Reconstructing the first COVID-19 pandemic wave with minimal data in England.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Siyu Chen, Jennifer A Flegg, Katrina A Lythgoe, Lisa J White
{"title":"Reconstructing the first COVID-19 pandemic wave with minimal data in England.","authors":"Siyu Chen, Jennifer A Flegg, Katrina A Lythgoe, Lisa J White","doi":"10.1016/j.epidem.2025.100814","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Accurate measurement of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in the population is crucial for understanding the dynamics of disease transmission and evaluating the impacts of interventions. However, it was particularly challenging to achieve this in the early phase of a pandemic because of the sparsity of epidemiological data. We previously developed an early pandemic diagnostic tool that linked minimum datasets: seroprevalence, mortality and infection testing data to estimate the true exposure in different regions of England and found levels of SARS-CoV-2 population exposure to be considerably higher than suggested by seroprevalence surveys. Here, we re-examine and evaluate the model in the context of reconstructing the first COVID-19 epidemic wave in England from three perspectives: validation against the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Coronavirus Infection Survey, relationship among model performance and data abundance and time-varying case detection ratios. We find that our model can recover the first, unobserved, epidemic wave of COVID-19 in England from March 2020 to June 2020 if two or three serological measurements are given as additional model inputs, while the second wave during winter of 2020 is validated by estimates from the ONS Coronavirus Infection Survey. Moreover, the model estimates that by the end of October in 2020 the UK government's official COVID-9 online dashboard reported COVID-19 cases only accounted for 9.1 % of cumulative exposure, dramatically varying across the two epidemic waves in England in 2020, 4.3 % vs 43.7 %.</p>","PeriodicalId":49206,"journal":{"name":"Epidemics","volume":"50 ","pages":"100814"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epidem.2025.100814","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Accurate measurement of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in the population is crucial for understanding the dynamics of disease transmission and evaluating the impacts of interventions. However, it was particularly challenging to achieve this in the early phase of a pandemic because of the sparsity of epidemiological data. We previously developed an early pandemic diagnostic tool that linked minimum datasets: seroprevalence, mortality and infection testing data to estimate the true exposure in different regions of England and found levels of SARS-CoV-2 population exposure to be considerably higher than suggested by seroprevalence surveys. Here, we re-examine and evaluate the model in the context of reconstructing the first COVID-19 epidemic wave in England from three perspectives: validation against the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Coronavirus Infection Survey, relationship among model performance and data abundance and time-varying case detection ratios. We find that our model can recover the first, unobserved, epidemic wave of COVID-19 in England from March 2020 to June 2020 if two or three serological measurements are given as additional model inputs, while the second wave during winter of 2020 is validated by estimates from the ONS Coronavirus Infection Survey. Moreover, the model estimates that by the end of October in 2020 the UK government's official COVID-9 online dashboard reported COVID-19 cases only accounted for 9.1 % of cumulative exposure, dramatically varying across the two epidemic waves in England in 2020, 4.3 % vs 43.7 %.

用最少的数据重建英格兰的第一次COVID-19大流行浪潮。
准确测量人群中SARS-CoV-2暴露情况对于了解疾病传播动态和评估干预措施的影响至关重要。然而,由于流行病学数据稀少,在大流行的早期阶段实现这一目标尤其具有挑战性。我们之前开发了一种早期大流行诊断工具,该工具将最低数据集:血清阳性率、死亡率和感染检测数据联系起来,以估计英格兰不同地区的真实暴露情况,并发现SARS-CoV-2人群暴露水平远高于血清阳性率调查所显示的水平。本文从英国国家统计局(ONS)冠状病毒感染调查的验证、模型性能与数据丰度的关系以及时变病例检出率三个方面,在重构英国第一次COVID-19流行波的背景下对模型进行重新检验和评估。我们发现,如果将两到三个血清学测量值作为额外的模型输入,我们的模型可以恢复2020年3月至2020年6月英格兰第一次未观察到的COVID-19流行波,而2020年冬季的第二波流行波通过英国国家统计局冠状病毒感染调查的估计得到验证。此外,该模型估计,到2020年10月底,英国政府官方COVID-9在线仪表板报告的COVID-19病例仅占累积暴露量的9.1% %,在2020年英格兰的两波疫情中差异很大,分别为4.3% %和43.7% %。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Epidemics
Epidemics INFECTIOUS DISEASES-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
7.90%
发文量
92
审稿时长
140 days
期刊介绍: Epidemics publishes papers on infectious disease dynamics in the broadest sense. Its scope covers both within-host dynamics of infectious agents and dynamics at the population level, particularly the interaction between the two. Areas of emphasis include: spread, transmission, persistence, implications and population dynamics of infectious diseases; population and public health as well as policy aspects of control and prevention; dynamics at the individual level; interaction with the environment, ecology and evolution of infectious diseases, as well as population genetics of infectious agents.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信