During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, mathematical modeling has been widely used to understand epidemiological burden, trends, and transmission dynamics, to facilitate policy decisions, and, to a lesser extent, to evaluate infection prevention and control (IPC) measures. This review highlights the added value of using conventional epidemiology and modeling approaches to address the complexity of healthcare-associated infections (HAI) and antimicrobial resistance. It demonstrates how epidemiological surveillance data and modeling can be used to infer transmission dynamics in healthcare settings and to forecast healthcare impact, how modeling can be used to improve the validity of interpretation of epidemiological surveillance data, how modeling can be used to estimate the impact of IPC interventions, and how modeling can be used to guide IPC and antimicrobial treatment and stewardship decision-making. There are several priority areas for expanding the use of modeling in healthcare epidemiology and IPC. Importantly, modeling should be viewed as complementary to conventional healthcare epidemiological approaches, and this requires collaboration and active coordination between IPC, healthcare epidemiology, and mathematical modeling groups.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to upgrade systems for infectious disease surveillance and forecasting and modeling of the spread of infection, both of which inform evidence-based public health guidance and policies. Here, we discuss requirements for an effective surveillance system to support decision making during a pandemic, drawing on the lessons of COVID-19 in the U.S., while looking to jurisdictions in the U.S. and beyond to learn lessons about the value of specific data types. In this report, we define the range of decisions for which surveillance data are required, the data elements needed to inform these decisions and to calibrate inputs and outputs of transmission-dynamic models, and the types of data needed to inform decisions by state, territorial, local, and tribal health authorities. We define actions needed to ensure that such data will be available and consider the contribution of such efforts to improving health equity.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, forecasting COVID-19 trends to support planning and response was a priority for scientists and decision makers alike. In the United States, COVID-19 forecasting was coordinated by a large group of universities, companies, and government entities led by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US COVID-19 Forecast Hub (https://covid19forecasthub.org). We evaluated approximately 9.7 million forecasts of weekly state-level COVID-19 cases for predictions 1-4 weeks into the future submitted by 24 teams from August 2020 to December 2021. We assessed coverage of central prediction intervals and weighted interval scores (WIS), adjusting for missing forecasts relative to a baseline forecast, and used a Gaussian generalized estimating equation (GEE) model to evaluate differences in skill across epidemic phases that were defined by the effective reproduction number. Overall, we found high variation in skill across individual models, with ensemble-based forecasts outperforming other approaches. Forecast skill relative to the baseline was generally higher for larger jurisdictions (e.g., states compared to counties). Over time, forecasts generally performed worst in periods of rapid changes in reported cases (either in increasing or decreasing epidemic phases) with 95% prediction interval coverage dropping below 50% during the growth phases of the winter 2020, Delta, and Omicron waves. Ideally, case forecasts could serve as a leading indicator of changes in transmission dynamics. However, while most COVID-19 case forecasts outperformed a naïve baseline model, even the most accurate case forecasts were unreliable in key phases. Further research could improve forecasts of leading indicators, like COVID-19 cases, by leveraging additional real-time data, addressing performance across phases, improving the characterization of forecast confidence, and ensuring that forecasts were coherent across spatial scales. In the meantime, it is critical for forecast users to appreciate current limitations and use a broad set of indicators to inform pandemic-related decision making.

IMPORTANCE: Infections due to multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) are associated with increased morbidity, mortality, length of hospitalization, and health care costs. Regional interventions may be advantageous in mitigating MDROs and associated infections. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether implementation of a decolonization collaborative is associated with reduced regional MDRO prevalence, incident clinical cultures, infection-related hospitalizations, costs, and deaths. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This quality improvement study was conducted from July 1, 2017, to July 31, 2019, across 35 health care facilities in Orange County, California. EXPOSURES: Chlorhexidine bathing and nasal iodophor antisepsis for residents in long-term care and hospitalized patients in contact precautions (CP). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Baseline and end of intervention MDRO point prevalence among participating facilities; incident MDRO (nonscreening) clinical cultures among participating and nonparticipating facilities; and infection-related hospitalizations and associated costs and deaths among residents in participating and nonparticipating nursing homes (NHs). RESULTS: Thirty-five facilities (16 hospitals, 16 NHs, 3 long-term acute care hospitals [LTACHs]) adopted the intervention. Comparing decolonization with baseline periods among participating facilities, the mean (SD) MDRO prevalence decreased from 63.9% (12.2%) to 49.9% (11.3%) among NHs, from 80.0% (7.2%) to 53.3% (13.3%) among LTACHs (odds ratio [OR] for NHs and LTACHs, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40-0.57), and from 64.1% (8.5%) to 55.4% (13.8%) (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60-0.93) among hospitalized patients in CP. When comparing decolonization with baseline among NHs, the mean (SD) monthly incident MDRO clinical cultures changed from 2.7 (1.9) to 1.7 (1.1) among participating NHs, from 1.7 (1.4) to 1.5 (1.1) among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 30.4%; 95% CI, 16.4%-42.1%), from 25.5 (18.6) to 25.0 (15.9) among participating hospitals, from 12.5 (10.1) to 14.3 (10.2) among nonparticipating hospitals (group × period interaction reduction, 12.9%; 95% CI, 3.3%-21.5%), and from 14.8 (8.6) to 8.2 (6.1) among LTACHs (all facilities participating; 22.5% reduction; 95% CI, 4.4%-37.1%). For NHs, the rate of infection-related hospitalizations per 1000 resident-days changed from 2.31 during baseline to 1.94 during intervention among participating NHs, and from 1.90 to 2.03 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 26.7%; 95% CI, 19.0%-34.5%). Associated hospitalization costs per 1000 resident-days changed from $64 651 to $55 149 among participating NHs and from $55 151 to $59 327 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 26.8%; 95% CI, 26.7%-26.9%). Associated hospitalization deaths per 1000 resident-days changed from 0.29 to 0.25 among participating NHs and from 0.23 to 0.24 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 23.7%; 95% CI, 4.5%-43.0%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A regional collaborative involving universal decolonization in long-term care facilities and targeted decolonization among hospital patients in CP was associated with lower MDRO carriage, infections, hospitalizations, costs, and deaths.

