PMC:7014668 / 6886-8747 JSONTXT

{"project":"LitCovid-PubTator","denotations":[{"id":"87","span":{"begin":103,"end":111},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"89","span":{"begin":565,"end":573},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"93","span":{"begin":847,"end":864},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"94","span":{"begin":866,"end":875},"obj":"Species"},{"id":"95","span":{"begin":833,"end":841},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"97","span":{"begin":1115,"end":1125},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"102","span":{"begin":1304,"end":1312},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"103","span":{"begin":1431,"end":1441},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"104","span":{"begin":1532,"end":1552},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"105","span":{"begin":1767,"end":1775},"obj":"Disease"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A87","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"87","obj":"MESH:D007239"},{"id":"A89","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"89","obj":"MESH:D007239"},{"id":"A93","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"93","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A94","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"94","obj":"Tax:2697049"},{"id":"A95","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"95","obj":"MESH:D007239"},{"id":"A97","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"97","obj":"MESH:D007239"},{"id":"A102","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"102","obj":"MESH:D007239"},{"id":"A103","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"103","obj":"MESH:D007239"},{"id":"A104","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"104","obj":"MESH:C000657245"},{"id":"A105","pred":"tao:has_database_id","subj":"105","obj":"MESH:D007239"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"Tax","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/taxonomy/"},{"prefix":"MESH","uri":"https://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/"},{"prefix":"Gene","uri":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/"},{"prefix":"CVCL","uri":"https://web.expasy.org/cellosaurus/CVCL_"}],"text":"Effect of screening on detection\nFor the baseline scenario we estimated that 44 (95% CI: 33–56) of 100 infected travellers would be detected by exit screening, no case (95% CI: 0–3) would develop severe symptoms during travel, nine (95% CI: 2–16) additional cases would be detected by entry screening, and the remaining 46 (95% CI: 36–58) would not be detected.\nThe effectiveness of entry screening is largely dependent on the effectiveness of the exit screening in place. Under baseline assumptions, entry screening could detect 53 (95% CI: 35–72) instead of nine infected travellers if no exit screening was in place. However, the probability of developing symptoms during the flight increases with flight time and hence exit screening is more effective for longer flights (Figure 3).\nFigure 3 Probability of detecting travellers infected with novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) at airport entry screening by travel duration and sensitivity of exit screening\nEach cell is a mean of 10,000 model simulations. Other parameters (incubation period, symptom onset to hospitalisation period, and proportion of asymptomatic infections) were fixed at baseline assumptions (Table). Intervals are probabilities of detection, binned at increments of 10% (0–10%, 10–20%, etc.). Syndromic screening designed to prevent infected and potentially infectious cases entering a country undetected is highly vulnerable to the proportion of asymptomatic infections and long incubation periods. If our baseline scenario is modified to have 0% asymptomatic 2019-nCoV infections and 100% sensitivity of entry screening, the incubation period will need to be around 10-fold shorter than the period from symptom onset to severe disease (e.g. hospitalisation) in order to detect more than 90% of infected travellers that would not otherwise report illness at either exit or entry screening."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-FMA-UBERON","denotations":[{"id":"T1","span":{"begin":962,"end":966},"obj":"Body_part"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A1","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T1","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma68646"}],"text":"Effect of screening on detection\nFor the baseline scenario we estimated that 44 (95% CI: 33–56) of 100 infected travellers would be detected by exit screening, no case (95% CI: 0–3) would develop severe symptoms during travel, nine (95% CI: 2–16) additional cases would be detected by entry screening, and the remaining 46 (95% CI: 36–58) would not be detected.\nThe effectiveness of entry screening is largely dependent on the effectiveness of the exit screening in place. Under baseline assumptions, entry screening could detect 53 (95% CI: 35–72) instead of nine infected travellers if no exit screening was in place. However, the probability of developing symptoms during the flight increases with flight time and hence exit screening is more effective for longer flights (Figure 3).