skip to main content


Title: Community and Campus COVID-19 Risk Uncertainty Under University Reopening Scenarios: Model-Based Analysis
Background Significant uncertainty has existed about the safety of reopening college and university campuses before the COVID-19 pandemic is better controlled. Moreover, little is known about the effects that on-campus students may have on local higher-risk communities. Objective We aimed to estimate the range of potential community and campus COVID-19 exposures, infections, and mortality under various university reopening plans and uncertainties. Methods We developed campus-only, community-only, and campus × community epidemic differential equations and agent-based models, with inputs estimated via published and grey literature, expert opinion, and parameter search algorithms. Campus opening plans (spanning fully open, hybrid, and fully virtual approaches) were identified from websites and publications. Additional student and community exposures, infections, and mortality over 16-week semesters were estimated under each scenario, with 10% trimmed medians, standard deviations, and probability intervals computed to omit extreme outliers. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to inform potential effective interventions. Results Predicted 16-week campus and additional community exposures, infections, and mortality for the base case with no precautions (or negligible compliance) varied significantly from their medians (4- to 10-fold). Over 5% of on-campus students were infected after a mean of 76 (SD 17) days, with the greatest increase (first inflection point) occurring on average on day 84 (SD 10.2 days) of the semester and with total additional community exposures, infections, and mortality ranging from 1-187, 13-820, and 1-21 per 10,000 residents, respectively. Reopening precautions reduced infections by 24%-26% and mortality by 36%-50% in both populations. Beyond campus and community reproductive numbers, sensitivity analysis indicated no dominant factors that interventions could primarily target to reduce the magnitude and variability in outcomes, suggesting the importance of comprehensive public health measures and surveillance. Conclusions Community and campus COVID-19 exposures, infections, and mortality resulting from reopening campuses are highly unpredictable regardless of precautions. Public health implications include the need for effective surveillance and flexible campus operations.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1742521
NSF-PAR ID:
10301578
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
Volume:
7
Issue:
4
ISSN:
2369-2960
Page Range / eLocation ID:
e24292
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Low, Nicola (Ed.)
    Background While booster vaccinations clearly reduce the risk of severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and death, the impact of boosters on Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections has not been fully characterized: Doing so requires understanding their impact on asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic infections that often go unreported but nevertheless play an important role in spreading SARS-CoV-2. We sought to estimate the impact of COVID-19 booster doses on SARS-CoV-2 infections in a vaccinated population of young adults during an Omicron BA.1-predominant period. Methods and findings We implemented a cohort study of young adults in a college environment (Cornell University’s Ithaca campus) from a period when Omicron BA.1 was the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant on campus (December 5 to December 31, 2021). Participants included 15,800 university students who completed initial vaccination series with vaccines approved by the World Health Organization for emergency use, were enrolled in mandatory at-least-weekly surveillance polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing, and had no positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test within 90 days before the start of the study period. Robust multivariable Poisson regression with the main outcome of a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test was performed to compare those who completed their initial vaccination series and a booster dose to those without a booster dose. A total of 1,926 unique SARS-CoV-2 infections were identified in the study population. Controlling for sex, student group membership, date of completion of initial vaccination series, initial vaccine type, and temporal effect during the study period, our analysis estimates that receiving a booster dose further reduces the rate of having a PCR-detected SARS-CoV-2 infection relative to an initial vaccination series by 56% (95% confidence interval [42%, 67%], P < 0.001). While most individuals had recent booster administration before or during the study period (a limitation of our study), this result is robust to the assumed delay over which a booster dose becomes effective (varied from 1 day to 14 days). The mandatory active surveillance approach used in this study, under which 86% of the person-days in the study occurred, reduces the likelihood of outcome misclassification. Key limitations of our methodology are that we did not have an a priori protocol or statistical analysis plan because the analysis was initially done for institutional research purposes, and some analysis choices were made after observing the data. Conclusions We observed that boosters are effective, relative to completion of initial vaccination series, in further reducing the rate of SARS-CoV-2 infections in a college student population during a period when Omicron BA.1 was predominant; booster vaccinations for this age group may play an important role in reducing incidence of COVID-19. 
    more » « less
  2. null (Ed.)
    School closures may reduce the size of social networks among children, potentially limiting infectious disease transmission. To estimate the impact of K–12 closures and reopening policies on children's social interactions and COVID-19 incidence in California's Bay Area, we collected data on children's social contacts and assessed implications for transmission using an individual-based model. Elementary and Hispanic children had more contacts during closures than high school and non-Hispanic children, respectively. We estimated that spring 2020 closures of elementary schools averted 2167 cases in the Bay Area (95% CI: −985, 5572), fewer than middle (5884; 95% CI: 1478, 11.550), high school (8650; 95% CI: 3054, 15 940) and workplace (15 813; 95% CI: 9963, 22 617) closures. Under assumptions of moderate community transmission, we estimated that reopening for a four-month semester without any precautions will increase symptomatic illness among high school teachers (an additional 40.7% expected to experience symptomatic infection, 95% CI: 1.9, 61.1), middle school teachers (37.2%, 95% CI: 4.6, 58.1) and elementary school teachers (4.1%, 95% CI: −1.7, 12.0). However, we found that reopening policies for elementary schools that combine universal masking with classroom cohorts could result in few within-school transmissions, while high schools may require masking plus a staggered hybrid schedule. Stronger community interventions (e.g. remote work, social distancing) decreased the risk of within-school transmission across all measures studied, with the influence of community transmission minimized as the effectiveness of the within-school measures increased. 
    more » « less
  3. Abstract

