COVID-19 Symptoms by Variant Period in the North Carolina COVID-19 Community Research Partnership, North Carolina, USA.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: DeWitt ME
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9796200 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
COVID-19 Symptoms by Variant Period in the North Carolina COVID-19 Community Research Partnership, North Carolina, USA.
DeWitt Michael E ME Tjaden Ashley H AH Herrington David D Schieffelin John J Gibbs Michael M Weintraub William S WS Sanders John W JW Edelstein Sharon L SL
Emerging infectious diseases 20230101 1
In North Carolina, USA, the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant was associated with changing symptomology in daily surveys, including increasing rates of self-reported cough and sore throat and decreased rates of loss of taste and smell. Compared with the pre-Delta period, Delta and Omicron (pre-BA.4/BA.5) variant periods were associated with shorter symptom duration. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Well-regulated clinical trials have shown FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines to be immunogenic and highly efficacious. We evaluated seroconversion rates in adults reporting ≥ 1 dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in a cohort study of nearly 8000 adults residing in North Carolina to validate immunogenicity using a novel approach: at-home, participant administered point-of-care testing. Overall, 91.4% had documented seroconversion within 75 days of first vaccination (median: 31 days). Participants who were older and male participants were less likely to seroconvert (adults aged 41-65: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.69 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64, 0.73], adults aged 66-95: aHR 0.55 [95% CI: 0.50, 0.60], compared to those 18-40; males: aHR 0.92 [95% CI: 0.87, 0.98], compared to females). Participants with evidence of prior infection were more likely to seroconvert than those without (aHR 1.50 [95% CI: 1.19, 1.88]) and those receiving BNT162b2 were less likely to seroconvert compared to those receiving mRNA-1273 (aHR 0.84 [95% CI: 0.79, 0.90]). Reporting at least one new symptom after first vaccination did not affect time to seroconversion, but participants reporting at least one new symptom after second vaccination were more likely to seroconvert (aHR 1.11 [95% CI: 1.05, 1.17]). This data demonstrates the high community-level immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines, albeit with notable differences in older adults, and feasibility of using at-home, participant administered point-of-care testing for community cohort monitoring. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04342884.
| S-EPMC9464595 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccine acceptance is variable. We surveyed participants in the COVID-19 Community Research Partnership from 17 December 2020 to 13 January 2021 to assess vaccine receptiveness. Vaccine uptake was then monitored until 15 May 2021; 20,232 participants responded to the receptiveness survey with vaccination status accessed in 18,874 participants via daily follow-up surveys (participants not completing daily surveys ≥30 days to 15 May 2021, were excluded). In the initial survey, 4802 (23.8%) were vaccine hesitant. Hesitancy was most apparent in women (Adjusted RR 0.93, p < 0.001), Black Americans (Adjusted RR 1.39, 1.41, 1.31 to non-Hispanic Whites, Other, and Hispanic or Latino, respectively p < 0.001), healthcare workers (Adjusted RR 0.93, p < 0.001), suburbanites (ref. Urban Adjusted RR 0.85, 0.90 to urban and rural dwellers, respectively, p < 0.01), and those previously diagnosed with COVID-19 (RR 1.20, p < 0.01). Those <50 years were also less accepting of vaccination. Subsequent vaccine uptake was 99% in non-hesitant participants. For those who were unsure, preferred not to answer, or answered "no", vaccination rates were 80% (Adjusted RR 0.86, p < 0.0001), 78% (Adjusted RR 0.83, p < 0.0001), and 52.7% (Adjusted RR 0.65, p < 0.0001), respectively. These findings suggest that initial intent did not correlate with vaccine uptake in our cohort.