\nFigure 3 Probability of detecting travellers infected with novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) at airport entry screening by travel duration and sensitivity of exit screening\nEach cell is a mean of 10,000 model simulations. Other parameters (incubation period, symptom onset to hospitalisation period, and proportion of asymptomatic infections) were fixed at baseline assumptions (Table). Intervals are probabilities of detection, binned at increments of 10% (0–10%, 10–20%, etc.). Syndromic screening designed to prevent infected and potentially infectious cases entering a country undetected is highly vulnerable to the proportion of asymptomatic infections and long incubation periods. If our baseline scenario is modified to have 0% asymptomatic 2019-nCoV infections and 100% sensitivity of entry screening, the incubation period will need to be around 10-fold shorter than the period from symptom onset to severe disease (e.g. hospitalisation) in order to detect more than 90% of infected travellers that would not otherwise report illness at either exit or entry screening."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-MONDO","denotations":[{"id":"T22","span":{"begin":1115,"end":1125},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T23","span":{"begin":1329,"end":1339},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T24","span":{"begin":1431,"end":1441},"obj":"Disease"},{"id":"T25","span":{"begin":1532,"end":1552},"obj":"Disease"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A22","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T22","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005550"},{"id":"A23","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T23","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005550"},{"id":"A24","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T24","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0005550"},{"id":"A25","pred":"mondo_id","subj":"T25","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/MONDO_0100096"}],"text":"Effect of screening on detection\nFor the baseline scenario we estimated that 44 (95% CI: 33–56) of 100 infected travellers would be detected by exit screening, no case (95% CI: 0–3) would develop severe symptoms during travel, nine (95% CI: 2–16) additional cases would be detected by entry screening, and the remaining 46 (95% CI: 36–58) would not be detected.\nThe effectiveness of entry screening is largely dependent on the effectiveness of the exit screening in place. Under baseline assumptions, entry screening could detect 53 (95% CI: 35–72) instead of nine infected travellers if no exit screening was in place. However, the probability of developing symptoms during the flight increases with flight time and hence exit screening is more effective for longer flights (Figure 3).\nFigure 3 Probability of detecting travellers infected with novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) at airport entry screening by travel duration and sensitivity of exit screening\nEach cell is a mean of 10,000 model simulations. Other parameters (incubation period, symptom onset to hospitalisation period, and proportion of asymptomatic infections) were fixed at baseline assumptions (Table). Intervals are probabilities of detection, binned at increments of 10% (0–10%, 10–20%, etc.). Syndromic screening designed to prevent infected and potentially infectious cases entering a country undetected is highly vulnerable to the proportion of asymptomatic infections and long incubation periods. If our baseline scenario is modified to have 0% asymptomatic 2019-nCoV infections and 100% sensitivity of entry screening, the incubation period will need to be around 10-fold shorter than the period from symptom onset to severe disease (e.g. hospitalisation) in order to detect more than 90% of infected travellers that would not otherwise report illness at either exit or entry screening."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-CLO","denotations":[{"id":"T19","span":{"begin":332,"end":334},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001313"},{"id":"T20","span":{"begin":542,"end":544},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001000"},{"id":"T21","span":{"begin":962,"end":966},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/GO_0005623"},{"id":"T22","span":{"begin":970,"end":971},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T23","span":{"begin":1355,"end":1356},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"}],"text":"Effect of screening on detection\nFor the baseline scenario we estimated that 44 (95% CI: 33–56) of 100 infected travellers would be detected by exit screening, no case (95% CI: 0–3) would develop severe symptoms during travel, nine (95% CI: 2–16) additional cases would be detected by entry screening, and the remaining 46 (95% CI: 36–58) would not be detected.\nThe effectiveness of entry screening is largely dependent on the effectiveness of the exit screening in place. Under baseline assumptions, entry screening could detect 53 (95% CI: 35–72) instead of nine infected travellers if no exit screening was in place. However, the probability of developing symptoms during the flight increases with flight time and hence exit screening is more effective for longer flights (Figure 3).\nFigure 3 Probability of detecting travellers infected with novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) at airport entry screening by travel duration and sensitivity of exit screening\nEach cell is a mean of 10,000 model simulations. Other parameters (incubation period, symptom onset to hospitalisation period, and proportion of asymptomatic infections) were fixed at baseline assumptions (Table). Intervals are probabilities of detection, binned at increments of 10% (0–10%, 10–20%, etc.). Syndromic screening designed to prevent infected and potentially infectious cases entering a country undetected is highly vulnerable to the proportion of asymptomatic infections and long incubation periods. If our baseline scenario is modified to have 0% asymptomatic 2019-nCoV infections and 100% sensitivity of entry screening, the incubation period will need to be around 10-fold shorter than the period from symptom onset to severe disease (e.g. hospitalisation) in order to detect more than 90% of infected travellers that would not otherwise report illness at either exit or entry screening."}

