Back

Time-analysis of COVID-19 dispersion among health care workers and the general population

Leme, P. A. F.; Jalalizadeh, M.; Dionato, F. A. V.; Buosi, K.; Dal Col, L. S. B.; Giacomelli, C. F.; Ferrari, K. L.; Pagliarone, A. C.; Gon, L. M.; Maia, C. L.; Esfahani, A. A.; Reis, L. O.

2021-08-09 epidemiology
10.1101/2021.08.07.21261433 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionHeath care workers with direct (HCW-D) or indirect (HCW-A) patient contact represent 4.2% to 17.8% of COVID-19 cases. We evaluate the temporal COVID-19 infection behavior among HCW-D, HCW-A, and non-HCW. MethodsFrom February 2020 to April 2021, trained nurses recorded age, gender, occupation, and symptoms in a COVID-19 testing outpatient health center. We allocated data into weekly time fractals and calculated the proportion of COVID-19 positive among HCW vs. non-HCW and incorporated an ARFIMA model (traditionally used in weather forecast) to predict future cases of COVID-19. ResultsAmong 8,998 COVID-19 RT-PCR tests, 3,462 (42%) patients were HCW-D, and 933 (11%) were HCW-A. Overall, 1,914 (21.3%) returned positive, representing 27%, 25% and 19% of HCW-D, HCW-A and non-HCW, respectively. HCW-D or HCW-A were significantly more likely to test positive for COVID-19 than non-HCW (OR=1.5, p<0.0001). The percentage of positive to negative test results remained steady over time. In the positive cases, the percentage of HCW to non-HCW declined significantly over time (Mann-Kendal trend test: tau=-0.58, p<0.0001). Our ARFIMA model showed a long-memory infection pattern in the occurrence of new COVID-19 cases lasting for months. Average error was 1.9 cases per week comparing predicted to actual values three months later (May-July 2021). ConclusionHCW have a sustained 50% higher risk of COVID-19 positivity in the pandemic. Time-series analysis showed a long-memory infection pattern with virus spread mainly among HCWs before the general population. The tool http://wdchealth.covid-map.com/shiny/covid-map/ will be updated according to population previous infection and vaccination impact.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.