| S-EPMC8402530 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough the incidence of venous and arterial thrombosis after a COVID-19 diagnosis and hospitalization has been well described using data available from electronic health records (EHR), little is known about their incidence after mild infections.ObjectivesTo characterize the cumulative incidence and risk factors for thrombosis after a COVID-19 diagnosis among those identified through the EHR and those with a self-reported case.MethodsWe calculated the cumulative incidence of thromboembolism diagnoses after EHR-identified and self-reported cases in the North Carolina COVID-19 Community Partnership, a prospective, multisite, longitudinal surveillance cohort using a Kaplan-Meier approach. We performed Cox regression to estimate the hazard of a thromboembolism diagnosis after COVID-19 by comorbidities, vaccination status, and dominant SARS-CoV-2 variant.ResultsOf a cohort of comprising more than 39,500 participants from 6 North Carolina sites, there were 6271 self-reported or EHR-diagnosed cases of COVID-19 reported between July 1, 2020, and April 30, 2022, of which 46 participants were diagnosed with a new-onset thromboembolism in the 365 days after their reported case. Self-reported cases had a lower estimated cumulative incidence of 0.15% (95% CI, 0.03-0.28) by day 90 and 0.64% (95% CI, 0.30-0.97) by day 365 compared with EHR-based diagnoses that had cumulative incidences of 0.73% (95% CI, 0.36-1.09) and 1.78 (95% CI, 1.14-2.46) by days 90 and 365 (log-rank test P value <.001). Those hospitalized and with pre-existing pulmonary and cardiovascular diseases were associated with the highest risk of a thromboembolism.ConclusionWe observed a higher cumulative incidence of thromboembolism after EHR-identified COVID-19 than self-reported cases.
| S-EPMC9904855 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 Community Research Partnership is a population-based longitudinal syndromic and sero-surveillance study. The study includes over 17,000 participants from six healthcare systems in North Carolina who submitted over 49,000 serology results. The purpose of this study is to use these serology data to estimate the cumulative proportion of the North Carolina population that has either been infected with SARS-CoV-2 or developed a measurable humoral response to vaccination.MethodsAdult community residents were invited to participate in the study between April 2020 and February 2021. Demographic information was collected and daily symptom screen was completed using a secure, HIPAA-compliant, online portal. A portion of participants were mailed kits containing a lateral flow assay to be used in-home to test for presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgM or IgG antibodies. The cumulative proportion of participants who tested positive at least once during the study was estimated. A standard Cox proportional hazards model was constructed to illustrate the probability of seroconversion over time up to December 20, 2020 (before vaccines available). A separate analysis was performed to describe the influence of vaccines through February 15, 2021.Results17,688 participants contributed at least one serology result. 68.7% of the population were female, and 72.2% were between 18 and 59 years of age. The average number of serology results submitted per participant was 3.0 (±1.9). By December 20, 2020, the overall probability of seropositivity in the CCRP population was 32.6%. By February 15, 2021 the probability among healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers was 83% and 49%, respectively. An inflection upward in the probability of seropositivity was demonstrated around the end of December, suggesting an influence of vaccinations, especially for healthcare workers. Among healthcare workers, those in the oldest age category (60+ years) were 38% less likely to have seroconverted by February 15, 2021.ConclusionsResults of this study suggest more North Carolina residents may have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 than the number of documented cases as determined by positive RNA or antigen tests. The influence of vaccinations on seropositivity among North Carolina residents is also demonstrated. Additional research is needed to fully characterize the impact of seropositivity on immunity and the ultimate course of the pandemic.