BACKGROUND: Antiviral chemoprophylaxis is recommended for use during influenza outbreaks in nursing homes to prevent transmission and severe disease among non-ill residents. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance recommends prophylaxis be initiated for all non-ill residents once an influenza outbreak is detected and be continued for at least 14 days and until seven days after the last laboratory-confirmed influenza case is identified. However, not all facilities strictly adhere to this guidance and the impact of such partial adherence is not fully understood. METHODS: We developed a stochastic compartmental framework to model influenza transmission within an average-sized U.S. nursing home. We compared the number of symptomatic illnesses and hospitalizations under varying prophylaxis implementation strategies, in addition to different levels of prophylaxis uptake and adherence by residents and healthcare personnel (HCP). RESULTS: Prophylaxis implemented according to current guidance reduced total symptomatic illnesses and hospitalizations among residents by an average of 12% and 36%, respectively, compared with no prophylaxis. We did not find evidence that alternative implementations of prophylaxis were more effective: compared to full adoption of current guidance, partial adoption resulted in increased symptomatic illnesses and/or hospitalizations, and longer or earlier adoption offered no additional improvements. In addition, increasing uptake and adherence among nursing home residents was effective in reducing resident illnesses and hospitalizations, but increasing HCP uptake had minimal indirect impacts for residents. CONCLUSIONS: The greatest benefits of influenza prophylaxis during nursing home outbreaks will likely be achieved through increasing uptake and adherence among residents and following current CDC guidance.

Our ability to forecast epidemics far into the future is constrained by the many complexities of disease systems. Realistic longer-term projections may, however, be possible under well-defined scenarios that specify the future state of critical epidemic drivers. Since December 2020, the U.S. COVID-19 Scenario Modeling Hub (SMH) has convened multiple modeling teams to make months ahead projections of SARS-CoV-2 burden, totaling nearly 1.8 million national and state-level projections. Here, we find SMH performance varied widely as a function of both scenario validity and model calibration. We show scenarios remained close to reality for 22 weeks on average before the arrival of unanticipated SARS-CoV-2 variants invalidated key assumptions. An ensemble of participating models that preserved variation between models (using the linear opinion pool method) was consistently more reliable than any single model in periods of valid scenario assumptions, while projection interval coverage was near target levels. SMH projections were used to guide pandemic response, illustrating the value of collaborative hubs for longer-term scenario projections.

Beginning in December 2020, the COVID-19 Scenario Modeling Hub has provided quantitative scenario-based projections for cases, hospitalizations, and deaths, aggregated across up to nine modeling groups. Projections spanned multiple months into the future and provided timely information on potential impacts of epidemiological uncertainties and interventions. Projections results were shared with the public, public health partners, and the Centers for Disease Control COVID-19 Response Team. The projections provided insights on situational awareness and informed decision-making to mitigate COVID-19 disease burden (e.g., vaccination strategies). By aggregating projections from multiple modeling teams, the Scenario Modeling Hub provided rapidly synthesized information in times of great uncertainty and conveyed possible trajectories in the presence of emerging variants. Here we detail several use cases of these projections in public health practice and communication, including assessments of whether modeling results directly or indirectly informed public health communication or guidance. These include multiple examples where comparisons of projected COVID-19 disease outcomes under different vaccination scenarios were used to inform Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices recommendations. We also describe challenges and lessons learned during this highly beneficial collaboration.

