Background The COVID-19 pandemic has driven demand for forecasts to guide policy and planning. Previous research has suggested that combining forecasts from multiple models into a single "ensemble" forecast can increase the robustness of forecasts. Here we evaluate the real-time application of an open, collaborative ensemble to forecast deaths attributable to COVID-19 in the U.S. Methods Beginning on April 13, 2020, we collected and combined one- to four-week ahead forecasts of cumulative deaths for U.S. jurisdictions in standardized, probabilistic formats to generate real-time, publicly available ensemble forecasts. We evaluated the point prediction accuracy and calibration of these forecasts compared to reported deaths. Results Analysis of 2,512 ensemble forecasts made April 27 to July 20 with outcomes observed in the weeks ending May 23 through July 25, 2020 revealed precise short-term forecasts, with accuracy deteriorating at longer prediction horizons of up to four weeks. At all prediction horizons, the prediction intervals were well calibrated with 92-96% of observations falling within the rounded 95% prediction intervals. Conclusions This analysis demonstrates that real-time, publicly available ensemble forecasts issued in April-July 2020 provided robust short-term predictions of reported COVID-19 deaths in the United States. With the ongoing need for forecasts of impacts and resource needs for the COVID-19 response, the results underscore the importance of combining multiple probabilistic models and assessing forecast skill at different prediction horizons. Careful development, assessment, and communication of ensemble forecasts can provide reliable insight to public health decision makers.

Significance This 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.

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. Starting in April 2020, the US COVID-19 Forecast Hub (https://covid19forecasthub.org/) collected, disseminated, and synthesized tens of millions of specific predictions from more than 90 different academic, industry, and independent research groups. A multi-model ensemble forecast that combined predictions from dozens of different research groups every week provided the most consistently accurate probabilistic forecasts of incident deaths due to COVID-19 at the state and national level from April 2020 through October 2021. The performance of 27 individual models that submitted complete forecasts of COVID-19 deaths consistently throughout this year showed high variability in forecast skill across time, geospatial units, and forecast horizons. Two-thirds of the models evaluated showed better accuracy than a naïve baseline model. Forecast accuracy degraded as models made predictions further into the future, with probabilistic error at a 20-week horizon 3-5 times larger 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. Significance Statement This 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 US. 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.

There is increasing appreciation that latrine access does not imply use-many individuals who own latrines do not consistently use them. Little is known, however, about the determinants of latrine use, particularly among those with variable defecation behaviors. Using the integrated behavior model of water, sanitation, and hygiene framework, we sought to characterize determinants of latrine use in rural Ecuador. We interviewed 197 adults living in three communities with a survey consisting of 70 psychosocial defecation-related questions. Questions were excluded from analysis if responses lacked variability or at least 10% of respondents did not provide a definitive answer. All interviewed individuals had access to a privately owned or shared latrine. We then applied adaptive elastic nets (ENET) and supervised principal component analysis (SPCA) to a reduced dataset of 45 questions among 154 individuals with complete data to select determinants that predict self-reported latrine use. Latrine use was common, but not universal, in the sample (76%). The SPCA model identified six determinants and adaptive ENET selected five determinants. Three indicators were represented in both models-latrine users were more likely to report that their latrine is clean enough to use and also more likely to report daily latrine use; while those reporting that elderly men were not latrine users were less likely to use latrines themselves. Our findings suggest that social norms are important predictors of latrine use, whereas knowledge of the health benefits of sanitation may not be as important. These determinants are informative for promotion of latrine adoption.

IntroductionDisplaced persons have a unique risk for developing anaemia due to often limited diets, overcrowding, new infections and inadequate sanitation and hygiene. The lack of anaemia prevalence estimates among the displaced inhibit global planning for anaemia reduction.MethodsWe analysed population representative, cross-sectional nutrition surveys from 2013 to 2016 conducted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and partner agencies. Included surveys measured haemoglobin concentration among children 6–59 months, non-pregnant women 15–49 years, or both groups. For each survey, we calculated mean haemoglobin and prevalence of total anaemia (<110 g/L in children, <120 g/L in women), and classified public health severity following WHO guidelines. Pearson correlations between indicators from women and children surveys were calculated where both subpopulations were measured.ResultsAnalysis included 196 surveys among children and 184 surveys among women from 121 unique refugee settings in 24 countries. The median prevalence of total anaemia in children and women was 44% and 28%, respectively. Sixty-one per cent of child surveys indicated a problem of severe public health importance compared with 25% of surveys in women. The prevalence of total anaemia in children and women was strongly correlated (ρ=0.80). Median prevalence of total anaemia was approximately 55% greater and mean haemoglobin was 6 g/L lower among children age 6–23 months compared with children 24–59 months. West and Central Africa region had the highest median prevalence of anaemia both in women and children.ConclusionWhile the burden of anaemia is high among the displaced, it mirrors that of the general population. Haemoglobin should continue to be measured in nutrition surveys in refugee settings. Sustained, multisectoral efforts to reduce anaemia are needed, with specific focus on children under 2 years of age and refugee settings in the West and Central Africa region.