| S-EPMC8932589 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe duration of protection afforded by coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) vaccines in the United States is unclear. Whether the increase in postvaccination infections during the summer of 2021 was caused by declining immunity over time, the emergence of the B.1.617.2 (delta) variant, or both is unknown.MethodsWe extracted data regarding Covid-19-related vaccination and outcomes during a 9-month period (December 11, 2020, to September 8, 2021) for approximately 10.6 million North Carolina residents by linking data from the North Carolina Covid-19 Surveillance System and the Covid-19 Vaccine Management System. We used a Cox regression model to estimate the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), and Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson-Janssen) vaccines in reducing the current risks of Covid-19, hospitalization, and death, as a function of time elapsed since vaccination.ResultsFor the two-dose regimens of messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines BNT162b2 (30 μg per dose) and mRNA-1273 (100 μg per dose), vaccine effectiveness against Covid-19 was 94.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.1 to 94.9) and 95.9% (95% CI, 95.5 to 96.2), respectively, at 2 months after the first dose and decreased to 66.6% (95% CI, 65.2 to 67.8) and 80.3% (95% CI, 79.3 to 81.2), respectively, at 7 months. Among early recipients of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, effectiveness decreased by approximately 15 and 10 percentage points, respectively, from mid-June to mid-July, when the delta variant became dominant. For the one-dose regimen of Ad26.COV2.S (5 × 1010 viral particles), effectiveness against Covid-19 was 74.8% (95% CI, 72.5 to 76.9) at 1 month and decreased to 59.4% (95% CI, 57.2 to 61.5) at 5 months. All three vaccines maintained better effectiveness in preventing hospitalization and death than in preventing infection over time, although the two mRNA vaccines provided higher levels of protection than Ad26.COV2.S.ConclusionsAll three Covid-19 vaccines had durable effectiveness in reducing the risks of hospitalization and death. Waning protection against infection over time was due to both declining immunity and the emergence of the delta variant. (Funded by a Dennis Gillings Distinguished Professorship and the National Institutes of Health.).
| S-EPMC8781317 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWearing a face mask is a primary public health method to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission.MethodsWe performed a nested case-control analysis within the North Carolina COVID-19 Community Research Partnership (NC-CCRP) of adults who completed daily surveillance surveys, April 2020 - February 2022. We assessed the association between self-reported mask wearing behavior during nonhousehold interactions and COVID-19 infection during 3 pandemic periods using conditional logistic regression models of risk of infection that were adjusted for demographics, vaccination status, and recent known exposure to COVID-19.ResultsAmong 3,901 cases and 27,813 date-matched controls, there was a significant interaction between mask use and time period (P < .001). Prior to July 2021, the odds of a reported infection were 66% higher (aOR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.43-1.91) among participants reporting ≥1 day not wearing a mask compared to those who reported no days (1,592 cases, 11,717 controls). During the Delta-predominant period, the results were similar (aOR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.23-1.89; 659 cases, 4,649 controls). This association was attenuated during the Omicron-predominant period, where odds of an infection was 16% higher (aOR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.03-1.32; 1,563 cases, 10,960 controls).ConclusionsWhile the effect of not wearing a mask remains significant, during the Omicron-predominant period we observed a decrease in the association between self-reported mask wearing and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
| S-EPMC9537112 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Wastewater surveillance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may be useful for monitoring population-wide coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections, especially given asymptomatic infections and limitations in diagnostic testing. We aimed to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA in wastewater and compare viral concentrations to COVID-19 case numbers in the respective counties and sewersheds. Influent 24-hour composite wastewater samples were collected from July to December 2020 from two municipal wastewater treatment plants serving different population sizes in Orange and Chatham Counties in North Carolina. After a concentration step via HA filtration, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected and quantified by reverse transcription droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (RT-ddPCR) and quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR), targeting the N1 and N2 nucleocapsid genes. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected by RT-ddPCR in 100 % (24/24) and 79 % (19/24) of influent wastewater samples from the larger and smaller plants, respectively. In comparison, viral RNA was detected by RT-qPCR in 41.7 % (10/24) and 8.3 % (2/24) of samples from the larger and smaller plants, respectively. Positivity rates and method agreement further increased for the RT-qPCR assay when samples with positive signals below the limit of detection were counted as positive. The wastewater data from the larger plant generally correlated (⍴ ~0.5, p < 0.05) with, and even anticipated, the trends in reported COVID-19 cases, with a notable spike in measured viral RNA preceding a spike in cases when students returned to a college campus in the Orange County sewershed. Correlations were generally higher when using estimates of sewershed-level case data rather than county-level data. This work supports use of wastewater surveillance for tracking COVID-19 disease trends, especially in identifying spikes in cases. Wastewater-based epidemiology can be a valuable resource for tracking disease trends, allocating resources, and evaluating policy in the fight against current and future pandemics.