Academic researchers, government agencies, industry groups, and individuals have produced forecasts at an unprecedented scale during the COVID-19 pandemic. To leverage these forecasts, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) partnered with an academic research lab at the University of Massachusetts Amherst to create the US COVID-19 Forecast Hub. Launched in April 2020, the Forecast Hub is a dataset with point and probabilistic forecasts of incident hospitalizations, incident cases, incident deaths, and cumulative deaths due to COVID-19 at national, state, and county levels in the United States. Included forecasts represent a variety of modeling approaches, data sources, and assumptions regarding the spread of COVID-19. The goal of this dataset is to establish a standardized and comparable set of short-term forecasts from modeling teams. These data can be used to develop ensemble models, communicate forecasts to the public, create visualizations, compare models, and inform policies regarding COVID-19 mitigation. These open-source data are available via download from GitHub, through an online API, and through R packages.Competing Interest StatementAV, MC, and APP report grants from Metabiota Inc outside the submitted work. Funding StatementFor teams that reported receiving funding for their work, we report the sources and disclosures below: AIpert-pwllnod: Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada; Caltech-CS156: Gary Clinard Innovation Fund; CEID-Walk: University of Georgia; CMU-TimeSeries: CDC Center of Excellence, gifts from Google and Facebook; COVIDhub: This work has been supported by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (1U01IP001122) and the National Institutes of General Medical Sciences (R35GM119582). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of CDC, NIGMS or the National Institutes of Health; Johannes Bracher was supported by the Helmholtz Foundation via the SIMCARD Information & Data Science Pilot Project; Tilmann Gneiting gratefully acknowledges support by the Klaus Tschira Foundation; CU-select: NSF DMS-2027369 and a gift from the Morris-Singer Foundation; DDS-NBDS: NSF III-1812699; epiforecasts-ensemble1: Wellcome Trust (210758/Z/18/Z) FDANIHASU: supported by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH/NIDDK; GT_CHHS-COVID19: William W. George Endowment, Virginia C. and Joseph C. Mello Endowment, NSF DGE-1650044, NSF MRI 1828187, research cyberinfrastructure resources and services provided by the Partnership for an Advanced Computing Environment (PACE) at Georgia Tech, and the following benefactors at Georgia Tech: Andrea Laliberte, Joseph C. Mello, Richard Rick E. & Charlene Zalesky, and Claudia & Paul Raines, CDC MInD-Healthcare U01CK000531-Supplement; IHME: This work was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, as well as funding from the state of Washington and the National Science Foundation (award no. FAIN: 2031096); Imperial-ensemble1: SB acknowledges funding from the Wellcome Trust (219415); Institute of Business Forecasting: IBF; IowaStateLW-STEM: NSF DMS-1916204, Iowa State University Plant Sciences Institute Scholars Program, NSF DMS-1934884, Laurence H. Baker Center for Bioinformatics and Biological Statistics; IUPUI CIS: NSF; JHU_CSSE-DECOM: JHU CSSE: National Science Foundation (NSF) RAPID Real-time Forecasting of COVID-19 risk in the USA. 2021-2022. Award ID: 2108526. National Science Foundation (NSF) RAPID Development of an interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real-time. 2020. Award ID: 2028604; JHU_IDD-CovidSP: State of California, US Dept of Health and Human Services, US Dept of Homeland Security, Johns Hopkins Health System, Office of the Dean at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University Modeling and Policy Hub, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (5U01CK000538-03), University of Utah Immunology, Inflammation, & Infectious Disease Initiative (26798 Seed Grant); JHU_UNC_GAS-StatMechP ol: NIH NIGMS: R01GM140564; JHUAPL-Bucky: US Dept of Health and Human Services; KITmetricslab-select_ensemble: Daniel Wolffram gratefully acknowledges support by the Klaus Tschira Foundation; LANL-GrowthRate: LANL LDRD 20200700ER; MIT-Cassandra: MIT Quest for Intelligence; MOBS-GLEAM_COVID: COVID Supplement CDC-HHS-6U01IP001137-01; CA NU38OT000297 from the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE); NotreDame-FRED: NSF RAPID DEB 2027718; NotreDame-mobility: NSF RAPID DEB 2027718; PSI-DRAFT: NSF RAPID Grant # 2031536; QJHong-Encounter: NSF DMR-2001411 and DMR-1835939; SDSC_ISG-TrendModel: The development of the dashboard was partly funded by the Fondation Privee des Hopitaux Universitaires de Geneve; UA-EpiCovDA: NSF RAPID Grant # 2028401; UChicagoCHATTOPADHYAY-UnIT: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) #HR00111890043/P00004 (I. Chattopadhyay, University of Chicago); UCSB-ACTS: NSF RAPID IIS 2029626; UCSD_NEU-DeepGLEAM: Google Faculty Award, W31P4Q-21-C-0014; UMass-MechBayes: NIGMS #R35GM119582, NSF #1749854, NIGMS #R35GM119582; UMich-RidgeTfReg: This project is funded by the University of Michigan Physics Department and the University of Michigan Office of Research; UVA-Ensemble: National Institutes of Health (NIH) Grant 1R01GM109718, NSF BIG DATA Grant IIS-1633028, NSF Grant No.: OAC-1916805, NSF Expeditions in Computing Grant CCF-1918656, CCF-1917819, NSF RAPID CNS-2028004, NSF RAPID OAC-2027541, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 75D30119C05935, a grant from Google, University of Virginia Strategic Investment Fund award number SIF160, Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) under Contract No. HDTRA1-19-D-0007, and Virginia Dept of Health Grant VDH-21-501-0141; Wadnwani_AI-BayesOpt: This study is made possible by the generous support of the American People through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The work described in this article was implemented under the TRACETB Project, managed by WIAI under the terms of Cooperative Agreement Number 72038620CA00006. The contents of this manuscript are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government; WalmartLabsML-LogForecasting: Team acknowledges Walmart to support this study Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.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 produced are available online at https://github.com/reichlab/covid19-forecast-hub https://github.com/reichlab/covid19-forecast-hub

