Search

Abstract Background During the COVID-19 outbreak in Taiwan between May 11 and June 20, 2021, the observed fatality rate (FR) was 5.3%, higher than the global average at 2.1%. The high number of reported deaths suggests that many patients were not treated promptly or effectively. However, many unexplained deaths were subsequently identified as cases, indicating a few undetected cases, resulting in a higher estimate of FR. Whether the true FR is exceedingly high and what factors determine the detection of cases remain unknown. Estimating the true number of total infected cases (i.e. including undetected cases) can allow an accurate estimation of FR and effective reproduction number ( $$R_{t}$$ R t ). Methods We aimed at quantifying the time-varying FR and $$R_{t}$$ R t using the estimated true numbers of cases; and, exploring the relationship between the true case number and test and trace data. After adjusting for reporting delays, we developed a model to estimate the number of undetected cases using reported deaths that were and were not previously detected. The daily FR and $$R_{t}$$ R t were calculated using the true number of cases. Afterwards, a logistic regression model was used to assess the impact of daily testing and tracing data on the detection ratio of deaths. Results The estimated true daily case number at the peak of the outbreak on May 22 was 897, which was 24.3% higher than the reported number, but the difference became less than 4% on June 9 and afterwards. After taking account of undetected cases, our estimated mean FR (4.7%) was still high but the daily rate showed a large decrease from 6.5% on May 19 to 2.8% on June 6. $$R_{t}$$ R t reached a maximum value of 6.4 on May 11, compared to 6.0 estimated using the reported case number. The decreasing proportion of undetected cases was found to be associated with the increases in the ratio of the number of tests conducted to reported cases, and the proportion of cases that are contact traced before symptom onset. Conclusions Increasing testing capacity and contact tracing coverage without delays not only improve parameter estimation by reducing hidden cases but may also reduce fatality rates.

Abstract Background Government responses to the pandemic varied in terms of timing, duration, and stringency, seeking to protect healthcare systems, whose pre-pandemic state varied significantly. Therefore, the severity of Covid-19 and, thus, excess mortality have been unequal across counties. This paper explores the geography of excess mortality and its underlying factors in 2020, highlighting the effects of health policies pre-pandemic and strategies devised by governments to cope with Covid-19. Methods Excess mortality is estimated for 79 high, medium and low-income countries. The factors of excess mortality are examined employing median quantile regression analysis. Results Health privatization, healthcare underfunding, and late implementation of containment and mitigation strategies were powerful drivers of excess mortality. By contrast, the results suggest a negative association of excess mortality with health expenditure, number of doctors and hospital beds, share of population covered by health insurance and test and trace capacity. Conclusions The evidence highlights the importance of sufficiently funded healthcare systems with universal access and strong primary healthcare in the battle against the pandemic. An early response to Covid-19, including borders’ controls and a strong test and trace capacity, could improve epidemiological surveillance and minimize excess mortality, with stringent and lengthy lockdowns not providing a significant benefit.

Objectives Data linkage was conducted between the Office for National Statistics’ Covid Infection Survey (CIS), the Department of Health and Social Care’s Test and Trace (T&T) and NHS’ Personal Demographics Service (PDS) datasets. Linked data was required to provide reliable estimates of rates of COVID-19 transmission and infection used to inform policy regarding the ongoing pandemic. Approach The CIS was created to track infection rates in the UK population. Linking CIS participants to positive tests in T&T helped improve these estimates. Linkage to PDS was required to attach NHS number to these datasets to facilitate further linkages that could also be used to inform Government about the spread of the virus. Multiple approaches were used to link the data. Initially, T&T was linked to itself via a series of strict matchkeys to cluster records belonging to the same individual, to create a person level identifier. Subsequent linkage of CIS-PDS, T&T-PDS and CIS-T&T involved deterministic linkages with matchkeys designed and applied independently. A probabilistic (Fellegi-Sunter scoring) method was used to link CIS-PDS and CIS-T&T. Additional, associative links were created between CIS and T&T records that had matched to the same PDS record but had not matched to each other. Results The accuracy of CIS-PDS and CIS-T&T linkages was high (recall and precision >98%; all 95% lower confidence intervals >93%). A quality assessment of T&T-PDS is underway, as are relevant bias analyses. Conclusion As a result of this linkage, COVID-19 analysts have access to enriched datasets linked to compare previously separated variables, with confidence that the linkage method used was to required quality standards. The linked data has been used to provide crucial evidence to Government on infection and re-infection rates. Subsequent linkages have enabled analysts to explore risk factors associated with different variants of the virus, vaccination status and hospital episodes. Improvements continue to be made.

