Explore the vast range of titles available.

Quantification of asymptomatic infections is fundamental for effective public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Discrepancies regarding the extent of asymptomaticity have arisen from inconsistent terminology as well as conflation of index and secondary cases which biases toward lower asymptomaticity. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and World Health Organization Global Research Database on COVID-19 between January 1, 2020 and April 2, 2021 to identify studies that reported silent infections at the time of testing, whether presymptomatic or asymptomatic. Index cases were removed to minimize representational bias that would result in overestimation of symptomaticity. By analyzing over 350 studies, we estimate that the percentage of infections that never developed clinical symptoms, and thus were truly asymptomatic, was 35.1% (95% CI: 30.7 to 39.9%). At the time of testing, 42.8% (95% prediction interval: 5.2 to 91.1%) of cases exhibited no symptoms, a group comprising both asymptomatic and presymptomatic infections. Asymptomaticity was significantly lower among the elderly, at 19.7% (95% CI: 12.7 to 29.4%) compared with children at 46.7% (95% CI: 32.0 to 62.0%). We also found that cases with comorbidities had significantly lower asymptomaticity compared to cases with no underlying medical conditions.Without proactive policies to detect asymptomatic infections, such as rapid contact tracing, prolonged efforts for pandemic control may be needed even in the presence of vaccination.

Since the emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), unprecedented movement restrictions and social distancing measures have been implemented worldwide. The socioeconomic repercussions have fueled calls to lift these measures. In the absence of population-wide restrictions, isolation of infected individuals is key to curtailing transmission. However, the effectiveness of symptom-based isolation in preventing a resurgence depends on the extent of presymptomatic and asymptomatic transmission. We evaluate the contribution of presymptomatic and asymptomatic transmission based on recent individual-level data regarding infectiousness prior to symptom onset and the asymptomatic proportion among all infections. We found that the majority of incidences may be attributable to silent transmission from a combination of the presymptomatic stage and asymptomatic infections. Consequently, even if all symptomatic cases are isolated, a vast outbreak may nonetheless unfold. We further quantified the effect of isolating silent infections in addition to symptomatic cases, finding that over one-third of silent infections must be isolated to suppress a future outbreak below 1% of the population. Our results indicate that symptom-based isolation must be supplemented by rapid contact tracing and testing that identifies asymptomatic and presymptomatic cases, in order to safely lift current restrictions and minimize the risk of resurgence.

The novel coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19) in mainland China has rapidly spread across the globe. Within 2 mo since the outbreak was first reported on December 31, 2019, a total of 566 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS CoV-2) cases have been confirmed in 26 other countries. Travel restrictions and border control measures have been enforced in China and other countries to limit the spread of the outbreak. We estimate the impact of these control measures and investigate the role of the airport travel network on the global spread of the COVID-19 outbreak. Our results show that the daily risk of exporting at least a single SARS CoV-2 case from mainland China via international travel exceeded 95% on January 13, 2020. We found that 779 cases (95% CI: 632 to 967) would have been exported by February 15, 2020 without any border or travel restrictions and that the travel lockdowns enforced by the Chinese government averted 70.5% (95% CI: 68.8 to 72.0%) of these cases. In addition, during the first three and a half weeks of implementation, the travel restrictions decreased the daily rate of exportation by 81.3% (95% CI: 80.5 to 82.1%), on average. At this early stage of the epidemic, reduction in the rate of exportation could delay the importation of cases into cities unaffected by the COVID-19 outbreak, buying time to coordinate an appropriate public health response.

In the wake of community coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission in the United States, there is a growing public health concern regarding the adequacy of resources to treat infected cases. Hospital beds, intensive care units (ICUs), and ventilators are vital for the treatment of patients with severe illness. To project the timing of the outbreak peak and the number of ICU beds required at peak, we simulated a COVID-19 outbreak parameterized with the US population demographics. In scenario analyses, we varied the delay from symptom onset to self-isolation, the proportion of symptomatic individuals practicing self-isolation, and the basic reproduction number R₀. Without self-isolation, when R₀ = 2.5, treatment of critically ill individuals at the outbreak peak would require 3.8 times more ICU beds than exist in the United States. Self-isolation by 20% of cases 24 h after symptom onset would delay and flatten the outbreak trajectory, reducing the number of ICU beds needed at the peak by 48.4% (interquartile range 46.4–50.3%), although still exceeding existing capacity. When R₀ = 2, twice as many ICU beds would be required at the peak of outbreak in the absence of self-isolation. In this scenario, the proportional impact of self-isolation within 24 h on reducing the peak number of ICU beds is substantially higher at 73.5% (interquartile range 71.4–75.3%). Our estimates underscore the inadequacy of critical care capacity to handle the burgeoning outbreak. Policies that encourage self-isolation, such as paid sick leave, may delay the epidemic peak, giving a window of time that could facilitate emergency mobilization to expand hospital capacity.