Background SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in nursing homes can be large with high case fatality. Identifying asymptomatic individuals early through serial testing is recommended to control COVID-19 in nursing homes, both in response to an outbreak (“outbreak testing” of residents and healthcare personnel) and in facilities without outbreaks (“non-outbreak testing” of healthcare personnel). The effectiveness of outbreak testing and isolation with or without non-outbreak testing was evaluated.Methods Using published SARS-CoV-2 transmission parameters, the fraction of SARS-CoV-2 transmissions prevented through serial testing (weekly, every three days, or daily) and isolation of asymptomatic persons compared to symptom-based testing and isolation was evaluated through mathematical modeling using a Reed-Frost model to estimate the percentage of cases prevented (i.e., “effectiveness”) through either outbreak testing alone or outbreak plus non-outbreak testing. The potential effect of simultaneous decreases (by 10%) in the effectiveness of isolating infected individuals when instituting testing strategies was also evaluated.Results Modeling suggests that outbreak testing could prevent 54% (weekly testing with 48-hour test turnaround) to 92% (daily testing with immediate results and 50% relative sensitivity) of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Adding non-outbreak testing could prevent up to an additional 8% of SARS-CoV-2 infections (depending on test frequency and turnaround time). However, added benefits of non-outbreak testing were mostly negated if accompanied by decreases in infection control practice.Conclusions When combined with high-quality infection control practices, outbreak testing could be an effective approach to preventing COVID-19 in nursing homes, particularly if optimized through increased test frequency and use of tests with rapid turnaround.Summary Mathematical modeling evaluated the effectiveness of serially testing asymptomatic persons in a nursing home in response to a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak with or without serial testing of asymptomatic staff in the absence of known SARS-CoV-2 infections.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNo external funding was received. All work was conducted as part of government duties.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:This activity was reviewed by CDC and was conducted consistent with applicable federal law and CDC policy (see e.g., 45 C.F.R. part 46, 21 C.F.R. part 56; 42 U.S.C. 241(d); 5 U.S.C 552a; 44 U.S.C. 351 et seq.).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.YesData provided in supplemental materials or publicly available through links in the manuscript. https://github.com/cdcepi/Nursing-home-SARS-CoV-2-testing-model/

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.

Short-term probabilistic forecasts of the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States have served as a visible and important communication channel between the scientific modeling community and both the general public and decision-makers. Forecasting models provide specific, quantitative, and evaluable predictions that inform short-term decisions such as healthcare staffing needs, school closures, and allocation of medical supplies. In 2020, the COVID-19 Forecast Hub (https://covid19forecasthub.org/) collected, disseminated, and synthesized hundreds of thousands of specific predictions from more than 50 different academic, industry, and independent research groups. This manuscript systematically evaluates 23 models that regularly submitted forecasts of reported weekly incident COVID-19 mortality counts in the US at the state and national level. One of these models was a multi-model ensemble that combined all available forecasts each week. The performance of individual models showed high variability across time, geospatial units, and forecast horizons. Half of the models evaluated showed better accuracy than a naïve baseline model. In combining the forecasts from all teams, the ensemble showed the best overall probabilistic accuracy of any model. Forecast accuracy degraded as models made predictions farther into the future, with probabilistic accuracy at a 20-week horizon more than 5 times worse than when predicting at a 1-week horizon. This project underscores the role that collaboration and active coordination between governmental public health agencies, academic modeling teams, and industry partners can play in developing modern modeling capabilities to support local, state, and federal response to outbreaks.Competing Interest StatementAV, MC, and APP report grants from Metabiota Inc outside the submitted work.Funding StatementFor teams that reported receiving funding for their work, we report the sources and disclosures below. CMU-TimeSeries: CDC Center of Excellence, gifts from Google and Facebook. CU-select: NSF DMS-2027369 and a gift from the Morris-Singer Foundation. COVIDhub: This work has been supported by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (1U01IP001122) and the National Institutes of General Medical Sciences (R35GM119582). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of CDC, NIGMS or the National Institutes of Health. Johannes Bracher was supported by the Helmholtz Foundation via the SIMCARD Information& Data Science Pilot Project. Tilmann Gneiting gratefully acknowledges support by the Klaus Tschira Foundation. DDS-NBDS: NSF III-1812699. EPIFORECASTS-ENSEMBLE1: Wellcome Trust (210758/Z/18/Z) GT_CHHS-COVID19: William W. George Endowment, Virginia C. and Joseph C. Mello Endowments, NSF DGE-1650044, NSF MRI 1828187, research cyberinfrastructure resources and services provided by the Partnership for an Advanced Computing Environment (PACE) at Georgia Tech, and the following benefactors at Georgia Tech: Andrea Laliberte, Joseph C. Mello, Richard Rick E. & Charlene Zalesky, and Claudia & Paul Raines GT-DeepCOVID: CDC MInD-Healthcare U01CK000531-Supplement. NSF (Expeditions CCF-1918770, CAREER IIS-2028586, RAPID IIS-2027862, Medium IIS-1955883, NRT DGE-1545362), CDC MInD program, ORNL and funds/computing resources from Georgia Tech and GTRI. IHME: This work was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, as well as funding from the state of Washington and the National Science Foundation (award no. FAIN: 2031096). IowaStateLW-STEM: Iowa State University Plant Sciences Institute Scholars Program, NSF DMS-1916204, NSF CCF-1934884, Laurence H. Baker Center for Bioinformatics and Biological Statistics. JHU_IDD-CovidSP: State of California, US Dept of Health and Human Services, US Dept of Homeland Security, US Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance, Johns Hopkins Health System, Office of the Dean at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University Modeling and Policy Hub, Centers fo Disease Control and Prevention (5U01CK000538-03), University of Utah Immunology, Inflammation, & Infectious Disease Initiative (26798 Seed Grant). LANL-GrowthRate: LANL LDRD 20200700ER. MOBS-GLEAM_COVID: COVID Supplement CDC-HHS-6U01IP001137-01. NotreDame-mobility and NotreDame-FRED: NSF RAPID DEB 2027718 UA-EpiCovDA: NSF RAPID Grant # 2028401. UCSB-ACTS: NSF RAPID IIS 2029626. UCSD-NEU: Google Faculty Award, DARPA W31P4Q-21-C-0014, COVID Supplement CDC-HHS-6U01IP001137-01. UMass-MechBayes: NIGMS R35GM119582, NSF 1749854. UMich-RidgeTfReg: The University of Michigan Physics Department and the University of Michigan Office of Research.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:UMass-Amherst IRBAll 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 and code referred to in the manuscript are publicly available. https://github.com/reichlab/covid19-forecast-hub/ https://github.com/reichlab/covidEnsembles https://zoltardata.com/project/44