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-GO-BP","denotations":[{"id":"T5","span":{"begin":679,"end":685},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/GO_0060361"},{"id":"T6","span":{"begin":701,"end":707},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/GO_0060361"}],"text":"Effect of screening on detection\nFor the baseline scenario we estimated that 44 (95% CI: 33–56) of 100 infected travellers would be detected by exit screening, no case (95% CI: 0–3) would develop severe symptoms during travel, nine (95% CI: 2–16) additional cases would be detected by entry screening, and the remaining 46 (95% CI: 36–58) would not be detected.\nThe effectiveness of entry screening is largely dependent on the effectiveness of the exit screening in place. Under baseline assumptions, entry screening could detect 53 (95% CI: 35–72) instead of nine infected travellers if no exit screening was in place. However, the probability of developing symptoms during the flight increases with flight time and hence exit screening is more effective for longer flights (Figure 3).\nFigure 3 Probability of detecting travellers infected with novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) at airport entry screening by travel duration and sensitivity of exit screening\nEach cell is a mean of 10,000 model simulations. Other parameters (incubation period, symptom onset to hospitalisation period, and proportion of asymptomatic infections) were fixed at baseline assumptions (Table). Intervals are probabilities of detection, binned at increments of 10% (0–10%, 10–20%, etc.). Syndromic screening designed to prevent infected and potentially infectious cases entering a country undetected is highly vulnerable to the proportion of asymptomatic infections and long incubation periods. If our baseline scenario is modified to have 0% asymptomatic 2019-nCoV infections and 100% sensitivity of entry screening, the incubation period will need to be around 10-fold shorter than the period from symptom onset to severe disease (e.g. hospitalisation) in order to detect more than 90% of infected travellers that would not otherwise report illness at either exit or entry screening."}

{"project":"LitCovid-sentences","denotations":[{"id":"T44","span":{"begin":0,"end":32},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T45","span":{"begin":33,"end":88},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T46","span":{"begin":89,"end":176},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T47","span":{"begin":177,"end":240},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T48","span":{"begin":241,"end":331},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T49","span":{"begin":332,"end":361},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T50","span":{"begin":362,"end":472},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T51","span":{"begin":473,"end":541},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T52","span":{"begin":542,"end":619},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T53","span":{"begin":620,"end":786},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T54","span":{"begin":787,"end":956},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T55","span":{"begin":957,"end":1005},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T56","span":{"begin":1006,"end":1170},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T57","span":{"begin":1171,"end":1263},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T58","span":{"begin":1264,"end":1470},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T59","span":{"begin":1471,"end":1861},"obj":"Sentence"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"_base","uri":"http://pubannotation.org/ontology/tao.owl#"}],"text":"Effect of screening on detection\nFor the baseline scenario we estimated that 44 (95% CI: 33–56) of 100 infected travellers would be detected by exit screening, no case (95% CI: 0–3) would develop severe symptoms during travel, nine (95% CI: 2–16) additional cases would be detected by entry screening, and the remaining 46 (95% CI: 36–58) would not be detected.\nThe effectiveness of entry screening is largely dependent on the effectiveness of the exit screening in place. Under baseline assumptions, entry screening could detect 53 (95% CI: 35–72) instead of nine infected travellers if no exit screening was in place. However, the probability of developing symptoms during the flight increases with flight time and hence exit screening is more effective for longer flights (Figure 3).\nFigure 3 Probability of detecting travellers infected with novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) at airport entry screening by travel duration and sensitivity of exit screening\nEach cell is a mean of 10,000 model simulations. Other parameters (incubation period, symptom onset to hospitalisation period, and proportion of asymptomatic infections) were fixed at baseline assumptions (Table). Intervals are probabilities of detection, binned at increments of 10% (0–10%, 10–20%, etc.). Syndromic screening designed to prevent infected and potentially infectious cases entering a country undetected is highly vulnerable to the proportion of asymptomatic infections and long incubation periods. If our baseline scenario is modified to have 0% asymptomatic 2019-nCoV infections and 100% sensitivity of entry screening, the incubation period will need to be around 10-fold shorter than the period from symptom onset to severe disease (e.g. hospitalisation) in order to detect more than 90% of infected travellers that would not otherwise report illness at either exit or entry screening."}