Summary Background Since December, 2019, Wuhan, China, has experienced an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 have been reported but risk factors for mortality and a detailed clinical course of illness, including viral shedding, have not been well described. Methods In this retrospective, multicentre cohort study, we included all adult inpatients (≥18 years old) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from Jinyintan Hospital and Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital (Wuhan, China) who had been discharged or had died by Jan 31, 2020. Demographic, clinical, treatment, and laboratory data, including serial samples for viral RNA detection, were extracted from electronic medical records and compared between survivors and non-survivors. We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression methods to explore the risk factors associated with in-hospital death. Findings 191 patients (135 from Jinyintan Hospital and 56 from Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital) were included in this study, of whom 137 were discharged and 54 died in hospital. 91 (48%) patients had a comorbidity, with hypertension being the most common (58 [30%] patients), followed by diabetes (36 [19%] patients) and coronary heart disease (15 [8%] patients). Multivariable regression showed increasing odds of in-hospital death associated with older age (odds ratio 1·10, 95% CI 1·03–1·17, per year increase; p=0·0043), higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (5·65, 2·61–12·23; p Interpretation The potential risk factors of older age, high SOFA score, and d-dimer greater than 1 μg/mL could help clinicians to identify patients with poor prognosis at an early stage. Prolonged viral shedding provides the rationale for a strategy of isolation of infected patients and optimal antiviral interventions in the future. Funding Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences; National Science Grant for Distinguished Young Scholars; National Key Research and Development Program of China; The Beijing Science and Technology Project; and Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development.

Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study

Governments are attempting to control the COVID-19 pandemic with nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). However, the effectiveness of different NPIs at reducing transmission is poorly understood. We gathered chronological data on the implementation of NPIs for several European, and other, countries between January and the end of May 2020. We estimate the effectiveness of NPIs, ranging from limiting gathering sizes, business closures, and closure of educational institutions to stay-at-home orders. To do so, we used a Bayesian hierarchical model that links NPI implementation dates to national case and death counts and supported the results with extensive empirical validation. Closing all educational institutions, limiting gatherings to 10 people or less, and closing face-to-face businesses each reduced transmission considerably. The additional effect of stay-at-home orders was comparatively small.

Inferring the effectiveness of government interventions against COVID-19.

Non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A review.

Infectious diseases and human behavior are intertwined. On one side, our movements and interactions are the engines of transmission. On the other, the unfolding of viruses might induce changes to our daily activities. While intuitive, our understanding of such feedback loop is still limited. Before COVID-19 the literature on the subject was mainly theoretical and largely missed validation. The main issue was the lack of empirical data capturing behavioral change induced by diseases. Things have dramatically changed in 2020. Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been the key weapon against the SARS-CoV-2 virus and affected virtually any societal process. Travels bans, events cancellation, social distancing, curfews, and lockdowns have become unfortunately very familiar. The scale of the emergency, the ease of survey as well as crowdsourcing deployment guaranteed by the latest technology, several Data for Good programs developed by tech giants, major mobile phone providers, and other companies have allowed unprecedented access to data describing behavioral changes induced by the pandemic. Here, I aim to review some of the vast literature written on the subject of NPIs during the COVID-19 pandemic. In doing so, I analyze 347 articles written by more than 2518 of authors in the last $12$ months. While the large majority of the sample was obtained by querying PubMed, it includes also a hand-curated list. Considering the focus, and methodology I have classified the sample into seven main categories: epidemic models, surveys, comments/perspectives, papers aiming to quantify the effects of NPIs, reviews, articles using data proxies to measure NPIs, and publicly available datasets describing NPIs. I summarize the methodology, data used, findings of the articles in each category and provide an outlook highlighting future challenges as well as opportunities