Policymakers make decisions about COVID-19 management in the face of considerable uncertainty. We convened multiple modeling teams to evaluate reopening strategies for a mid-sized county in the United States, in a novel process designed to fully express scientific uncertainty while reducing linguistic uncertainty and cognitive biases. For the scenarios considered, the consensus from 17 distinct models was that a second outbreak will occur within 6 months of reopening, unless schools and non-essential workplaces remain closed. Up to half the population could be infected with full workplace reopening; non-essential business closures reduced median cumulative infections by 82%. Intermediate reopening interventions identified no win-win situations; there was a trade-off between public health outcomes and duration of workplace closures. Aggregate results captured twice the uncertainty of individual models, providing a more complete expression of risk for decision-making purposes.

Transmission heterogeneity plays a critical role in the dynamics of an epidemic. During an outbreak of an emerging infectious disease, efforts to characterize transmission heterogeneity are generally limited to quantifications during a small outbreak or a limited number of generations of a larger outbreak. Understanding how transmission heterogeneity itself varies over the course of a large enduring outbreak not only improves understanding of observed disease dynamics but also informs public health strategy and response. In this study, we employ a method, adaptable to other emerging infectious disease outbreaks, to quantify spatiotemporal variation in transmission heterogeneity for the 2022 mpox outbreak in the United States. Based on past research on mpox and following reports of potential superspreading events early in this outbreak, we expected to find high transmission heterogeneity as quantified by the dispersion parameter of the offspring distribution, k. Our methods use maximum likelihood estimation to fit a negative binomial distribution to transmission chain offspring distributions informed by a large mpox contact tracing dataset. We find that, while estimates of transmission heterogeneity varied across the outbreak with spatiotemporal pockets of higher heterogeneity, overall transmission heterogeneity was low. When testing our methods on simulated data from an outbreak with high transmission heterogeneity, k estimate accuracy depended on the contact tracing data completeness. Because the actual contact tracing data had high incompleteness, our values of k estimated from the empirical data may be artificially high. However, it is also possible that our estimates accurately reflect low transmission heterogeneity for the United States mpox outbreak. Copyright The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC 4.0 International license.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS TOPIC? The highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant has begun to cause increases in cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in parts of the United States. With slowed vaccination uptake, this novel variant is expected to increase the risk of pandemic resurgence in the US in July-December 2021. WHAT IS ADDED BY THIS REPORT? Data from nine mechanistic models project substantial resurgences of COVID-19 across the US resulting from the more transmissible Delta variant. These resurgences, which have now been observed in most states, were projected to occur across most of the US, coinciding with school and business reopening. Reaching higher vaccine coverage in July-December 2021 reduces the size and duration of the projected resurgence substantially. The expected impact of the outbreak is largely concentrated in a subset of states with lower vaccination coverage. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE? Renewed efforts to increase vaccination uptake are critical to limiting transmission and disease, particularly in states with lower current vaccination coverage. Reaching higher vaccination goals in the coming months can potentially avert 1.5 million cases and 21,000 deaths and improve the ability to safely resume social contacts, and educational and business activities. Continued or renewed non-pharmaceutical interventions, including masking, can also help limit transmission, particularly as schools and businesses reopen.

Monkeypox is a zoonotic disease endemic in Central and West Africa. In May 2022, an outbreak of monkeypox characterized by human-to-human transmission was detected in multiple non-endemic countries. We estimated the incubation period for monkeypox using information from 22 probable (N = 1) and confirmed (N = 21) monkeypox cases in patients reported in the United States through June 6, 2022. We pooled U.S. patient data with the data from 18 confirmed cases in patients reported from the Netherlands through May 31, 2022. The mean incubation period from exposure to first symptom onset was 7.6 days (95% credible interval: 6.2 - 9.7), and the 95th percentile was 17.1 days (95% CrI: 12.7-24.3). These findings align with current CDC recommendations for monitoring close contacts of people with monkeypox for 21 days after their last exposure. Copyright The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. This article is a US Government work. It is not subject to copyright under 17 USC 105 and is also made available for use under a CC0 license.

