Evaluating the number of unvaccinated people needed to exclude to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmissions
Prosser, A.; Helfer, B.; Streiner, D. L.
Show abstract
BackgroundVaccine mandates and vaccine passports (VMVP) for SARS-CoV-2 are thought to be a path out of the pandemic by increasing vaccination through coercion and excluding unvaccinated people from different settings because they are viewed as being at significant risk of transmitting SARS-CoV-2. While variants and waning efficacy are relevant, SARS-CoV-2 vaccines reduce the risk of infection, transmission, and severe illness/hospitalization in adults. Thus, higher vaccination levels are beneficial by reducing healthcare system pressures and societal fear. However, the benefits of excluding unvaccinated people are unknown. MethodsA method to evaluate the benefits of excluding unvaccinated people to reduce transmissions is described, called the number needed to exclude (NNE). The NNE is analogous to the number needed to treat (NNT=1/ARR), except the absolute risk reduction (ARR) is the baseline transmission risk in the population for a setting (e.g., healthcare). The rationale for the NNE is that exclusion removes all unvaccinated people from a setting, such that the ARR is the baseline transmission risk for that type of setting, which depends on the secondary attack rate (SAR) typically observed in that type of setting and the baseline infection risk in the population. The NNE is the number of unvaccinated people who need to be excluded from a setting to prevent one transmission event from unvaccinated people in that type of setting. The NNE accounts for the transmissibility of the currently dominant Delta (B.1.617.2) variant to estimate the minimum NNE in six types of settings: households, social gatherings, casual close contacts, work/study places, healthcare, and travel/transportation. The NNE can account for future potentially dominant variants (e.g., Omicron, B.1.1.529). To assist societies and policymakers in their decision-making about VMVP, the NNEs were calculated using the current (mid-to-end November 2021) baseline infection risk in many countries. FindingsThe NNEs suggest that at least 1,000 unvaccinated people likely need to be excluded to prevent one SARS-CoV-2 transmission event in most types of settings for many jurisdictions, notably Australia, California, Canada, China, France, Israel, and others. The NNEs of almost every jurisdiction examined are well within the range of the NNTs of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) ([≥] 250 to 333). This is important since ASA is not recommended for primary prevention of CVD because the harms outweigh the benefits. Similarly, the harms of exclusion may outweigh the benefits. These findings depend on the accuracy of the model assumptions and the baseline infection risk estimates. ConclusionsVaccines are beneficial, but the high NNEs suggest that excluding unvaccinated people has negligible benefits for reducing transmissions in many jurisdictions across the globe. This is because unvaccinated people are likely not at significant risk - in absolute terms - of transmitting SARS-CoV-2 to others in most types of settings since current baseline transmission risks are negligible. Consideration of the harms of exclusion is urgently needed, including staffing shortages from losing unvaccinated healthcare workers, unemployment/unemployability, financial hardship for unvaccinated people, and the creation of a class of citizens who are not allowed to fully participate in many areas of society. RegistrationCRD42021292263 FundingThis study received no grant from any funding agency, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. It has also received no support of any kind from any individual or organization. BH is supported by a personal research grant from the University of Wroclaw within the "Excellence Initiative - Research University" framework and by a scholarship from the Polish Ministry of Education and Science. None of these institutions were involved in this research and did not fund it directly. Competing interestsThe authors have no competing interests to declare. Ethical approvalNot applicable. All the work herein was performed using publicly available data. Data reportingThe data used in this work are available at https://tinyurl.com/4m8mm4jh and https://decision-support-tools.com/.
Matching journals
The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccinating school children required to contain SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant outbreaks in Australia: a modelling analysis 96%
- SARS-CoV-2 infection risk during delivery of childhood vaccination campaigns: a modelling study 94%
- Influential drivers of the cost-effectiveness of respiratory syncytial virus vaccination in European older adults: A multi-country analysis 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Identifying silent COVID-19 infections among children is critical for controlling the pandemic 95%
- The Joint Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination and Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions on Infections, Hospitalizations, and Mortality: An Agent-Based Simulation 95%
- Health impact and cost of COVID-19 prophylaxis with monoclonal antibodies 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Cost-effectiveness of antigen testing for ending COVID-19 isolation 95%
- Association between vaccination rates and COVID-19 health outcomes in the United States: a population-level statistical analysis 94%
- The relative effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on early Covid-19 mortality: natural experiment in 130 countries 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Risk-benefit analysis of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine in Australia using a Bayesian network modelling framework 95%
- Cost-effectiveness of routine COVID-19 adult vaccination programmes in England 94%
- Projected COVID-19 epidemic in the United States in the context of the effectiveness of a potential vaccine and implications for social distancing and face mask use 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- COVID-19 vaccine uptake and effectiveness by time since vaccination in the Western Cape province, South Africa: An observational cohort study during 2020-2022 95%
- The potential economic impact of the updated COVID-19 mRNA fall 2023 vaccines in Japan 94%
- Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 Infections after Vaccination in North Carolina 93%
"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.