Non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: a rapid review

As countries in Europe gradually relaxed lockdown restrictions after the first wave, test–trace–isolate strategies became critical to maintain the incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at low levels1,2. Reviewing their shortcomings can provide elements to consider in light of the second wave that is currently underway in Europe. Here we estimate the rate of detection of symptomatic cases of COVID-19 in France after lockdown through the use of virological3 and participatory syndromic4 surveillance data coupled with mathematical transmission models calibrated to regional hospitalizations2. Our findings indicate that around 90,000 symptomatic infections, corresponding to 9 out 10 cases, were not ascertained by the surveillance system in the first 7 weeks after lockdown from 11 May to 28 June 2020, although the test positivity rate did not exceed the 5% recommendation of the World Health Organization (WHO)5. The median detection rate increased from 7% (95% confidence interval, 6–8%) to 38% (35–44%) over time, with large regional variations, owing to a strengthening of the system as well as a decrease in epidemic activity. According to participatory surveillance data, only 31% of individuals with COVID-19-like symptoms consulted a doctor in the study period. This suggests that large numbers of symptomatic cases of COVID-19 did not seek medical advice despite recommendations, as confirmed by serological studies6,7. Encouraging awareness and same-day healthcare-seeking behaviour of suspected cases of COVID-19 is critical to improve detection. However, the capacity of the system remained insufficient even at the low epidemic activity achieved after lockdown, and was predicted to deteriorate rapidly with increasing incidence of COVID-19 cases. Substantially more aggressive, targeted and efficient testing with easier access is required to act as a tool to control the COVID-19 pandemic. The testing strategy will be critical to enable partial lifting of the current restrictive measures in Europe and to avoid a third wave. Analyses of virological and surveillance data in France show that a substantial proportion of symptomatic cases of COVID-19 have remained undetected and that easily accessible and efficient testing is required to control the pandemic.

Underdetection of cases of COVID-19 in France threatens epidemic control.

As rates of new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases decline across Europe owing to nonpharmaceutical interventions such as social distancing policies and lockdown measures, countries require guidance on how to ease restrictions while minimizing the risk of resurgent outbreaks. We use mobility and case data to quantify how coordinated exit strategies could delay continental resurgence and limit community transmission of COVID-19. We find that a resurgent continental epidemic could occur as many as 5 weeks earlier when well-connected countries with stringent existing interventions end their interventions prematurely. Further, we find that appropriate coordination can greatly improve the likelihood of eliminating community transmission throughout Europe. In particular, synchronizing intermittent lockdowns across Europe means that half as many lockdown periods would be required to end continent-wide community transmission.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/369/6510/1465.full.pdf

Assessing the impact of coordinated COVID-19 exit strategies across Europe

As rates of new COVID-19 cases decline across Europe due to non-pharmaceutical interventions such as social distancing policies and lockdown measures, countries require guidance on how to ease restrictions while minimizing the risk of resurgent outbreaks Here, we use mobility and case data to quantify how coordinated exit strategies could delay continental resurgence and limit community transmission of COVID-19 We find that a resurgent continental epidemic could occur as many as 5 weeks earlier when well-connected countries with stringent existing interventions end their interventions prematurely Further, we found that appropriate coordination can greatly improve the likelihood of eliminating community transmission throughout Europe In particular, synchronizing intermittent lockdowns across Europe meant half as many lockdown periods were required to end community transmission continent-wide

https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.16.20132688v1.full.pdf

Mobility restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic ostensibly prevented the public from transmitting the disease in public places, but they also hampered outdoor recreation, despite the importance of blue-green spaces (e.g., parks and natural areas) for physical and mental health. We assess whether restrictions on human movement, particularly in blue-green spaces, affected the transmission of COVID-19. Our assessment uses a spatially resolved dataset of COVID-19 case numbers for 848 administrative units across 153 countries during the first year of the pandemic (February 2020 to February 2021). We measure mobility in blue-green spaces with planetary-scale aggregate and anonymized mobility flows derived from mobile phone tracking data. We then use machine learning forecast models and linear mixed-effects models to explore predictors of COVID-19 growth rates. After controlling for a number of environmental factors, we find no evidence that increased visits to blue-green space increase COVID-19 transmission. By contrast, increases in the total mobility and relaxation of other non-pharmaceutical interventions such as containment and closure policies predict greater transmission. Ultraviolet radiation stands out as the strongest environmental mitigant of COVID-19 spread, while temperature, humidity, wind speed, and ambient air pollution have little to no effect. Taken together, our analyses produce little evidence to support public health policies that restrict citizens from outdoor mobility in blue-green spaces, which corroborates experimental studies showing low risk of outdoor COVID-19 transmission. However, we acknowledge and discuss some of the challenges of big data approaches to ecological regression analyses such as this, and outline promising directions and opportunities for future research.

Aaron Schneider

Papers

Assessing the impact of coordinated COVID-19 exit strategies across Europe

Assessing the impact of coordinated COVID-19 exit strategies across Europe

Mobility in Blue-Green Spaces Does Not Predict COVID-19 Transmission: A Global Analysis