Back

Survey data yields improved estimates of test-confirmed COVID-19 cases when rapid at-home tests were massively distributed in the United States

Santillana, M.; Uslu, A. A.; Urmi, T.; Quintana, A.; Druckman, J. N.; Ognyanova, K.; Baum, M.; Perlis, R. H.; Lazer, D.

2024-05-22 epidemiology
10.1101/2024.05.21.24307697
Show abstract

ImportanceIdentifying and tracking new infections during an emerging pandemic is crucial to design and deploy interventions to protect populations and mitigate its effects, yet it remains a challenging task. ObjectiveTo characterize the ability of non-probability online surveys to longitudinally estimate the number of COVID-19 infections in the population both in the presence and absence of institutionalized testing. DesignInternet-based non-probability surveys were conducted, using the PureSpectrum survey vendor, approximately every 6 weeks between April 2020 and January 2023. They collected information on COVID-19 infections with representative state-level quotas applied to balance age, gender, race and ethnicity, and geographic distribution. Data from this survey were compared to institutional case counts collected by Johns Hopkins University and wastewater surveillance data for SARS-CoV-2 from Biobot Analytics. SettingPopulation-based online non-probability survey conducted for a multi-university consortium --the Covid States Project. ParticipantsResidents of age 18+ across 50 US states and the District of Columbia in the US. Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe main outcomes are: (a) survey-weighted estimates of new monthly confirmed COVID-19 cases in the US from January 2020 to January 2023, and (b) estimates of uncounted test-confirmed cases, from February 1, 2022, to January 1, 2023. These are compared to institutionally reported COVID-19 infections and wastewater viral concentrations. ResultsThe survey spanned 17 waves deployed from June 2020 to January 2023, with a total of 408,515 responses from 306,799 respondents with mean age 42.8 (STD 13) years; 202,416 (66%) identified as women, and 104,383 (34%) as men. A total of 16,715 (5.4%) identified as Asian, 33,234 (10.8%) as Black, 24,938 (8.1%) as Hispanic, 219,448 (71.5%) as White, and 12,464 (4.1%) as another race. Overall, 64,946 respondents (15.9%) self-reported a test-confirmed COVID-19 infection. National survey-weighted test-confirmed COVID-19 estimates were strongly correlated with institutionally reported COVID-19 infections (Pearson correlation of r=0.96; p=1.8 e-12) from April 2020 to January 2022 (50-state correlation average of r=0.88, SD = 0.073). This was before the government-led mass distribution of at-home rapid tests. Following January 2022, correlation was diminished and no longer statistically significant (r=0.55, p=0.08; 50-state correlation average of r=0.48, SD = 0.227). In contrast, survey COVID-19 estimates correlated highly with SARS-CoV-2 viral concentrations in wastewater both before (r=0.92; p=2.2e-09) and after (r=0.89; p=2.3e-04) January 2022. Institutionally reported COVID-19 cases correlated (r = 0.79, p=1.10e-05) with wastewater viral concentrations before January 2022, but poorly (r = 0.31, p=0.35) after, suggesting both survey and wastewater estimates may have better captured test-confirmed COVID-19 infections after January 2022. Consistent correlation patterns were observed at the state-level. Based on national-level survey estimates, approximately 54 million COVID-19 cases were unaccounted for in official records between January 2022 and January 2023. Conclusions and RelevanceNon-probability survey data can be used to estimate the temporal evolution of test-confirmed infections during an emerging disease outbreak. Self-reporting tools may enable government and healthcare officials to implement accessible and affordable at-home testing for efficient infection monitoring in the future. Trial RegistrationNA Key PointsO_ST_ABSQuestionC_ST_ABSCan non-probability survey data accurately track institutionally confirmed COVID-19 cases in the United States, and provide estimates of unaccounted infections when rapid at-home tests are popularized and institutionalized tests are discontinued? FindingsThe proportion of individuals reporting a positive COVID-19 infection in a longitudinal non-probability survey closely tracked the institutionally reported proportions in the US, and nationally-aggregated wastewater SARS-CoV-2 viral concentrations, from April 2020 to February 2022. Survey estimates suggest that a high number of confirmed infections may have been unaccounted for in official records starting in February 2022, when large-scale distribution of rapid at-home tests occurred. This is further confirmed by viral concentrations in wastewater. MeaningNon-probability online surveys can serve as an effective complementary method to monitor infections during an emerging pandemic. They provide an alternative for estimating infections in the absence of institutional testing when at-home tests are widely available. Longitudinal surveys have the potential to guide real-time decision-making in future public health crises.

Matching journals

The top 14 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Science of The Total Environment
based on 80 papers
Top 0.8%
10.4%
2
ACS ES&T Water
based on 11 papers
Top 0.1%
7.7%
3
PLOS ONE
based on 1737 papers
Top 62%
6.5%
4
Scientific Reports
based on 701 papers
Top 50%
3.0%
5
American Journal of Epidemiology
based on 54 papers
Top 2%
2.9%
6
Environmental Health Perspectives
based on 11 papers
Top 0.4%
2.9%
7
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
based on 116 papers
Top 9%
2.6%
8
BMC Public Health
based on 148 papers
Top 10%
2.5%
9
Environmental Science & Technology
based on 16 papers
Top 0.7%
2.4%
10
Epidemics
based on 96 papers
Top 4%
2.4%
11
Annals of Epidemiology
based on 19 papers
Top 0.5%
2.4%
12
mSphere
based on 27 papers
Top 0.7%
1.8%
13
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
based on 50 papers
Top 5%
1.8%
14
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
based on 100 papers
Top 7%
1.6%
50% of probability mass above
15
Environmental Research
based on 36 papers
Top 2%
1.6%
16
PeerJ
based on 46 papers
Top 5%
1.6%
17
Nature Communications
based on 483 papers
Top 30%
1.6%
18
PLOS Global Public Health
based on 287 papers
Top 17%
1.4%
19
Clinical Infectious Diseases
based on 219 papers
Top 16%
1.4%
20
mSystems
based on 16 papers
Top 1%
1.4%
21
One Health
based on 15 papers
Top 0.6%
1.4%
22
BMC Infectious Diseases
based on 110 papers
Top 12%
1.4%
23
JAMA Network Open
based on 125 papers
Top 15%
1.2%
24
Emerging Infectious Diseases
based on 84 papers
Top 9%
1.2%
25
Water Research
based on 26 papers
Top 1%
0.8%
26
Journal of Medical Internet Research
based on 81 papers
Top 14%
0.8%
27
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
based on 16 papers
Top 4%
0.8%
28
Epidemiology and Infection
based on 80 papers
Top 12%
0.7%
29
International Journal of Epidemiology
based on 65 papers
Top 10%
0.7%
30
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology
based on 17 papers
Top 2%
0.7%