    In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many higher educational institutions moved their courses on-line in hopes of slowing disease spread. The advent of multiple highly-effective vaccines offers the promise of a return to “normal” in-person operations, but it is not clear if—or for how long—campuses should employ non-pharmaceutical interventions such as requiring masks or capping the size of in-person courses. In this study, we develop and fine-tune a model of COVID-19 spread to UC Merced’s student and faculty population. We perform a global sensitivity analysis to consider how both pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions impact disease spread. Our work reveals that vaccines alone may not be sufficient to eradicate disease dynamics and that significant contact with an infectious surrounding community will maintain infections on-campus. Our work provides a foundation for higher-education planning allowing campuses to balance the benefits of in-person instruction with the ability to quarantine/isolate infectious individuals.

     
    more » « less
  4. 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. 
    more » « less
  5. Galea, Sandro (Ed.)
    Abstract Excess mortality has exceeded reported deaths from Covid-19 during the pandemic. This gap may be attributable to deaths that occurred among individuals with undiagnosed Covid-19 infections or indirect consequences of the pandemic response such as interruptions in medical care; distinguishing these possibilities has implications for public health responses. In the present study, we examined patterns of excess mortality over time and by setting (in-hospital or out-of-hospital) and cause of death using death certificate data from California. The estimated number of excess natural-cause deaths from 2020 March 1 to 2021 February 28 (69,182) exceeded the number of Covid-19 diagnosed deaths (53,667) by 29%. Nearly half, 47.4% (32,775), of excess natural-cause deaths occurred out of the hospital, where only 28.6% (9,366) of excess mortality was attributed to Covid-19. Over time, increases or decreases in excess natural non-Covid-19 mortality closely mirrored increases or decreases in Covid-19 mortality. The time series were positively correlated in out-of-hospital settings, particularly at time lags when excess natural-cause deaths preceded reported Covid-19 deaths; for example, when comparing Covid-19 deaths to excess natural-cause deaths in the week prior, the correlation was 0.73. The strong temporal association of reported Covid-19 deaths with excess out-of-hospital deaths from other reported natural-cause causes suggests Covid-19 deaths were undercounted during the first year of the pandemic. 
    more » « less