Two of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines currently approved in the United States require 2 doses, administered 3 to 4 weeks apart. Constraints in vaccine supply and distribution capacity, together with a deadly wave of COVID-19 from November 2020 to January 2021 and the emergence of highly contagious Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants, sparked a policy debate on whether to vaccinate more individuals with the first dose of available vaccines and delay the second dose or to continue with the recommended 2-dose series as tested in clinical trials. We developed an agent-based model of COVID-19 transmission to compare the impact of these 2 vaccination strategies, while varying the temporal waning of vaccine efficacy following the first dose and the level of preexisting immunity in the population. Our results show that for Moderna vaccines, a delay of at least 9 weeks could maximize vaccination program effectiveness and avert at least an additional 17.3 (95% credible interval [CrI]: 7.8–29.7) infections, 0.69 (95% CrI: 0.52–0.97) hospitalizations, and 0.34 (95% CrI: 0.25–0.44) deaths per 10,000 population compared to the recommended 4-week interval between the 2 doses. Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines also averted an additional 0.60 (95% CrI: 0.37–0.89) hospitalizations and 0.32 (95% CrI: 0.23–0.45) deaths per 10,000 population in a 9-week delayed second dose (DSD) strategy compared to the 3-week recommended schedule between doses. However, there was no clear advantage of delaying the second dose with Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines in reducing infections, unless the efficacy of the first dose did not wane over time. Our findings underscore the importance of quantifying the characteristics and durability of vaccine-induced protection after the first dose in order to determine the optimal time interval between the 2 doses.

Disease risk is a potential cost of group living. Although modular organization is thought to reduce this cost in animal societies, empirical evidence toward this hypothesis has been conflicting. We analyzed empirical social networks from 43 animal species to motivate our study of the epidemiological consequences of modular structure in animal societies. From these empirical studies, we identified the features of interaction patterns associated with network modularity and developed a theoretical network model to investigate when and how subdivisions in social networks influence disease dynamics. Contrary to prior work, we found that disease risk is largely unaffected by modular structure, although social networks beyond a modular threshold experience smaller disease burden and longer disease duration. Our results illustrate that the lowering of disease burden in highly modular social networks is driven by two mechanisms of modular organization: network fragmentation and subgroup cohesion. Highly fragmented social networks with cohesive subgroups are able to structurally trap infections within a few subgroups and also cause a structural delay to the spread of disease outbreaks. Finally, we show that network models incorporating modular structure are necessary only when prior knowledge suggests that interactions within the population are highly subdivided. Otherwise, null networks based on basic knowledge about group size and local contact heterogeneity may be sufficient when data-limited estimates of epidemic consequences are necessary. Overall, our work does not support the hypothesis that modular structure universally mitigates the disease impact of group living.

