users access to network connectedness at different periods, places, and spatial levels through various network statistics calculation methods in accordance with their needs. The analysis can facilitate early recognition of the risk of a current communicable disease pandemic and newly emerging communicable diseases in the future.


Subject(s)
Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Global Health , Public Health , Spatio-Temporal Analysis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks/statistics & numerical data , Humans
8.
Travel Med Infect Dis ; 40: 101988, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33578044

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) that was first detected in the city of Wuhan, China has now spread to every inhabitable continent, but now the attention has shifted from China to other epicentres. This study explored early assessment of the influence of spatial proximities and travel patterns from Italy on the further spread of SARS-CoV-2 worldwide. METHODS: Using data on the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 and air travel data between countries, we applied a stochastic meta-population model to estimate the global spread of COVID-19. Pearson's correlation, semi-variogram, and Moran's Index were used to examine the association and spatial autocorrelation between the number of COVID-19 cases and travel influx (and arrival time) from the source country. RESULTS: We found significant negative association between disease arrival time and number of cases imported from Italy (r = -0.43, p = 0.004) and significant positive association between the number of COVID-19 cases and daily travel influx from Italy (r = 0.39, p = 0.011). Using bivariate Moran's Index analysis, we found evidence of spatial interaction between COVID-19 cases and travel influx (Moran's I = 0.340). Asia-Pacific region is at higher/extreme risk of disease importation from the Chinese epicentre, whereas the rest of Europe, South-America and Africa are more at risk from the Italian epicentre. CONCLUSION: We showed that as the epicentre changes, the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 spread change to reflect spatial proximities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Diseases, Imported/epidemiology , Models, Statistical , Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , China/epidemiology , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Population Surveillance , Risk , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Travel/statistics & numerical data
9.
J Korean Med Sci ; 36(2): e14, 2021 Jan 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33429473

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The quarantine process at a country's port of entry has an important role in preventing an influx of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases from abroad and further minimizing the national healthcare burden of COVID-19. However, there has been little published on the process of COVID-19 screening among travelers entering into a country. Identifying the characteristics of COVID-19 infected travelers could help attenuate the further spread of the disease. METHODS: The authors analyzed epidemiological investigation forms and real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) of entrants to Incheon International Airport between March 11 to April 30, 2020. We performed univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis to determine the odds of positive SARS-CoV-2 result. RESULTS: A total of 11,074 entrants underwent reverse-transcription PCR for SARS-CoV-2, resulting 388 confirmed cases of COVID-19 infection. COVID-19 had a strong association with the reported loss of smell or taste and association with self-reported fever, chill, cough, and vomiting. If a traveler reported contact with an individual with either respiratory symptoms or confirmed COVID-19 in the last two weeks directly prior to landing, the probability of a positive result was increased. CONCLUSION: If overseas travelers experience loss of smell or taste in the two weeks prior to arrival, they may require an immediate examination to rule out COVID-19 at a port of entry. As to measure body temperature upon arrival at a port of entry, it is important to screen for any occurrence of fever within the two weeks prior to travel. Also, information with epidemiological relevance, such as recent contact with an individual suffering from any respiratory symptoms or with confirmed COVID-19, should be included in COVID-19 screening questionnaires for international travelers.


Subject(s)
Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Mass Screening/methods , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adult , Ageusia/diagnosis , Anosmia/diagnosis , Female , Fever/diagnosis , Health Surveys/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Quarantine/methods , Republic of Korea/epidemiology , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction
10.
Artif Organs ; 45(3): 230-235, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32920899

ABSTRACT

Literature on the air travel activities of patients supported by permanent mechanical assist devices is rare. To the best of our knowledge, no air travel guidelines or fitness prerequisites exist on whether and when ventricular assist device (VAD) patients are allowed to travel by plane after device implantation. In this study, we evaluated the topic of air travel after VAD implantation. This working group aimed to produce a report on air travel passengers supported by VADs, regarding their fitness to fly. Fifty left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients were surveyed in a worldwide multicenter study. The single survey was performed with a multimethod design, including interviews conducted face-to-face, online, and on phone. Out of 50 patients, 97% described their traveling by aircraft as perfect and uneventful during the flight. Eighty-five percent of the study participants consulted their medical practitioner before the flight. No patient reported the occurrence of a severe condition associated with flying. LVAD alarms, especially low flow alarms, did not occur in any of the devices. Thirty-five percent of the surveyed patients, however, stated a major problem pertaining to the security check procedures at the airport. The results of this study suggest that commercial air travel is safe for stable patients on permanent VAD support and traveling can be resumed securely after VAD implantation. Conscientious preparation by packing necessary devices, fluids, medications, and careful preparation for the airport security check is recommended.