Background SARS-CoV-2 vaccination of persons aged 12 years and older has reduced disease burden in the United States. The COVID-19 Scenario Modeling Hub convened multiple modeling teams in September 2021 to project the impact of expanding vaccine administration to children 5-11 years old on anticipated COVID-19 burden and resilience against variant strains. Methods Nine modeling teams contributed state- and national-level projections for weekly counts of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in the United States for the period September 12, 2021 to March 12, 2022. Four scenarios covered all combinations of: 1) presence vs. absence of vaccination of children ages 5-11 years starting on November 1, 2021; and 2) continued dominance of the Delta variant vs. emergence of a hypothetical more transmissible variant on November 15, 2021. Individual team projections were combined using linear pooling. The effect of childhood vaccination on overall and age-specific outcomes was estimated by meta-analysis approaches. Findings Absent a new variant, COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths among all ages were projected to decrease nationally through mid-March 2022. Under a set of specific assumptions, models projected that vaccination of children 5-11 years old was associated with reductions in all-age cumulative cases (7.2%, mean incidence ratio [IR] 0.928, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.880-0.977), hospitalizations (8.7%, mean IR 0.913, 95% CI 0.834-0.992), and deaths (9.2%, mean IR 0.908, 95% CI 0.797-1.020) compared with scenarios where children were not vaccinated. This projected effect of vaccinating children 5-11 years old increased in the presence of a more transmissible variant, assuming no change in vaccine effectiveness by variant. Larger relative reductions in cumulative cases, hospitalizations, and deaths were observed for children than for the entire U.S. population. Substantial state-level variation was projected in epidemic trajectories, vaccine benefits, and variant impacts. Conclusions Results from this multi-model aggregation study suggest that, under a specific set of scenario assumptions, expanding vaccination to children 5-11 years old would provide measurable direct benefits to this age group and indirect benefits to the all-age U.S. population, including resilience to more transmissible variants. Copyright The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license.

Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) are among the most concerning antibiotic resistance threats due to high rates of multidrug resistance, transmissibility in health care settings, and high mortality rates. We evaluated the potential for regional genomic surveillance to track the spread of bla(KPC)-carrying CRE (KPC-CRE) by using isolate collections from health care facilities in three U.S. states. Clinical isolates were collected from Connecticut (2017 to 2018), Minnesota (2012 to 2018), and Tennessee (2016 to 2017) through the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Multi-site Gram-negative Surveillance Initiative (MuGSI) and additional surveillance. KPC-CRE isolates were whole-genome sequenced, yielding 255 isolates from 214 patients across 96 facilities. Case report data on patient comorbidities, facility exposures, and interfacility patient transfer were extracted. We observed that in Connecticut, most KPC-CRE isolates showed evidence of importation from outside the state, with limited local transmission. In Minnesota, cases were mainly from sporadic importation and transmission of bla(KPC)-carrying Klebsiella pneumoniae ST258, and clonal expansion of bla(KPC)-carrying Enterobacter hormaechei ST171, primarily at a single focal facility and its satellite facilities. In Tennessee, we observed transmission of diverse strains of bla(KPC)-carrying Enterobacter and Klesbiella, with evidence that most derived from the local acquisition of bla(KPC) plasmids circulating in an interconnected regional health care network. Thus, the underlying processes driving KPC-CRE burden can differ substantially across regions and can be discerned through regional genomic surveillance. This study provides proof of concept that integrating genomic data with information on interfacility patient transfers can provide insights into locations and drivers of regional KPC-CRE burden that can enable targeted interventions.

Nursing homes (NH) were among the first settings to receive COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, but staff vaccination coverage remains low at an average of 64%. Using an agent-based model, we examined the impact of community prevalence, the Delta variant, staff vaccination coverage, and boosters for residents on outbreak dynamics in nursing homes. We found that increased staff primary series coverage and high booster vaccine effectiveness (VE) in residents leads to fewer infections and that the cumulative incidence is highly dependent on community transmission. Despite high VE, high community transmission resulted in continued symptomatic infections in NHs.

BACKGROUND: Nursing home residents and staff were included in the first phase of COVID-19 vaccination in the United States. Because the primary trial endpoint was vaccine efficacy (VE) against symptomatic disease, there are limited data on the extent to which vaccines protect against SARS-CoV-2 infection and the ability to infect others (infectiousness). Assumptions about VE against infection and infectiousness have implications for possible changes to infection prevention guidance for vaccinated populations, including testing strategies. METHODS: We use a stochastic agent-based SEIR model of a nursing home to simulate SARS-CoV-2 transmission. We model three scenarios, varying VE against infection, infectiousness, and symptoms, to understand the expected impact of vaccination in nursing homes, increasing staff vaccination coverage, and different screening testing strategies under each scenario. RESULTS: Increasing vaccination coverage in staff decreases total symptomatic cases in each scenario. When there is low VE against infection and infectiousness, increasing staff coverage reduces symptomatic cases among residents. If vaccination only protects against symptoms, but asymptomatic cases remain infectious, increased staff coverage increases symptomatic cases among residents through exposure to asymptomatic but infected staff. High frequency testing is needed to reduce total symptomatic cases if the vaccine has low efficacy against infection and infectiousness, or only protects against symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Encouraging staff vaccination is not only important for protecting staff, but might also reduce symptomatic cases in residents if a vaccine confers at least some protection against infection or infectiousness. SUMMARY: The extent of efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines against infection, infectiousness, or disease, impacts strategies for vaccination and testing in nursing homes. If vaccines confer some protection against infection or infectiousness, encouraging vaccination in staff may reduce symptomatic cases in residents.