| S-EPMC9639408 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the United States, underserved communities including Blacks and Latinx are disproportionately affected by COVID-19. This study sought to estimate the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, describe attitudes related to vaccination, and identify correlates among historically marginalized populations across 9 counties in North Carolina.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey distributed at free COVID-19 testing events in underserved rural and urban communities from August 27 -December 15, 2020. Vaccine hesitancy was defined as the response of "no" or "don't know/not sure" to whether the participant would get the COVID-19 vaccine as soon as it became available.ResultsThe sample comprised 948 participants including 27.7% Whites, 59.6% Blacks, 12.7% Latinx, and 63% female. 32% earned <$20K annually, 60% owned a computer and ~80% had internet access at home. The prevalence of vaccine hesitancy was 68.9% including 62.7%, 74%, and 59.5% among Whites, Blacks, and Latinx, respectively. Between September and December, the largest decline in vaccine hesitancy occurred among Whites (27.5 percentage points), followed by Latinx (17.6) and only 12.0 points among Blacks. 51.2% of respondents reported vaccine safety concerns, 23.7% wanted others to get vaccinated first, and 63.1% would trust health care providers about the COVID-19 vaccine. Factors associated with hesitancy in multivariable logistic regression included being female (OR = 1.90 95%CI [1.36, 2.64]), being Black (OR = 1.68 1.16, 2.45]), calendar month (OR = 0.76 [0.63, 0.92]), safety concerns (OR = 4.28 [3.06, 5.97]), and government distrust (OR = 3.57 [2.26, 5.63]).ConclusionsThis study engaged the community to directly reach underserved minority populations at highest risk of COVID-19 that permitted assessment of vaccine hesitancy (which was much higher than national estimates), driven in part by distrust, and safety concerns.
| S-EPMC8559933 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimIt has been demonstrated that marginalized populations across the U.S. have suffered a disproportionate burden of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, illustrating the role that social determinants of health play in health outcomes. To better understand how these vulnerable and high-risk populations have experienced the pandemic, we conducted a qualitative study to better understand their experiences from diagnosis through recovery.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative study of patients in a North Carolina healthcare system's registry who tested positive for COVID-19 from March 2020 through February 2021, identified from population-dense outbreaks of COVID-19 (hotspots). We conducted semi-structured phone interviews in English or Spanish, based on patient preference, with trained bilingual study personnel. Each interview was evaluated using a combination of deductive and inductive content analysis to determine prevalent themes related to COVID-19 knowledge, diagnosis, disease experience, and long-term impacts.FindingsThe 10 patients interviewed from our COVID-19 hotspot clusters were of equal distribution by sex, predominantly Black (70%), aged 22-70 years (IQR 45-62 years), and more frequently publicly insured (50% Medicaid/Medicare, vs 30% uninsured, vs 20% private insurance). Major themes identified included prior knowledge of COVID-19 and patient perceptions of their personal risk, the testing process in numerous settings, the process of quarantining at home after a positive diagnosis, the experience of receiving medical care during their illness, and difficulties with long-term recovery.DiscussionOur findings suggest areas for targeted interventions to reduce COVID-19 transmission in these high-risk communities, as well as improve the patient experience throughout the COVID-19 illness course.
| S-EPMC9162358 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Analysis of COVID-19 hospitalized patients, with different kind of symptoms, by human rectal swabs collection and 16S sequencing approach.
2022-09-22 | E-MTAB-12236 | biostudies-arrayexpress