Subject(s)
Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , Heart Failure/surgery , Heart-Assist Devices/standards , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
12.
Travel Med Infect Dis ; 39: 101915, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33186687

ABSTRACT

Air travel during the COVID-19 pandemic is challenging for travellers, airlines, airports, health authorities, and governments. We reviewed multiple aspects of COVID peri-pandemic air travel, including data on traveller numbers, peri-flight prevention, and testing recommendations and in-flight SARS-CoV-2 transmission, photo-epidemiology of mask use, the pausing of air travel to mass gathering events, and quarantine measures and their effectiveness. Flights are reduced by 43% compared to 2019. Hygiene measures, mask use, and distancing are effective, while temperature screening has been shown to be unreliable. Although the risk of in-flight transmission is considered to be very low, estimated at one case per 27 million travellers, confirmed in-flight cases have been published. Some models exist and predict minimal risk but fail to consider human behavior and airline procedures variations. Despite aircraft high-efficiency filtering, there is some evidence that passengers within two rows of an index case are at higher risk. Air travel to mass gatherings should be avoided. Antigen testing is useful but impaired by time lag to results. Widespread application of solutions such as saliva-based, rapid testing or even detection with the help of "sniffer dogs" might be the way forward. The "traffic light system" for traveling, recently introduced by the Council of the European Union is a first step towards normalization of air travel. Quarantine of travellers may delay introduction or re-introduction of the virus, or may delay the peak of transmission, but the effect is small and there is limited evidence. New protocols detailing on-arrival, rapid testing and tracing are indicated to ensure that restricted movement is pragmatically implemented. Guidelines from airlines are non-transparent. Most airlines disinfect their flights and enforce wearing masks and social distancing to a certain degree. A layered approach of non-pharmaceutical interventions, screening and testing procedures, implementation and adherence to distancing, hygiene measures and mask use at airports, in-flight and throughout the entire journey together with pragmatic post-flight testing and tracing are all effective measures that can be implemented. Ongoing research and systematic review are indicated to provide evidence on the utility of preventive measures and to help answer the question "is it safe to fly?".


Subject(s)
Air Travel , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , Aircraft , Airports , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/transmission , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Communicable Disease Control/standards , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Travel Medicine/organization & administration , Travel Medicine/standards
13.
JAMA Netw Open ; 3(11): e2025082, 2020 11 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33175176

ABSTRACT

Importance: Concussions are a common occurrence in young athletes. Hypobaric hypoxemia, such as that experienced during airplane travel, can potentially cause alterations to cerebral blood flow and increased neuroinflammatory response. It remains unknown whether flying early after a concussion may influence the clinical course of injury. Objective: To determine whether there is an association between concussion recovery and airplane travel in collegiate athletes and military cadets. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted by the National Collegiate Athletic Association and US Department of Defense Concussion Assessment, Research, and Education Consortium from August 3, 2014, to September 13, 2018. Participant groups were categorized by those who flew within 72 hours of injury and those who did not fly. All participants included in the final analyses had complete data of interest and only 1 injury during the study. Data analysis was performed from September 2018 to March 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Recovery outcome measures were defined as time (in days) from injury to return to activity, school, and baseline symptoms. Symptom and headache severity scores were derived from the Sports Concussion Assessment Tool-Third Edition. Scores for both groups were taken at baseline and a median of 2 days after injury. Results: A total of 92 participants who flew (mean [SD] age, 19.1 [1.2] years; 55 male [59.8%]) and 1383 participants who did not fly (mean [SD] age, 18.9 [1.3] years; 809 male [58.5%]) were included in the analysis of symptom recovery outcomes (analysis 1). Similarly, 100 participants who flew (mean [SD] age, 19.2 [1.2] years; 63 male [63.0%]) and 1577 participants who did not fly (mean [SD] age, 18.9 [1.3] years; 916 male [58.1%]) were included in the analysis of symptom severity outcomes (analysis 2). No significant group differences were found regarding recovery outcome measures. Likewise, there were no group differences in symptom (estimated mean difference, 0.029; 95% CI, -0.083 to 0.144; P = .67) or headache (estimated mean difference, -0.007; 95% CI, -0.094 to 0.081; P = .91) severity scores. Conclusions and Relevance: Airplane travel early after concussion was not associated with recovery or severity of concussion symptoms. These findings may help guide future recommendations on flight travel after concussion in athletes.