Policymakers must make management decisions despite incomplete knowledge and conflicting model projections. Little guidance exists for the rapid, representative, and unbiased collection of policy-relevant scientific input from independent modeling teams. Integrating approaches from decision analysis, expert judgment, and model aggregation, we convened multiple modeling teams to evaluate COVID-19 reopening strategies for a mid-sized United States county early in the pandemic. Projections from seventeen distinct models were inconsistent in magnitude but highly consistent in ranking interventions. The 6-mo-ahead aggregate projections were well in line with observed outbreaks in mid-sized US counties. The aggregate results showed that up to half the population could be infected with full workplace reopening, while workplace restrictions reduced median cumulative infections by 82%. Rankings of interventions were consistent across public health objectives, but there was a strong trade-off between public health outcomes and duration of workplace closures, and no win-win intermediate reopening strategies were identified. Between-model variation was high; the aggregate results thus provide valuable risk quantification for decision making. This approach can be applied to the evaluation of management interventions in any setting where models are used to inform decision making. This case study demonstrated the utility of our approach and was one of several multimodel efforts that laid the groundwork for the COVID-19 Scenario Modeling Hub, which has provided multiple rounds of real-time scenario projections for situational awareness and decision making to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention since December 2020.

Academic researchers, government agencies, industry groups, and individuals have produced forecasts at an unprecedented scale during the COVID-19 pandemic. To leverage these forecasts, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) partnered with an academic research lab at the University of Massachusetts Amherst to create the US COVID-19 Forecast Hub. Launched in April 2020, the Forecast Hub is a dataset with point and probabilistic forecasts of incident cases, incident hospitalizations, incident deaths, and cumulative deaths due to COVID-19 at county, state, and national, levels in the United States. Included forecasts represent a variety of modeling approaches, data sources, and assumptions regarding the spread of COVID-19. The goal of this dataset is to establish a standardized and comparable set of short-term forecasts from modeling teams. These data can be used to develop ensemble models, communicate forecasts to the public, create visualizations, compare models, and inform policies regarding COVID-19 mitigation. These open-source data are available via download from GitHub, through an online API, and through R packages.

Reconstructing the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection is central to understanding the state of the pandemic. Seroprevalence studies are often used to assess cumulative infections as they can identify asymptomatic infection. Since July 2020, commercial laboratories have conducted nationwide serosurveys for the U.S. CDC. They employed three assays, with different sensitivities and specificities, potentially introducing biases in seroprevalence estimates. Using models, we show that accounting for assays explains some of the observed state-to-state variation in seroprevalence, and when integrating case and death surveillance data, we show that when using the Abbott assay, estimates of proportions infected can differ substantially from seroprevalence estimates. We also found that states with higher proportions infected (before or after vaccination) had lower vaccination coverages, a pattern corroborated using a separate dataset. Finally, to understand vaccination rates relative to the increase in cases, we estimated the proportions of the population that received a vaccine prior to infection.

OBJECTIVES: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends implementing Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) for all nursing home (NH) residents known to be colonized with targeted multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs), wounds, or medical devices. Differences in health care personnel (HCP) and resident interactions between units may affect risk of acquiring and transmitting MDROs, affecting EBP implementation. We studied HCP-resident interactions across a variety of NHs to characterize MDRO transmission opportunities. DESIGN: 2 cross-sectional visits. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Four CDC Epicenter sites and CDC Emerging Infection Program sites in 7 states recruited NHs with a mix of unit care types (≥30 beds or ≥2 units). HCP were observed providing resident care. METHODS: Room-based observations and HCP interviews assessed HCP-resident interactions, care type provided, and equipment use. Observations and interviews were conducted for 7-8 hours in 3-6-month intervals per unit. Chart reviews collected deidentified resident demographics and MDRO risk factors (eg, indwelling devices, pressure injuries, and antibiotic use). RESULTS: We recruited 25 NHs (49 units) with no loss to follow-up, conducted 2540 room-based observations (total duration: 405 hours), and 924 HCP interviews. HCP averaged 2.5 interactions per resident per hour (long-term care units) to 3.4 per resident per hour (ventilator care units). Nurses provided care to more residents (n = 12) than certified nursing assistants (CNAs) and respiratory therapists (RTs) (CNA: 9.8 and RT: 9) but nurses performed significantly fewer task types per interaction compared to CNAs (incidence rate ratio (IRR): 0.61, P < .05). Short-stay (IRR: 0.89) and ventilator-capable (IRR: 0.94) units had less varied care compared with long-term care units (P < .05), although HCP visited residents in these units at similar rates. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Resident-HCP interaction rates are similar across NH unit types, differing primarily in types of care provided. Current and future interventions such as EBP, care bundling, or targeted infection prevention education should consider unit-specific HCP-resident interaction patterns.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 Scenario Modeling Hub convened nine modeling teams to project the impact of expanding SARS-CoV-2 vaccination to children aged 5-11 years on COVID-19 burden and resilience against variant strains. METHODS: Teams contributed state- and national-level weekly projections of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in the United States from September 12, 2021 to March 12, 2022. Four scenarios covered all combinations of 1) vaccination (or not) of children aged 5-11 years (starting November 1, 2021), and 2) emergence (or not) of a variant more transmissible than the Delta variant (emerging November 15, 2021). Individual team projections were linearly pooled. The effect of childhood vaccination on overall and age-specific outcomes was estimated using meta-analyses. FINDINGS: Assuming that a new variant would not emerge, all-age COVID-19 outcomes were projected to decrease nationally through mid-March 2022. In this setting, vaccination of children 5-11 years old was associated with reductions in projections for all-age cumulative cases (7.2%, mean incidence ratio [IR] 0.928, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.880-0.977), hospitalizations (8.7%, mean IR 0.913, 95% CI 0.834-0.992), and deaths (9.2%, mean IR 0.908, 95% CI 0.797-1.020) compared with scenarios without childhood vaccination. Vaccine benefits increased for scenarios including a hypothesized more transmissible variant, assuming similar vaccine effectiveness. Projected relative reductions in cumulative outcomes were larger for children than for the entire population. State-level variation was observed. INTERPRETATION: Given the scenario assumptions (defined before the emergence of Omicron), expanding vaccination to children 5-11 years old would provide measurable direct benefits, as well as indirect benefits to the all-age U.S. population, including resilience to more transmissible variants. FUNDING: Various (see acknowledgments).

