Social contact patterns among employees in 3 U.S. companies during early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, April to June 2020

Kiti, Moses Chapa; Aguolu, Obianuju Genevieve; Liu, Carol; Mesa, Ana R.; Regina, Rachel; Woody, Meaghan; Willebrand, Kathryn; Couzens, Chandra; Bartelsmeyer, Tilman; Nelson, Kristin N.; Jenness, Samuel M.; Riley, Steven; Melegaro, Alessia; Ahmed, Faruque; Malik, Farnaz; Lopman, Ben; Omer, Saad B.

doi:10.1016/j.epidem.2021.100481

Cited by 20 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Systematic data collected in other countries has helped to explain the interplay between contact patterns and transmission dynamics [3,4], but studies of contact patterns in the U.S. during this period draw primarily from convenience samples which survey unrepresentative segments of the population. [5,6] While some studies have reported on changing contact patterns throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S. [1], few have reported on differences in contact patterns among key demographic groups. This is particularly important since the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately fallen on low-income and minority populations, with a heavier burden of COVID-19 cases and deaths in low-income and minority populations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nationally Representative Social Contact Patterns among U.S. adults, August 2020-April 2021

Nelson

Sullivan

Bradley

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S prompted abrupt and dramatic changes to social contact patterns. Monitoring changing social behavior is essential to provide reliable input data for mechanistic models of infectious disease, which have been increasingly used to support public health policy to mitigate the impacts of the pandemic. While some studies have reported on changing contact patterns throughout the pandemic., few have reported on differences in contact patterns among key demographic groups and none have reported nationally representative estimates. We conducted a national probability survey of US households and collected information on social contact patterns during two time periods: August-December 2020 (before widespread vaccine availability) and March-April 2021 (during national vaccine rollout). Overall, contact rates in Spring 2021 were similar to those in Fall 2020, with most contacts reported at work. Persons identifying as non-White, non-Black, non-Asian, and non-Hispanic reported high numbers of contacts relative to other racial and ethnic groups. Contact rates were highest in those reporting occupations in retail, hospitality and food service, and transportation. Those testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies reported a higher number of daily contacts than those who were seronegative. Our findings provide evidence for differences in social behavior among demographic groups, highlighting the profound disparities that have become the hallmark of the COVID-19 pandemic.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nationally Representative Social Contact Patterns among U.S. adults, August 2020-April 2021

Nelson

Sullivan

Bradley

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Small reductions in household transmission have potential to meaningfully reduce overall cases. On a daily basis, a larger proportion of close proximity human contact occurs within households [36][37][38] rather than in community settings such as schools, nursing homes or large gatherings notorious for superspreading. While households rarely become superspreading locations, the majority of Americans (72%) 39 live with at least one other individual who would be highly exposed to an index household case.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring and understanding household clustering of SARS-CoV-2 cases using surveillance data in Fulton County, Georgia

Liu

Smith

Chamberlain

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHouseholds are important for SARS-CoV-2 transmission due to high intensity exposure in enclosed living spaces over prolonged durations. Using contact tracing, the secondary attack rate in households is estimated at 18-20%, yet no studies have examined COVID-19 clustering within households to inform testing and prevention strategies. We sought to quantify and characterize household clustering of COVID-19 cases in Fulton County, Georgia and further explore age-specific patterns in household clusters.MethodsWe used state surveillance data to identify all PCR- or antigen-confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Fulton County, Georgia. Household clustered cases were defined as cases with matching residential address with positive sample collection dates within 28 days of one another. We described proportion of COVID-19 cases that were clustered, stratified by age and over time and explored trends in age of first diagnosed case within clusters and age patterns between first diagnosed case and subsequent household cases.ResultsBetween 6/1/20–10/31/21, there were 106,233 COVID-19 cases with available address reported in Fulton County. Of these, 31,449 (37%) were from 12,955 household clusters. Children were more likely to be in household clusters than any other age group and children increasingly accounted for the first diagnosed household case, rising from 11% in February 2021 to a high of 31% in August 2021. Bubble plot density of age of first diagnosed case and subsequent household cases mirror age-specific patterns in household social mixing.DiscussionOne-third of COVID-19 cases in Fulton County were part of a household cluster. High proportion of children in household clusters reflects higher probability of living in larger homes with caregivers or other children. Increasing probability of children as the first diagnosed case coincide with temporal trends in vaccine roll-out among the elderly in March 2021 and the return to in-person schooling for the Fall 2021 semester. While vaccination remains the most effective intervention at reducing household clustering, other household-level interventions should also be emphasized such as timely testing for household members to prevent ongoing transmission.

show abstract

“…The Pennsylvania COVID-19 Task Force allocation of initial doses was intended to reflect "disease epidemiology and local community factors 9 ." So why send less vaccine to areas with more Black people, given that they tended to have more face-to-face interactions during the pandemic than White people did 52,53 ? Pennsylvania's Phase 1 sought to prioritize "critical populations 29 " for vaccination.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even from a so-called “race-neutral” perspective 49,50 , where the goal is to reduce overall harm to society as a whole 51 , the racial disparities we have identified cannot be justified. The Pennsylvania COVID-19 Task Force allocation of initial doses was intended to reflect “disease epidemiology and local community factors 9 .” So why send less vaccine to areas with more Black people, given that they tended to have more face-to-face interactions during the pandemic than White people did 52,53 ? Pennsylvania’s Phase 1 sought to prioritize “critical populations 29 ” for vaccination.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Did COVID-19 Vaccines Go to the Whitest Neighborhoods First? Racial Inequities in Six Million Phase 1 Doses Shipped to Pennsylvania

Holtzman

Yang

Louis

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on racial disparities in COVID-19 vaccination rates has focused primarily on vaccine hesitancy. However, vaccine hesitancy research is increasingly unable to account for racial disparities in vaccination rates in the U.S., which have shrunk rapidly over the past year. This and other evidence suggests that inequities in vaccine allocation and access may have contributed to vaccination rate disparities in the U.S. But to our knowledge, no previously published research has examined whether the geographic distribution of COVID-19 vaccines has led to greater access for White Americans than for Black Americans. Here, we link neighborhood-level data on vaccine allocation to data on racial demographics to show that in the first 17 weeks of Pennsylvania's COVID-19 vaccine rollout (Phase 1), White people were 25% more likely than Black people to live in neighborhoods (census tracts) that received vaccine shipments. In the 17 weeks of Pennsylvania's de jure restrictions on vaccine eligibility, de facto geographic restrictions on vaccine access disproportionately disadvantaged Black people and favored White people. In revealing these vaccine inequities, our work builds on prior work to develop a theory-driven, evidence-based, reproducible framework for studying racial inequities in the distribution of COVID-19 vaccines.

show abstract

Social contact patterns among employees in 3 U.S. companies during early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, April to June 2020

Cited by 20 publications

References 12 publications

Nationally Representative Social Contact Patterns among U.S. adults, August 2020-April 2021

Nationally Representative Social Contact Patterns among U.S. adults, August 2020-April 2021

Monitoring and understanding household clustering of SARS-CoV-2 cases using surveillance data in Fulton County, Georgia

Did COVID-19 Vaccines Go to the Whitest Neighborhoods First? Racial Inequities in Six Million Phase 1 Doses Shipped to Pennsylvania

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About