Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Seattle, Washington: October 2019–April 2020

McCulloch, Denise J.; Jackson, Michael L.; Lester, Sandra; Mills, Lisa; Freeman, Brandi; Rasheed, Mohammad Ata Ur; Thornburg, Natalie J.; Chu, Helen Y.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0252235

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unfortunately, because of privacy protocols implemented by our laboratory in conjunction with the county public health office, we were not able to analyze the reference samples for SARS-CoV-2 and were unable to determine the impact it may have had on the EHFT accuracy. On the basis of the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 around this time [ 46 ], it seems unlikely that there were enough COVID-19 cases circulating in the Seattle area to cause a major reduction in test performance, although it may have had a small impact on PPV for ARI.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Accuracy of an At-Home, Rapid Self-test for Influenza: Prospective Comparative Accuracy Study

Geyer¹,

Kotnik²,

Lyon³

et al. 2022

JMIR Public Health Surveill

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for influenza used by individuals at home could potentially expand access to testing and reduce the impact of influenza on health systems. Improving access to testing could lead to earlier diagnosis following symptom onset, allowing more rapid interventions for those who test positive, including behavioral changes to minimize spread. However, the accuracy of RDTs for influenza has not been determined in self-testing populations. Objective This study aims to assess the accuracy of an influenza RDT conducted at home by lay users with acute respiratory illness compared with that of a self-collected sample by the same individual mailed to a laboratory for reference testing. Methods We conducted a comparative accuracy study of an at-home influenza RDT (Ellume) in a convenience sample of individuals experiencing acute respiratory illness symptoms. Participants were enrolled in February and March 2020 from the Greater Seattle region in Washington, United States. Participants were mailed the influenza RDT and reference sample collection materials, which they completed and returned for quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction influenza testing in a central laboratory. We explored the impact of age, influenza type, duration, and severity of symptoms on RDT accuracy and on cycle threshold for influenza virus and ribonuclease P, a marker of human DNA. Results A total of 605 participants completed all study steps and were included in our analysis, of whom 87 (14.4%) tested positive for influenza by quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (70/87, 80% for influenza A and 17/87, 20% for influenza B). The overall sensitivity and specificity of the RDT compared with the reference test were 61% (95% CI 50%-71%) and 95% (95% CI 93%-97%), respectively. Among individuals with symptom onset ≤72 hours, sensitivity was 63% (95% CI 48%-76%) and specificity was 94% (95% CI 91%-97%), whereas, for those with duration >72 hours, sensitivity and specificity were 58% (95% CI 41%-74%) and 96% (95% CI 93%-98%), respectively. Viral load on reference swabs was negatively correlated with symptom onset, and quantities of the endogenous marker gene ribonuclease P did not differ among reference standard positive and negative groups, age groups, or influenza subtypes. The RDT did not have higher sensitivity or specificity among those who reported more severe illnesses. Conclusions The sensitivity and specificity of the self-test were comparable with those of influenza RDTs used in clinical settings. False-negative self-test results were more common when the test was used after 72 hours of symptom onset but were not related to inadequate swab collection or severity of illness. Therefore, the deployment of home tests may provide a valuable tool to support the management of influenza and other respiratory infections.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Accuracy of an At-Home, Rapid Self-test for Influenza: Prospective Comparative Accuracy Study

Geyer¹,

Kotnik²,

Lyon³

et al. 2022

JMIR Public Health Surveill

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Missing science: A scoping study of COVID-19 epidemiological data in the United States

Bhatia

I²,

Baral

2022

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systematic approaches to epidemiologic data collection are critical for informing pandemic responses, providing information for the targeting and timing of mitigations, for judging the efficacy and efficiency of alternative response strategies, and for conducting real-world impact assessments. Here, we report on a scoping study to assess the completeness of epidemiological data available for COVID-19 pandemic management in the United States, enumerating authoritative US government estimates of parameters of infectious transmission, infection severity, and disease burden and characterizing the extent and scope of US public health affiliated epidemiological investigations published through November 2021. While we found authoritative estimates for most expected transmission and disease severity parameters, some were lacking, and others had significant uncertainties. Moreover, most transmission parameters were not validated domestically or re-assessed over the course of the pandemic. Publicly available disease surveillance measures did grow appreciably in scope and resolution over time; however, their resolution with regards to specific populations and exposure settings remained limited. We identified 283 published epidemiological reports authored by investigators affiliated with U.S. governmental public health entities. Most reported on descriptive studies. Published analytic studies did not appear to fully respond to knowledge gaps or to provide systematic evidence to support, evaluate or tailor community mitigation strategies. The existence of epidemiological data gaps 18 months after the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic underscores the need for more timely standardization of data collection practices and for anticipatory research priorities and protocols for emerging infectious disease epidemics.

show abstract

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Seattle, Washington: October 2019–April 2020

Cited by 2 publications

References 19 publications

Diagnostic Accuracy of an At-Home, Rapid Self-test for Influenza: Prospective Comparative Accuracy Study

Diagnostic Accuracy of an At-Home, Rapid Self-test for Influenza: Prospective Comparative Accuracy Study

Missing science: A scoping study of COVID-19 epidemiological data in the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About