Subject(s)
Athletes/statistics & numerical data , Brain Concussion/diagnosis , Military Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Recovery of Function/physiology , Adolescent , Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , Aircraft , Athletic Injuries/complications , Brain Concussion/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Neuropsychological Tests/statistics & numerical data , Severity of Illness Index , Sports , Students , Young Adult
15.
J Travel Med ; 27(8)2020 12 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33094347

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed an ongoing global crisis, but how the virus spread across the world remains poorly understood. This is of vital importance for informing current and future pandemic response strategies. METHODS: We performed two independent analyses, travel network-based epidemiological modelling and Bayesian phylogeographic inference, to investigate the intercontinental spread of COVID-19. RESULTS: Both approaches revealed two distinct phases of COVID-19 spread by the end of March 2020. In the first phase, COVID-19 largely circulated in China during mid-to-late January 2020 and was interrupted by containment measures in China. In the second and predominant phase extending from late February to mid-March, unrestricted movements between countries outside of China facilitated intercontinental spread, with Europe as a major source. Phylogenetic analyses also revealed that the dominant strains circulating in the USA were introduced from Europe. However, stringent restrictions on international travel across the world since late March have substantially reduced intercontinental transmission. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses highlight that heterogeneities in international travel have shaped the spatiotemporal characteristics of the pandemic. Unrestricted travel caused a large number of COVID-19 exportations from Europe to other continents between late February and mid-March, which facilitated the COVID-19 pandemic. Targeted restrictions on international travel from countries with widespread community transmission, together with improved capacity in testing, genetic sequencing and contact tracing, can inform timely strategies for mitigating and containing ongoing and future waves of COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Air Travel , COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control , Disease Transmission, Infectious , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , Air Travel/trends , Bayes Theorem , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Disease Transmission, Infectious/statistics & numerical data , Epidemiologic Measurements , Epidemiological Monitoring , Humans , Phylogeny , Spatio-Temporal Analysis
17.
PLoS One ; 15(9): e0238360, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32886681

ABSTRACT

This paper analyzes the impact of air transport connectivity and accessibility on scientific collaboration. Numerous studies demonstrated that the likelihood of collaboration declines with increase in distance between potential collaborators. These works commonly use simple measures of physical distance rather than actual flight capacity and frequency. Our study addresses this limitation by focusing on the relationship between flight availability and the number of scientific co-publications. Furthermore, we distinguish two components of flight availability: (1) direct and indirect air connections between airports; and (2) distance to the nearest airport from cities and towns where authors of scientific articles have their professional affiliations. Based on Zero-inflated Negative Binomial Regression, we provide evidence that greater flight availability is associated with more frequent scientific collaboration. More flight connections (connectivity) and proximity of airport (accessibility) increase the expected number of coauthored scientific papers. Moreover, direct flights and flights with one transfer are more valuable for intensifying scientific cooperation than travels involving more connecting flights. Further, analysis of four organizational sub-datasets-Arizona State University, Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, and University of Michigan-shows that the relationship between airline transport availability and scientific collaboration is not uniform, but is associated with the research profile of an institution and the characteristics of the airport that serves this institution.


Subject(s)
Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , Biomedical Research/statistics & numerical data , Biomedical Research/trends , Cooperative Behavior , Periodicals as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Publications/statistics & numerical data , Transportation/statistics & numerical data , Biomedical Research/organization & administration , Humans , Transportation/methods , Universities
20.
J Travel Med ; 27(8)2020 12 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32841354

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: With more countries exiting lockdown, public health safety requires screening measures at international travel entry points that can prevent the reintroduction or importation of the severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-2. Here, we estimate the number of cases captured, quarantining days averted and secondary cases expected to occur with screening interventions. METHODS: To estimate active case exportation risk from 153 countries with recorded coronavirus disease-2019 cases and deaths, we created a simple data-driven framework to calculate the number of infectious and upcoming infectious individuals out of 100 000 000 potential travellers from each country, and assessed six importation risk reduction strategies; Strategy 1 (S1) has no screening on entry, S2 tests all travellers and isolates test-positives where those who test negative at 7 days are permitted entry, S3 the equivalent but for a 14 day period, S4 quarantines all travellers for 7 days where all are subsequently permitted entry, S5 the equivalent for 14 days and S6 the testing of all travellers and prevention of entry for those who test positive. RESULTS: The average reduction in case importation across countries relative to S1 is 90.2% for S2, 91.7% for S3, 55.4% for S4, 91.2% for S5 and 77.2% for S6. An average of 79.6% of infected travellers are infectious upon arrival. For the top 100 exporting countries, an 88.2% average reduction in secondary cases is expected through S2 with the 7-day isolation of test-positives, increasing to 92.1% for S3 for 14-day isolation. A substantially smaller reduction of 30.0% is expected for 7-day all traveller quarantining, increasing to 84.3% for 14-day all traveller quarantining. CONCLUSIONS: The testing and isolation of test-positives should be implemented provided good testing practices are in place. If testing is not feasible, quarantining for a minimum of 14 days is recommended with strict adherence measures in place.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control , Communicable Diseases, Imported , Mass Screening/methods , Quarantine/methods , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , Airports/organization & administration , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Communicable Diseases, Imported/diagnosis , Communicable Diseases, Imported/epidemiology , Communicable Diseases, Imported/prevention & control , Epidemiological Monitoring , Global Health , Humans , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Assessment/statistics & numerical data
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...