Back

Impact of Shifting University Policies During the COVID-19 Pandemic on Self-Reported Employee Social Networks

Johnson, S. S.; Jackson, K. C.; Lofgren, E. T.

2024-02-08 epidemiology
10.1101/2024.02.08.24302489 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectivesTo ascertain if faculty and staff were the link between the two COVID-19 outbreaks in a rural university county, and if the local universitys COVID-19 policies affected contact rates of their employees across all its campuses. MethodsWe conducted two anonymous, voluntary online surveys for faculty and staff of a PAC-12 university on their contact patterns both within and outside the university during the COVID-19 pandemic. One was asked when classes were virtual, and another when classes were in-person but masking. Participants were asked about the individuals they encountered, the type and location of the interactions, what COVID-19 precautions were taken - if any, as well as general questions about their location and COVID-19. ResultsWe received 271 responses from the first survey and 124 responses from the second. The first survey had a median of 3 contacts/respondent, with the second having 7 contacts/respondent (p<0.001). During the first survey, most contacts were family contacts (Spouse, Children), with the second survey period having Strangers and Students having the most contact (p<0.001). Over 50% of the first survey contacts happened at their home, while the second survey had 40% at work and 35% at home. Both respondents and contacts masked 42% and 46% of the time for the two surveys respectively (p<0.01). ConclusionFor future pandemics, it would be wise to take employees into account when trying to plan for the safety of university students, employees, and surrounding communities. The main places to be aware of and potentially push infectious disease precautions would be on campus, especially confined spaces like offices or small classrooms, and the home, as these tend to be the largest areas of non-masked close contact.

Matching journals

The top 2 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.