The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant has been hypothesized to exhibit faster clearance (time from peak viral concentration to clearance of acute infection), decreased sensitivity of antigen tests, and increased immune escape (the ability of the variant to evade immunity conferred by past infection or vaccination) compared to prior variants. These factors necessitate re-evaluation of prevention and control strategies-particularly in high-risk, congregate settings like nursing homes that have been heavily impacted by other COVID-19 variants. We used a simple model representing individual-level viral shedding dynamics to estimate the optimal strategy for testing nursing home healthcare personnel and quantify potential reduction in transmission of COVID-19. This provides a framework for prospectively evaluating testing strategies in emerging variant scenarios when data are limited. We find that case-initiated testing prevents 38% of transmission within a facility if implemented within a day of an index case testing positive, and screening testing strategies could prevent 30-78% of transmission within a facility if implemented daily, depending on test sensitivity.

In Spring 2021, the highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant began to cause increases in cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in parts of the United States. At the time, with slowed vaccination uptake, this novel variant was expected to increase the risk of pandemic resurgence in the US in summer and fall 2021. As part of the COVID-10 Scenario Modeling Hub, an ensemble of nine mechanistic models produced six-month scenario projections for July-December 2021 for the United States. These projections estimated substantial resurgences of COVID-19 across the US resulting from the more transmissible Delta variant, projected to occur across most of the US, coinciding with school and business reopening. The scenarios revealed that reaching higher vaccine coverage in July-December 2021 reduced the size and duration of the projected resurgence substantially, with the expected impacts was largely concentrated in a subset of states with lower vaccination coverage. Despite accurate projection of COVID-19 surges occurring and timing, the magnitude was substantially underestimated 2021 by the models compared with the of the reported cases, hospitalizations, and deaths occurring during July-December, highlighting the continued challenges to predict the evolving COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccination uptake remains critical to limiting transmission and disease, particularly in states with lower vaccination coverage. Higher vaccination goals at the onset of the surge of the new variant were estimated to avert over 1.5 million cases and 21,000 deaths, though may have had even greater impacts, considering the underestimated resurgence magnitude from the model.

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.

As of 2 September 2021, United States nursing homes have reported >675,000 COVID-19 cases and >134,000 deaths according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). More than 205,000,000 persons in the United States had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine (62% of total population) as of 2 September 2021. We investigate the role of vaccination in controlling future COVID-19 outbreaks. We developed a stochastic, compartmental model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a 100-bed nursing home with a staff of 99 healthcare personnel (HCP) in a community of 20,000 people. We parameterized admission and discharge of residents in the model with CMS data, for a within-facility basic reproduction number (R(0)) of 3.5 and a community R(0) of 2.5. The model also included: importation of COVID-19 from the community, isolation of SARS-CoV-2 positive residents, facility-wide adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE) use by HCP, and testing. We systematically varied coverage of mRNA vaccine among residents, HCP, and the community. Simulations were run for 6months after the second dose in the facility, with results summarized over 1,000 simulations. Expected resident cases decreased as community vaccination increased, with large reductions at high HCP coverage. The probability of a COVID-19 outbreak was lower as well: at HCP vaccination coverage of 60%, probability of an outbreak was below 20% for community coverage of 50% or above. At high coverage, stopping asymptomatic screening and facility-wide testing yielded similar results. Results suggest that high coverage among HCP and in the community can prevent infections in residents. When vaccination is high in nursing homes, but not in their surrounding communities, asymptomatic and facility-wide testing remains necessary to prevent the spread of COVID-19. High adherence to PPE may increase the likelihood of containing future COVID-19 outbreaks if they occur.

SignificanceThis paper compares the probabilistic accuracy of short-term forecasts of reported deaths due to COVID-19 during the first year and a half of the pandemic in the United States. Results show high variation in accuracy between and within stand-alone models and more consistent accuracy from an ensemble model that combined forecasts from all eligible models. This demonstrates that an ensemble model provided a reliable and comparatively accurate means of forecasting deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic that exceeded the performance of all of the models that contributed to it. This work strengthens the evidence base for synthesizing multiple models to support public-health action.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended phased allocation of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in December 2020. To support the development of this guidance, we used a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to evaluate the relative impact of three vaccine allocation strategies on infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. All three strategies initially prioritized healthcare personnel (HCP) for vaccination. Strategies of subsequently prioritizing adults aged ≥65 years, or a combination of essential workers and adults aged ≥75 years, prevented the most deaths. Meanwhile, prioritizing adults with high-risk medical conditions immediately after HCP prevented the most infections. All three strategies prevented a similar fraction of hospitalizations. While no model is capable of fully capturing the complex social dynamics which shape epidemics, exercises such as this one can be a useful way for policy makers to formalize their assumptions and explore the key features of a problem before making decisions.