Last data update: May 06, 2024. (Total: 46732 publications since 2009)
Records 1-6 (of 6 Records) |
Query Trace: Prasad PV[original query] |
---|
Evaluation of Different Types of Face Masks to Limit the Spread of SARS-CoV-2 – A Modeling Study (preprint)
Gurbaxani BM , Hill AN , Paul P , Prasad PV , Slayton RB . medRxiv 2021 2021.04.21.21255889 We updated a published mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission with laboratory-derived source and wearer protection efficacy estimates for a variety of face masks to estimate their impact on COVID-19 incidence and related mortality in the United States. When used at already-observed population rates of 80% for those ≥65 years and 60% for those <65 years, face masks are associated with 69% (cloth) to 78% (medical procedure mask) reductions in cumulative COVID-19 infections and 82% (cloth) to 87% (medical procedure mask) reductions in related deaths over a 6-month timeline in the model, assuming a basic reproductive number of 2.5. If cloth or medical procedure masks’ source control and wearer protection efficacies are boosted about 30% each to 84% and 60% by cloth over medical procedure masking, fitters, or braces, the COVID-19 basic reproductive number of 2.5 could be reduced to an effective reproductive number ≤ 1.0, and from 6.0 to 2.3 for a variant of concern similar to delta (B.1.617.2).Article Summary Line Adapting a published SARS-CoV-2 transmission model together with updated, laboratory-derived source control and wearer protection efficacy estimates for a variety of face coverings as well as N95 respirators, we demonstrate that community masking as currently practiced has likely reduced cases and deaths and that this benefit can be increased with wider adoption of better performing masks.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialThis is an epidemiological modeling study, not a clinical trialFunding StatementNo external funding was received.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:No IRB was needed as this is an epidemiological modeling study.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data/parameters used in the models are reported in the manuscript. Code is available upon request. |
Multimodeling approach to evaluating the efficacy of layering pharmaceutical and nonpharmaceutical interventions for influenza pandemics
Prasad PV , Steele MK , Reed C , Meyers LA , Du Z , Pasco R , Alfaro-Murillo JA , Lewis B , Venkatramanan S , Schlitt J , Chen J , Orr M , Wilson ML , Eubank S , Wang L , Chinazzi M , Pastore YPiontti A , Davis JT , Halloran ME , Longini I , Vespignani A , Pei S , Galanti M , Kandula S , Shaman J , Haw DJ , Arinaminpathy N , Biggerstaff M . Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2023 120 (28) e2300590120 When an influenza pandemic emerges, temporary school closures and antiviral treatment may slow virus spread, reduce the overall disease burden, and provide time for vaccine development, distribution, and administration while keeping a larger portion of the general population infection free. The impact of such measures will depend on the transmissibility and severity of the virus and the timing and extent of their implementation. To provide robust assessments of layered pandemic intervention strategies, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded a network of academic groups to build a framework for the development and comparison of multiple pandemic influenza models. Research teams from Columbia University, Imperial College London/Princeton University, Northeastern University, the University of Texas at Austin/Yale University, and the University of Virginia independently modeled three prescribed sets of pandemic influenza scenarios developed collaboratively by the CDC and network members. Results provided by the groups were aggregated into a mean-based ensemble. The ensemble and most component models agreed on the ranking of the most and least effective intervention strategies by impact but not on the magnitude of those impacts. In the scenarios evaluated, vaccination alone, due to the time needed for development, approval, and deployment, would not be expected to substantially reduce the numbers of illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths that would occur. Only strategies that included early implementation of school closure were found to substantially mitigate early spread and allow time for vaccines to be developed and administered, especially under a highly transmissible pandemic scenario. |
Evaluation of different types of face masks to limit the spread of SARS-CoV-2: a modeling study.
Gurbaxani BM , Hill AN , Paul P , Prasad PV , Slayton RB . Sci Rep 2022 12 (1) 8630 We expanded a published mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission with complex, age-structured transmission and with laboratory-derived source and wearer protection efficacy estimates for a variety of face masks to estimate their impact on COVID-19 incidence and related mortality in the United States. The model was also improved to allow realistic age-structured transmission with a pre-specified R0 of transmission, and to include more compartments and parameters, e.g. for groups such as detected and undetected asymptomatic infectious cases who mask up at different rates. When masks are used at typically-observed population rates of 80% for those ≥ 65 years and 60% for those < 65 years, face masks are associated with 69% (cloth) to 78% (medical procedure mask) reductions in cumulative COVID-19 infections and 82% (cloth) to 87% (medical procedure mask) reductions in related deaths over a 6-month timeline in the model, assuming a basic reproductive number of 2.5. If cloth or medical procedure masks' source control and wearer protection efficacies are boosted about 30% each to 84% and 60% by cloth over medical procedure masking, fitters, or braces, the COVID-19 basic reproductive number of 2.5 could be reduced to an effective reproductive number ≤ 1.0, and from 6.0 to 2.3 for a variant of concern similar to delta (B.1.617.2). For variants of concern similar to omicron (B.1.1.529) or the sub-lineage BA.2, modeled reductions in effective reproduction number due to similar high quality, high prevalence mask wearing is more modest (to 3.9 and 5.0 from an R(0) = 10.0 and 13.0, respectively). None-the-less, the ratio of incident risk for masked vs. non-masked populations still shows a benefit of wearing masks even with the higher R0 variants. |
Cruise ship travel in the era of COVID-19: A summary of outbreaks and a model of public health interventions.