Background: During the COVID-19 outbreak in Taiwan between May 11 and June 20, 2021, the observed fatality rate (FR) was 5.3%, higher than the global average at 2.1%. The high number of reported deaths suggests that many patients were not treated promptly or effectively. However, many unexplained deaths were subsequently identified as cases, indicating a few undetected cases, resulting in a higher estimate of FR. Whether the true FR is exceedingly high and what factors determine the detection of cases remain unknown. Estimating the true number of total infected cases (i.e. including undetected cases) can allow an accurate estimation of FR and effective reproduction number ([Formula: see text]).Methods: We aimed at quantifying the time-varying FR and [Formula: see text] using the estimated true numbers of cases; and, exploring the relationship between the true case number and test and trace data. After adjusting for reporting delays, we developed a model to estimate the number of undetected cases using reported deaths that were and were not previously detected. The daily FR and [Formula: see text] were calculated using the true number of cases. Afterwards, a logistic regression model was used to assess the impact of daily testing and tracing data on the detection ratio of deaths.Results: The estimated true daily case number at the peak of the outbreak on May 22 was 897, which was 24.3% higher than the reported number, but the difference became less than 4% on June 9 and afterwards. After taking account of undetected cases, our estimated mean FR (4.7%) was still high but the daily rate showed a large decrease from 6.5% on May 19 to 2.8% on June 6. [Formula: see text] reached a maximum value of 6.4 on May 11, compared to 6.0 estimated using the reported case number. The decreasing proportion of undetected cases was found to be associated with the increases in the ratio of the number of tests conducted to reported cases, and the proportion of cases that are contact traced before symptom onset.Conclusions: Increasing testing capacity and contact tracing coverage without delays not only improve parameter estimation by reducing hidden cases but may also reduce fatality rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To develop a critical appraisal tool for non-computational-specialist public health professionals to assess the quality and relevance of modelling studies about Test and Trace (and Protect – TTP) programmes' impact on COVID-19 transmission. Decision-making tool development. Using Tugwell et al.'s 1985 Health Care Effectiveness equation as a conceptual framework, combined with a purposive search of the relevant early modeling literature, we developed six critical appraisal questions for the rapid assessment of modeling studies related to the evaluation of TTP programmes' effectiveness. By applying the critical appraisal tool to selected recent COVID-19 modeling studies, we demonstrate how models can be evaluated using the six questions to evaluate internal and external validity and relevance. These six critical appraisal questions are able to discriminate between modeling studies of higher and lower quality and relevance to evaluating TTP programmes' impact. However, these questions require independent validation in a larger and systematic sample of relevant modeling studies which have appeared in later stages of the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Government responses to the pandemic varied in terms of timing, duration, and stringency, seeking to protect healthcare systems, whose pre-pandemic state varied significantly. Therefore, the severity of Covid-19 and, thus, excess mortality have been unequal across counties. This paper explores the geography of excess mortality and its underlying factors in 2020, highlighting the effects of health policies pre-pandemic and strategies devised by governments to cope with Covid-19.Methods: Excess mortality is estimated for 79 high, medium and low-income countries. The factors of excess mortality are examined employing median quantile regression analysis.Results: Health privatization, healthcare underfunding, and late implementation of containment and mitigation strategies were powerful drivers of excess mortality. By contrast, the results suggest a negative association of excess mortality with health expenditure, number of doctors and hospital beds, share of population covered by health insurance and test and trace capacity.Conclusions: The evidence highlights the importance of sufficiently funded healthcare systems with universal access and strong primary healthcare in the battle against the pandemic. An early response to Covid-19, including borders' controls and a strong test and trace capacity, could improve epidemiological surveillance and minimize excess mortality, with stringent and lengthy lockdowns not providing a significant benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Aims The UK Government piloted a COVID-19 digital contact tracing smartphone app on the Isle of Wight, England, in June 2020 in attempt to contain the spread of the virus. This study aimed to investigate the factors that affected the decision to download the app among individuals in the Isle of Wight. Methods Online questionnaires were distributed over social media to the sample population. Quantitative data were analysed, both descriptively and using a Chi-square or Fisher's test. Qualitative data were analysed through content analysis. Results Overall, 74.2% of participants downloaded the COVID-19 app, citing compliance, protection and fighting the pandemic or returning to normal as their main reasons. There was a significant negative correlation between having concerns about the app and downloading the app (P=<0.01). Concerns were split into the three themes of privacy or data security concerns, technology issues and increased complacency. There was a significant negative correlation between being in a COVID-19 high-risk group and downloading the app (P=0.042). Conclusions Concerns about the COVID-19 app, particularly in terms of its security, significantly affected whether participants were likely to download it. The results provide insight into factors influencing mass public health behaviours and can form the basis for future research into app-based interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Making testing available to everyone and tracing contacts might be the gold standard to control COVID-19. Many countries including the United Kingdom have relied on the symptom-based test and trace strategy in bringing the COVID-19 pandemic under control. The effectiveness of a test and trace strategy based on symptoms has been questionable and has failed to meet testing and tracing needs. This is further exacerbated by it not being delivered at the point of care, leading to rising cases and deaths. Increases in COVID-19 cases and deaths in the United Kingdom despite performing the highest number of tests in Europe suggest that symptom-based testing and contact tracing might not be effective as a control strategy. An alternative strategy is making testing available to all., Objective: The primary objective of this review was to compare mass testing and contact tracing with the conventional test and trace method in the suppression of SARS-CoV-2 infections. The secondary objective was to determine the proportion of asymptomatic COVID-19 cases reported during mass testing interventions., Methods: Literature in English was searched from September through December 2020 in Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, Mendeley, and PubMed. Search terms included "mass testing," "test and trace," "contact tracing," "COVID-19," "SARS-CoV-2," "effectiveness," "asymptomatic," "symptomatic," "community screening," "UK," and "2020." Search results were synthesized without meta-analysis using the direction of effect as the standardized metric and vote counting as the synthesis metric. A statistical synthesis was performed using Stata 14.2. Tabular and graphical methods were used to present findings., Results: The literature search yielded 286 articles from Google Scholar, 20 from ScienceDirect, 14 from Mendeley, 27 from PubMed, and 15 through manual search. A total of 35 articles were included in the review, with a sample size of nearly 1 million participants. We found a 76.9% (10/13, 95% CI 46.2%-95.0%; P =.09) majority vote in favor of the intervention under the primary objective. The overall proportion of asymptomatic cases among those who tested positive and in the tested sample populations under the secondary objective was 40.7% (1084/2661, 95% CI 38.9%-42.6%) and 0.0% (1084/9,942,878, 95% CI 0.0%-0.0%), respectively., Conclusions: There was low-level but promising evidence that mass testing and contact tracing could be more effective in bringing the virus under control and even more effective if combined with social distancing and face coverings. The conventional test and trace method should be superseded by decentralized and regular mass rapid testing and contact tracing, championed by general practitioner surgeries and low-cost community services., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: None declared., (©Mathew Mbwogge. Originally published in JMIRx Med (https://med.jmirx.org), 12.04.2021.)