Social network analysis is an invaluable tool to understand the patterns, evolution, and consequences of sociality. Comparative studies over a range of social systems across multiple taxonomic groups are particularly valuable. Such studies however require quantitative social association or interaction data across multiple species which is not easily available. We introduce the Animal Social Network Repository (ASNR) as the first multi-taxonomic repository that collates 790 social networks from more than 45 species, including those of mammals, reptiles, fish, birds, and insects. The repository was created by consolidating social network datasets from the literature on wild and captive animals into a consistent and easy-to-use network data format. The repository is archived at https://bansallab.github.io/asnr/. ASNR has tremendous research potential, including testing hypotheses in the fields of animal ecology, social behavior, epidemiology and evolutionary biology.Design Type(s)species comparison design • network analysis objective • data integration objectiveMeasurement Type(s)social interaction measurementTechnology Type(s)digital curationFactor Type(s)Taxon • experimental condition • geographic locationSample Characteristic(s)Gasterosteus aculeatus • Poecilia reticulata • Hirundo rustica • Branta leucopsis • Gallus gallus • Haemorhous mexicanus • Zonotrichia atricapilla • Acanthiza • Philetairus socius • Aves • Camponotus fellah • Camponotus pennsylvanicus • Bolitotherus cornutus • Elephas maximus • Papio cynocephalus • Desmodus rotundus • Myotis sodalis • Bison bison • Bos taurus • Tursiops truncatus • Mirounga angustirostris • Crocuta crocuta • Macropus giganteus • Trichosurus cunninghami • Ateles geoffroyi • Macaca fuscata • Macaca mulatta • Macaca radiata • Macaca tonkeana • Pan paniscus • Pan troglodytes • Papio papio • Saguinus fuscicollis • Saguinus mystax • Trachypithecus johnii • Alouatta guariba • Brachyteles arachnoides • Sapajus apella • Cercopithecus campbelli • Colobus guereza • Erythrocebus patas • Macaca arctoides • Macaca assamensis • Procyon lotor • Ovis canadensis • Ateles hybridus • Microtus agrestis • Equus • Gopherus agassizii • Tiliqua rugosaMachine-accessible metadata file describing the reported data (ISA-Tab format)

Successive waves of infection by SARS-CoV-2 have left little doubt that this virus will transition to an endemic disease. Foreknowledge of when to expect seasonal surges is crucial for healthcare and public health decision-making. However, the future seasonality of COVID-19 remains uncertain. Evaluating its seasonality is complicated due to the limited years of SARS-CoV-2 circulation, pandemic dynamics, and varied interventions. In this study, we project the expected endemic seasonality by employing a phylogenetic ancestral and descendant state approach that leverages long-term data on the incidence of circulating HCoV coronaviruses. Our projections indicate asynchronous surges of SARS-CoV-2 across different locations in the northern hemisphere, occurring between October and January in New York and between January and March in Yamagata, Japan. This knowledge of spatiotemporal surges leads to medical preparedness and enables the implementation of targeted public health interventions to mitigate COVID-19 transmission. The seasonality of COVID-19 is important for effective healthcare and public health decision-making. Previous waves of SARS-CoV-2 infections have indicated that the virus will likely persist as an endemic pathogen with distinct surges. However, the timing and patterns of potentially seasonal surges remain uncertain, rendering effective public health policies uninformed and in danger of poorly anticipating opportunities for intervention, such as well-timed booster vaccination drives. Applying an evolutionary approach to long-term data on closely related circulating coronaviruses, our research provides projections of seasonal surges that should be expected at major temperate population centers. These projections enable local public health efforts that are tailored to expected surges at specific locales or regions. This knowledge is crucial for enhancing medical preparedness and facilitating the implementation of targeted public health interventions.

[...]at least 45 341 (IQR 31 346–62 110) additional units would be needed for the surge at the peak. [...]it is plausible that the USA will experience several asynchronous local peaks rather than one apex. [...]the USA simply needs more ventilators.

The spread of pathogens fundamentally depends on the underlying contacts between individuals. Modeling the dynamics of infectious disease spread through contact networks, however, can be challenging due to limited knowledge of how an infectious disease spreads and its transmission rate. We developed a novel statistical tool, INoDS (Identifying contact Networks of infectious Disease Spread) that estimates the transmission rate of an infectious disease outbreak, establishes epidemiological relevance of a contact network in explaining the observed pattern of infectious disease spread and enables model comparison between different contact network hypotheses. We show that our tool is robust to incomplete data and can be easily applied to datasets where infection timings of individuals are unknown. We tested the reliability of INoDS using simulation experiments of disease spread on a synthetic contact network and find that it is robust to incomplete data and is reliable under different settings of network dynamics and disease contagiousness compared with previous approaches. We demonstrate the applicability of our method in two host-pathogen systems: Crithidia bombi in bumblebee colonies and Salmonella in wild Australian sleepy lizard populations. INoDS thus provides a novel and reliable statistical tool for identifying transmission pathways of infectious disease spread. In addition, application of INoDS extends to understanding the spread of novel or emerging infectious disease, an alternative approach to laboratory transmission experiments, and overcoming common data-collection constraints.