Guagliardo SAJ , Prasad PV , Rodriguez A , Fukunaga R , Novak RT , Ahart L , Reynolds J , Griffin I , Wiegand R , Quilter LAS , Morrison S , Jenkins K , Wall HK , Treffiletti A , White SB , Regan J , Tardivel K , Freeland A , Brown C , Wolford H , Johansson MA , Cetron MS , Slayton RB , Friedman CR . Clin Infect Dis 2021 74 (3) 490-497 BACKGROUND: Cruise travel contributed to SARS-CoV-2 transmission when there were relatively few cases in the United States. By March 14, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a No Sail Order suspending U.S. cruise operations; the last U.S. passenger ship docked on April 16. METHODS: We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on cruises in U.S. waters or carrying U.S. citizens and used regression models to compare voyage characteristics. We used compartmental models to simulate the potential impact of four interventions (screening for COVID-19 symptoms; viral testing on two days and isolation of positive persons; reduction of passengers by 40%, crew by 20%, and port visits to one) for 7-day and 14-day voyages. RESULTS: During January 19-April 16, 2020, 89 voyages on 70 ships had known SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks; 16 ships had recurrent outbreaks. There were 1,669 RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and 29 confirmed deaths. Longer voyages were associated with more cases (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.10, 95% CI: 1.03-1.17, p < 0.0001). Mathematical models showed that 7-day voyages had about 70% fewer cases than 14-day voyages. On 7-day voyages, the most effective interventions were reducing the number of individuals onboard (43-49% reduction in total infections) and testing passengers and crew (42-43% reduction in total infections). All four interventions reduced transmission by 80%, but no single intervention or combination eliminated transmission. Results were similar for 14-day voyages. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on cruises were common during January-April 2020. Despite all interventions modeled, cruise travel still poses a significant SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk. |
SARS-CoV-2 Transmission From People Without COVID-19 Symptoms.
Johansson MA , Quandelacy TM , Kada S , Prasad PV , Steele M , Brooks JT , Slayton RB , Biggerstaff M , Butler JC . JAMA Netw Open 2021 4 (1) e2035057 IMPORTANCE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the etiology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is readily transmitted person to person. Optimal control of COVID-19 depends on directing resources and health messaging to mitigation efforts that are most likely to prevent transmission, but the relative importance of such measures has been disputed. OBJECTIVE: To assess the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 transmissions in the community that likely occur from persons without symptoms. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This decision analytical model assessed the relative amount of transmission from presymptomatic, never symptomatic, and symptomatic individuals across a range of scenarios in which the proportion of transmission from people who never develop symptoms (ie, remain asymptomatic) and the infectious period were varied according to published best estimates. For all estimates, data from a meta-analysis was used to set the incubation period at a median of 5 days. The infectious period duration was maintained at 10 days, and peak infectiousness was varied between 3 and 7 days (-2 and +2 days relative to the median incubation period). The overall proportion of SARS-CoV-2 was varied between 0% and 70% to assess a wide range of possible proportions. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Level of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from presymptomatic, never symptomatic, and symptomatic individuals. RESULTS: The baseline assumptions for the model were that peak infectiousness occurred at the median of symptom onset and that 30% of individuals with infection never develop symptoms and are 75% as infectious as those who do develop symptoms. Combined, these baseline assumptions imply that persons with infection who never develop symptoms may account for approximately 24% of all transmission. In this base case, 59% of all transmission came from asymptomatic transmission, comprising 35% from presymptomatic individuals and 24% from individuals who never develop symptoms. Under a broad range of values for each of these assumptions, at least 50% of new SARS-CoV-2 infections was estimated to have originated from exposure to individuals with infection but without symptoms. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this decision analytical model of multiple scenarios of proportions of asymptomatic individuals with COVID-19 and infectious periods, transmission from asymptomatic individuals was estimated to account for more than half of all transmissions. In addition to identification and isolation of persons with symptomatic COVID-19, effective control of spread will require reducing the risk of transmission from people with infection who do not have symptoms. These findings suggest that measures such as wearing masks, hand hygiene, social distancing, and strategic testing of people who are not ill will be foundational to slowing the spread of COVID-19 until safe and effective vaccines are available and widely used. |
Early Insights from Statistical and Mathematical Modeling of Key Epidemiologic Parameters of COVID-19.
Biggerstaff M , Johansson MA , Kada S , Prasad PV , Quandelacy TM . Emerg Infect Dis 2020 26 (11) e1-e14 We report key epidemiologic parameter estimates for coronavirus disease identified in peer-reviewed publications, preprint articles, and online reports. Range estimates for incubation period were 1.8-6.9 days, serial interval 4.0-7.5 days, and doubling time 2.3-7.4 days. The effective reproductive number varied widely, with reductions attributable to interventions. Case burden and infection fatality ratios increased with patient age. Implementation of combined interventions could reduce cases and delay epidemic peak up to 1 month. These parameters for transmission, disease severity, and intervention effectiveness are critical for guiding policy decisions. Estimates will likely change as new information becomes available. |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:May 06, 2024
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure