Dataset Information

SARS-CoV-2: An Empirical Investigation of Rose's Population-based Logic.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Geoffrey Rose's paper "Sick Individuals, Sick Populations" highlights the counterintuitive finding that the largest share of morbidity arises from populations engaging in low- to moderate-risk behavior. Scholars refer to this finding as the prevention paradox. We examine whether this logic applies to SARS-CoV-2 infected persons considered low to moderate risk.

Methods

We conducted a population-representative survey and sero-surveillance study for SARS-CoV-2 among adults in Orange County, California. Participants answered questions about health behaviors and provided a finger-pin-prick sample from 10 July to 16 August 2020.

Results

Of the 2979 adults, those reporting low- and moderate-risk behavior accounted for between 78% and 92% of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Asymptomatic individuals, as well as persons with low and moderate scores for self-reported likelihood of having had SARS-CoV-2, accounted for the majority of infections.

Conclusions

Our findings support Rose's logic, which encourages public health measures among persons who self-identify as unlikely to have SARS-CoV-2. See video abstract at, http://links.lww.com/EDE/B860.

SUBMITTER: Bruckner T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8478111 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundConsidering the insufficiently controlled spread of new SARS-CoV-2 variants, partially low vaccination rates, and increased risk of a post-COVID syndrome, well-functioning, targeted intervention measures at local and national levels are urgently needed to contain the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Surveillance concepts (cross-sectional, cohorts, clusters) need to be carefully selected to monitor and assess incidence and prevalence at the population level. A critical methodological gap for identifying specific risks/dynamics for SARS-Cov-2 transmission and post-COVID-19-syndrome includes repetitive testing for past or present infection of a defined cohort with simultaneous assessment of symptoms, behavior, risk, and protective factors, as well as quality of life.MethodsThe ELISA-Study is a longitudinal, prospective surveillance study with a cohort approach launched in Luebeck in April 2020. The first part comprised regular PCR testing, antibody measurements, and a recurrent App-based questionnaire for a population-based cohort of 3000 inhabitants of Luebeck. The follow-up study protocol includes self-testing for antibodies and PCR testing for a subset of the participants, focusing on studying immunity after vaccination and/or infection and post-COVID-19 symptoms.DiscussionThe ELISA cohort and our follow-up study protocol will enable us to study the effects of a sharp increase of SARS-CoV-2 infections on seroprevalence of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, post-COVID-19-symptoms, and possible medical, occupational, and behavioral risk factors. We will be able to monitor the pandemic continuously and discover potential sequelae of an infection long-term. Further examinations can be readily set up on an ad-hoc basis in the future. Our study protocol can be adapted to other regions and settings and is transferable to other infectious diseases.Trial registrationDRKS.de, German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), Identifier: DRKS00023418 , Registered on 28 October 2020.

Project description:IntroductionThere is an evidence gap regarding the duration of SARS-CoV-2 shedding and of its variability across different care settings and by age, sex, income, and co-morbidities. Such evidence is part of understanding of infectivity and reinfection. We examine direct measures of viral shedding using a linked population-based health administrative dataset.MethodsLaboratory and sociodemographic databases for Ontario, Canada were linked to identify those testing positive (RT-PCR) between Jan. 15 and April 30, 2020 who underwent subsequent testing by May 31, 2020. To maximise use of available data, we computed two shedding duration estimates defined as the time between initial positive and most recent positive (documented shedding) or second of two negative tests (documented resolution). We also report multivariable results using quantile regression to examine subgroup differences.ResultsIn Ontario, of the 16,595 who tested positive before April 30, 2020, 6604 had sufficient subsequent testing to allow shedding duration calculation. Documented shedding median duration calculated in 4,889 (29% of 16,595) patients was 19 days (IQR 12-28). Documented resolution median duration calculated in 3,219 (19% of the 16,595) patients was 25 days (IQR 18-34). Long-term care residents had 3-5 day longer shedding durations using both definitions. Shorter documented shedding durations of 2-4 days were observed in those living in higher income neighbourhoods. Shorter documented resolution durations of 2-3 days were observed at the 25th% of the distribution in those aged 20-49. Only 11.5% of those with definitive negative test results reverted to negative status by day 14.ConclusionsViral shedding continued well beyond 14 days among this large subset of a population-based group with COVID-19, and longer still for long-term care residents and those living in less affluent neighborhoods. Our findings do not speak to duration of infectivity but are useful for understanding the expected duration of RT-PCR positivity and for identifying reinfection.

Project description:AimIn a consecutive series of cancer patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection, this retrospective population-based study investigates the risks of viral infection and death.MethodsMalignancies were distinguished as incident or prevalent (active or inactive). Cancer management and vital status were retrieved from institutional regional databases. Comorbidities were recorded, based on Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG). Six Resource Utilization Bands (RUBs) were also considered. Independent risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection and death were identified using multivariable logistic regression, considering sex, age, comorbidities and RUBs, cancer status (active versus prevalent), primary cancer site, and treatments (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy).ResultsAmong 34,929 cancer patients, 1,090 (3.1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection (CoV2+ve). The risk of infection was associated with age (OR per 1-year increase=1.012; 95%CI=1.007-1.017), prevalent-inactive disease, hematologic malignancies (OR=1.33; 95%CI=1.03-1.72) and RUB (OR per 1-level increase=1.14; 95%CI=1.05-1.24). Among CoV2+ve cancer patients, the risk of death was doubled for males, and increased with age (OR per 1-year increase=1.07; 95%CI=1.06-1.09) and comorbidities (renal [OR=3.18; 95%CI=1.58-6.49], hematological [OR=3.08; 95%CI=1.49-6.50], respiratory [OR=2.87; 95%CI=1.61-5.14], endocrine [OR=2.09; 95%CI=1.25-3.51]). Lung and blood malignancies raised the mortality risk (OR=3.55; 95%CI=1.56-8.33, and OR=1.81; 95%CI=1.01-3.25 respectively). Incident or prevalent-active disease and recent chemotherapy and radiotherapy (OR=4.34; 95%CI=1.85-10.50) increased the risk of death.ConclusionIn a large cohort of cancer patients, the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection was higher for those with inactive disease than in incident or prevalent-active cases. Among CoV2+ve cancer patients, active malignancies and recent multimodal therapy both significantly raised the risk of death, which increased particularly for lung cancer.