Dataset Information

Using test positivity and reported case rates to estimate state-level COVID-19 prevalence and seroprevalence in the United States.

ABSTRACT: Accurate estimates of infection prevalence and seroprevalence are essential for evaluating and informing public health responses and vaccination coverage needed to address the ongoing spread of COVID-19 in each United States (U.S.) state. However, reliable, timely data based on representative population sampling are unavailable, and reported case and test positivity rates are highly biased. A simple data-driven Bayesian semi-empirical modeling framework was developed and used to evaluate state-level prevalence and seroprevalence of COVID-19 using daily reported cases and test positivity ratios. The model was calibrated to and validated using published state-wide seroprevalence data, and further compared against two independent data-driven mathematical models. The prevalence of undiagnosed COVID-19 infections is found to be well-approximated by a geometrically weighted average of the positivity rate and the reported case rate. Our model accurately fits state-level seroprevalence data from across the U.S. Prevalence estimates of our semi-empirical model compare favorably to those from two data-driven epidemiological models. As of December 31, 2020, we estimate nation-wide a prevalence of 1.4% [Credible Interval (CrI): 1.0%-1.9%] and a seroprevalence of 13.2% [CrI: 12.3%-14.2%], with state-level prevalence ranging from 0.2% [CrI: 0.1%-0.3%] in Hawaii to 2.8% [CrI: 1.8%-4.1%] in Tennessee, and seroprevalence from 1.5% [CrI: 1.2%-2.0%] in Vermont to 23% [CrI: 20%-28%] in New York. Cumulatively, reported cases correspond to only one third of actual infections. The use of this simple and easy-to-communicate approach to estimating COVID-19 prevalence and seroprevalence will improve the ability to make public health decisions that effectively respond to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

SUBMITTER: Chiu WA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8448371 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMany states in the United States have progressed towards legalization of marijuana including decriminalization, medicinal and/or recreational use. We studied the impact of legalization on cannabis-related emergency department visits in states with varying degrees of legalization.MethodsSeventeen healthcare institutions in fifteen states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Washington) participated. Cannabinoid immunoassay results and cannabis-related International Classification of Diseases (ninth and tenth versions) codes were obtained for emergency department visits over a 3- to 8-year period during various stages of legalization: no state laws, decriminalized, medical approval before dispensaries, medical dispensaries available, recreational approval before dispensaries and recreational dispensaries available. Trends and monthly rates of cannabinoid immunoassay and cannabis-related International Classification of Diseases code positivity were determined during these legalization periods.ResultsFor most states, there was a significant increase in both cannabinoid immunoassay and International Classification of Diseases code positivity as legalization progressed; however, positivity rates differed. The availability of dispensaries may impact positivity in states with medical and/or recreational approval. In most states with no laws, there was a significant but smaller increase in cannabinoid immunoassay positivity rates.ConclusionsStates may experience an increase in cannabis-related emergency department visits with progression toward marijuana legalization. The differences between states, including those in which no impact was seen, are likely multifactorial and include cultural norms, attitudes of local law enforcement, differing patient populations, legalization in surrounding states, availability of dispensaries, various ordering protocols in the emergency department, and the prevalence of non-regulated cannabis products.

Project description:ImportanceMany states in the United States enforce restrictions to reproductive care, with access to abortion remaining a highly divisive issue. Denial of abortion is linked with heightened stress and anxiety among reproductive-aged women. However, no studies have tested whether access to reproductive care is linked to suicide.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether state-level restrictions in access to reproductive care in the United States were associated with suicide rates among reproductive-aged women from 1974 to 2016.Design, setting, and participantsA longitudinal ecologic study with a difference-in-differences analysis assessed whether annual changes in the enforcement of state-level restrictions to reproductive care were related to annual state-level suicide rates vs rates of death due to motor vehicle crashes. Duration of follow-up varied between different states (range, 4-40 years), contingent on the first year that restrictions were implemented. Models controlled for year and state fixed effects and other relevant demographic and economic factors. Analyses were conducted between December 2021 and January 2022.ExposuresTargeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) laws index measuring state-year-level restrictions to reproductive care.Main outcomes and measuresAnnual state-level suicide rates and motor vehicle crash death rates among reproductive-aged women (ages 20-34 years; target group) vs women of postreproductive age (ages 45-64 years; control group).ResultsTwenty-one US states enforced at least 1 TRAP law between 1974 and 2016. Annual rates of death by suicide ranged from 1.4 to 25.6 per 100 000 women of reproductive age to 2.7 to 33.2 per 100 000 women of postreproductive age during the study period (1974-2016). Annual motor vehicle crash death rates among women of reproductive age ranged from 2.4 to 42.9 per 100 000. Enforcement of TRAP laws was associated with higher suicide rates among reproductive-aged women (β = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.32; P = .02) but not women of postreproductive age (β = 0.06; 95% CI, -0.11 to 0.24; P = .47) nor to deaths due to motor vehicle crashes (β = 0.03, 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.11; P = .36). Among reproductive-aged women, the weighted average annual-state level suicide death rate when no TRAP laws were enforced was 5.5 per 100 000. Enforcement of a TRAP law was associated with a 5.81% higher annual rate of suicide than in pre-enforcement years. Findings remained significant when using alternative, broader indices of reproductive care access and different age categorizations.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study with a difference-in-differences analysis of US women, restrictions on access to reproductive care from 1974 to 2016 were associated with suicide rates among reproductive-aged women. Given the limitations of the ecologic design of this study, further research is needed to assess whether current factors affecting access to reproductive care services are related to suicide risk among women of reproductive age and to inform suicide prevention strategies.

Dataset Information

Using test positivity and reported case rates to estimate state-level COVID-19 prevalence and seroprevalence in the United States.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets