PMC:7060038 / 15789-18805 JSON TXT

Annnotations TAB JSON ListView MergeView

LitCovid-PubTator

LitCovid-PD-FMA-UBERON

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-FMA-UBERON","denotations":[{"id":"T2","span":{"begin":2267,"end":2271},"obj":"Body_part"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A2","pred":"fma_id","subj":"T2","obj":"http://purl.org/sig/ont/fma/fma256135"}],"text":"Table 1. Parameter values estimated in currently available studies, along with accompanying uncertainties and assumptions.\nRanges in the final column reflect confidence interval, credible interval, standard error or range reported by each study referenced.\nParameter Best estimate (Used in Figure 2) Plausible range (Used in Figure 3) References and notes\nMean incubation period 5.5 days Sensitivity: 4.5 or 6.5 days 4.5–6.5 days 3–6 days, n = 4 (Chan et al., 2020)* 5.2 (4.1–7.0) days, n \u003c 425 (Li et al., 2020)† 5.2 (4.4–6.0) days, n = 101 (Lauer et al., 2020)† 6.5 (5.6–7.9) days, n = 88 (Backer et al., 2020)†\nIncubation period distribution Gamma distribution with mean as above, and standard deviation = 2.25\nPercent of cases subclinical (No fever or cough) Best case scenario: 5% Middle case scenario: 25% Worst case scenario: 50% Clinical data: 83% fever, 67% cough, n = 6 (Chan et al., 2020) 83% fever, 82% cough, n = 99 (Chen et al., 2020) 98% fever, 76% cough, n = 41 (Huang et al., 2020) 43.8% fever at hospital admission, 88.7% fever during hospitalization, n = 1099 (Guan et al., 2020) Active monitoring after repatriation flights or on cruise ships: % asymptomatic at diagnosis 31.2% (111/355) (Japan Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, 2020) 65.2% (5 of 8) (Nishiura et al., 2020) 70.0% (7 of 10) (Dorigatti et al., 2020)\nR0 No effect in individual-level analysis. 1.5–4.0 2.2 (1.4–3.8) (Riou and Althaus, 2020) 2.2 (1.4–3.9) (Li et al., 2020) 2.6 (1.5–3.5) (Imai et al., 2020) 2.7 (2.5–2.9) (Wu et al., 2020) 4.5 (4.4-4.6) (Liu et al., 2020) 3.8 (3.6-4.0) (Read et al., 2020) 4.08 (3.37–4.77) (Cao et al., 2020) 4.7 (2.8–7.6) (Sanche et al., 2020) 6.3 (3.3-11.3) (Sanche et al., 2020) 6.47 (5.71–7.23) (Tang et al., 2020)\nPercent of travellers aware of exposure risk 20% 5–40% We assume a low percentage, as no specific risk factors have been identified, and known times or sources of exposure are rarely reported in existing line lists.\nSensitivity of infrared thermal scanners for fever 70% 60–90% Most studies estimated sensitivity between 60–88% (Bitar et al., 2009; Priest et al., 2011; Tay et al., 2015). But a handful of studies estimated very low sensitivity (4–30%). In general, sensitivity depended on the device used, body area targeted and ambient temperature.\nProbability that travellers self-report exposure risk 25% 5–25% 25% is an upper-bound estimate based on outcomes of past screening initiatives. (Gostic et al., 2015)\nTime from symptom onset to patient isolation (After which we assume travel is not possible) No effect in individual-level analysis. 3–7 days Median 7 days from onset to hospitalization (n = 6) (Chan et al., 2020) Mean 2.9 days onset to patient isolation (n = 164) (Liu et al., 2020) Median 7 days from onset to hospitalization (n = 41) (Huang et al., 2020) As awareness increases, times to isolation may decline.\n* From family cluster.\n† Parametric distributions fit to cases with known dates of exposure or travel to and from Wuhan."}

LitCovid-PD-CLO

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-CLO","denotations":[{"id":"T52","span":{"begin":437,"end":440},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001313"},{"id":"T53","span":{"begin":503,"end":505},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001022"},{"id":"T54","span":{"begin":503,"end":505},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0007314"},{"id":"T55","span":{"begin":985,"end":987},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0053794"},{"id":"T56","span":{"begin":1109,"end":1115},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001658"},{"id":"T57","span":{"begin":1458,"end":1460},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001022"},{"id":"T58","span":{"begin":1458,"end":1460},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0007314"},{"id":"T59","span":{"begin":1822,"end":1823},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T60","span":{"begin":2153,"end":2154},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0001020"},{"id":"T61","span":{"begin":2254,"end":2260},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/OBI_0000968"},{"id":"T62","span":{"begin":2815,"end":2817},"obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CLO_0053794"}],"text":"Table 1. Parameter values estimated in currently available studies, along with accompanying uncertainties and assumptions.\nRanges in the final column reflect confidence interval, credible interval, standard error or range reported by each study referenced.\nParameter Best estimate (Used in Figure 2) Plausible range (Used in Figure 3) References and notes\nMean incubation period 5.5 days Sensitivity: 4.5 or 6.5 days 4.5–6.5 days 3–6 days, n = 4 (Chan et al., 2020)* 5.2 (4.1–7.0) days, n \u003c 425 (Li et al., 2020)† 5.2 (4.4–6.0) days, n = 101 (Lauer et al., 2020)† 6.5 (5.6–7.9) days, n = 88 (Backer et al., 2020)†\nIncubation period distribution Gamma distribution with mean as above, and standard deviation = 2.25\nPercent of cases subclinical (No fever or cough) Best case scenario: 5% Middle case scenario: 25% Worst case scenario: 50% Clinical data: 83% fever, 67% cough, n = 6 (Chan et al., 2020) 83% fever, 82% cough, n = 99 (Chen et al., 2020) 98% fever, 76% cough, n = 41 (Huang et al., 2020) 43.8% fever at hospital admission, 88.7% fever during hospitalization, n = 1099 (Guan et al., 2020) Active monitoring after repatriation flights or on cruise ships: % asymptomatic at diagnosis 31.2% (111/355) (Japan Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, 2020) 65.2% (5 of 8) (Nishiura et al., 2020) 70.0% (7 of 10) (Dorigatti et al., 2020)\nR0 No effect in individual-level analysis. 1.5–4.0 2.2 (1.4–3.8) (Riou and Althaus, 2020) 2.2 (1.4–3.9) (Li et al., 2020) 2.6 (1.5–3.5) (Imai et al., 2020) 2.7 (2.5–2.9) (Wu et al., 2020) 4.5 (4.4-4.6) (Liu et al., 2020) 3.8 (3.6-4.0) (Read et al., 2020) 4.08 (3.37–4.77) (Cao et al., 2020) 4.7 (2.8–7.6) (Sanche et al., 2020) 6.3 (3.3-11.3) (Sanche et al., 2020) 6.47 (5.71–7.23) (Tang et al., 2020)\nPercent of travellers aware of exposure risk 20% 5–40% We assume a low percentage, as no specific risk factors have been identified, and known times or sources of exposure are rarely reported in existing line lists.\nSensitivity of infrared thermal scanners for fever 70% 60–90% Most studies estimated sensitivity between 60–88% (Bitar et al., 2009; Priest et al., 2011; Tay et al., 2015). But a handful of studies estimated very low sensitivity (4–30%). In general, sensitivity depended on the device used, body area targeted and ambient temperature.\nProbability that travellers self-report exposure risk 25% 5–25% 25% is an upper-bound estimate based on outcomes of past screening initiatives. (Gostic et al., 2015)\nTime from symptom onset to patient isolation (After which we assume travel is not possible) No effect in individual-level analysis. 3–7 days Median 7 days from onset to hospitalization (n = 6) (Chan et al., 2020) Mean 2.9 days onset to patient isolation (n = 164) (Liu et al., 2020) Median 7 days from onset to hospitalization (n = 41) (Huang et al., 2020) As awareness increases, times to isolation may decline.\n* From family cluster.\n† Parametric distributions fit to cases with known dates of exposure or travel to and from Wuhan."}

LitCovid-PD-CHEBI

{"project":"LitCovid-PD-CHEBI","denotations":[{"id":"T2","span":{"begin":503,"end":505},"obj":"Chemical"},{"id":"T3","span":{"begin":1458,"end":1460},"obj":"Chemical"}],"attributes":[{"id":"A2","pred":"chebi_id","subj":"T2","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CHEBI_30145"},{"id":"A3","pred":"chebi_id","subj":"T3","obj":"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/CHEBI_30145"}],"text":"Table 1. Parameter values estimated in currently available studies, along with accompanying uncertainties and assumptions.\nRanges in the final column reflect confidence interval, credible interval, standard error or range reported by each study referenced.\nParameter Best estimate (Used in Figure 2) Plausible range (Used in Figure 3) References and notes\nMean incubation period 5.5 days Sensitivity: 4.5 or 6.5 days 4.5–6.5 days 3–6 days, n = 4 (Chan et al., 2020)* 5.2 (4.1–7.0) days, n \u003c 425 (Li et al., 2020)† 5.2 (4.4–6.0) days, n = 101 (Lauer et al., 2020)† 6.5 (5.6–7.9) days, n = 88 (Backer et al., 2020)†\nIncubation period distribution Gamma distribution with mean as above, and standard deviation = 2.25\nPercent of cases subclinical (No fever or cough) Best case scenario: 5% Middle case scenario: 25% Worst case scenario: 50% Clinical data: 83% fever, 67% cough, n = 6 (Chan et al., 2020) 83% fever, 82% cough, n = 99 (Chen et al., 2020) 98% fever, 76% cough, n = 41 (Huang et al., 2020) 43.8% fever at hospital admission, 88.7% fever during hospitalization, n = 1099 (Guan et al., 2020) Active monitoring after repatriation flights or on cruise ships: % asymptomatic at diagnosis 31.2% (111/355) (Japan Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, 2020) 65.2% (5 of 8) (Nishiura et al., 2020) 70.0% (7 of 10) (Dorigatti et al., 2020)\nR0 No effect in individual-level analysis. 1.5–4.0 2.2 (1.4–3.8) (Riou and Althaus, 2020) 2.2 (1.4–3.9) (Li et al., 2020) 2.6 (1.5–3.5) (Imai et al., 2020) 2.7 (2.5–2.9) (Wu et al., 2020) 4.5 (4.4-4.6) (Liu et al., 2020) 3.8 (3.6-4.0) (Read et al., 2020) 4.08 (3.37–4.77) (Cao et al., 2020) 4.7 (2.8–7.6) (Sanche et al., 2020) 6.3 (3.3-11.3) (Sanche et al., 2020) 6.47 (5.71–7.23) (Tang et al., 2020)\nPercent of travellers aware of exposure risk 20% 5–40% We assume a low percentage, as no specific risk factors have been identified, and known times or sources of exposure are rarely reported in existing line lists.\nSensitivity of infrared thermal scanners for fever 70% 60–90% Most studies estimated sensitivity between 60–88% (Bitar et al., 2009; Priest et al., 2011; Tay et al., 2015). But a handful of studies estimated very low sensitivity (4–30%). In general, sensitivity depended on the device used, body area targeted and ambient temperature.\nProbability that travellers self-report exposure risk 25% 5–25% 25% is an upper-bound estimate based on outcomes of past screening initiatives. (Gostic et al., 2015)\nTime from symptom onset to patient isolation (After which we assume travel is not possible) No effect in individual-level analysis. 3–7 days Median 7 days from onset to hospitalization (n = 6) (Chan et al., 2020) Mean 2.9 days onset to patient isolation (n = 164) (Liu et al., 2020) Median 7 days from onset to hospitalization (n = 41) (Huang et al., 2020) As awareness increases, times to isolation may decline.\n* From family cluster.\n† Parametric distributions fit to cases with known dates of exposure or travel to and from Wuhan."}

LitCovid-PD-HP

2_test

{"project":"2_test","denotations":[{"id":"32091395-32109013-27032132","span":{"begin":1103,"end":1107},"obj":"32109013"},{"id":"32091395-19215720-27032133","span":{"begin":2103,"end":2107},"obj":"19215720"},{"id":"32091395-21245928-27032134","span":{"begin":2124,"end":2128},"obj":"21245928"},{"id":"32091395-26296847-27032135","span":{"begin":2142,"end":2146},"obj":"26296847"}],"text":"Table 1. Parameter values estimated in currently available studies, along with accompanying uncertainties and assumptions.\nRanges in the final column reflect confidence interval, credible interval, standard error or range reported by each study referenced.\nParameter Best estimate (Used in Figure 2) Plausible range (Used in Figure 3) References and notes\nMean incubation period 5.5 days Sensitivity: 4.5 or 6.5 days 4.5–6.5 days 3–6 days, n = 4 (Chan et al., 2020)* 5.2 (4.1–7.0) days, n \u003c 425 (Li et al., 2020)† 5.2 (4.4–6.0) days, n = 101 (Lauer et al., 2020)† 6.5 (5.6–7.9) days, n = 88 (Backer et al., 2020)†\nIncubation period distribution Gamma distribution with mean as above, and standard deviation = 2.25\nPercent of cases subclinical (No fever or cough) Best case scenario: 5% Middle case scenario: 25% Worst case scenario: 50% Clinical data: 83% fever, 67% cough, n = 6 (Chan et al., 2020) 83% fever, 82% cough, n = 99 (Chen et al., 2020) 98% fever, 76% cough, n = 41 (Huang et al., 2020) 43.8% fever at hospital admission, 88.7% fever during hospitalization, n = 1099 (Guan et al., 2020) Active monitoring after repatriation flights or on cruise ships: % asymptomatic at diagnosis 31.2% (111/355) (Japan Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, 2020) 65.2% (5 of 8) (Nishiura et al., 2020) 70.0% (7 of 10) (Dorigatti et al., 2020)\nR0 No effect in individual-level analysis. 1.5–4.0 2.2 (1.4–3.8) (Riou and Althaus, 2020) 2.2 (1.4–3.9) (Li et al., 2020) 2.6 (1.5–3.5) (Imai et al., 2020) 2.7 (2.5–2.9) (Wu et al., 2020) 4.5 (4.4-4.6) (Liu et al., 2020) 3.8 (3.6-4.0) (Read et al., 2020) 4.08 (3.37–4.77) (Cao et al., 2020) 4.7 (2.8–7.6) (Sanche et al., 2020) 6.3 (3.3-11.3) (Sanche et al., 2020) 6.47 (5.71–7.23) (Tang et al., 2020)\nPercent of travellers aware of exposure risk 20% 5–40% We assume a low percentage, as no specific risk factors have been identified, and known times or sources of exposure are rarely reported in existing line lists.\nSensitivity of infrared thermal scanners for fever 70% 60–90% Most studies estimated sensitivity between 60–88% (Bitar et al., 2009; Priest et al., 2011; Tay et al., 2015). But a handful of studies estimated very low sensitivity (4–30%). In general, sensitivity depended on the device used, body area targeted and ambient temperature.\nProbability that travellers self-report exposure risk 25% 5–25% 25% is an upper-bound estimate based on outcomes of past screening initiatives. (Gostic et al., 2015)\nTime from symptom onset to patient isolation (After which we assume travel is not possible) No effect in individual-level analysis. 3–7 days Median 7 days from onset to hospitalization (n = 6) (Chan et al., 2020) Mean 2.9 days onset to patient isolation (n = 164) (Liu et al., 2020) Median 7 days from onset to hospitalization (n = 41) (Huang et al., 2020) As awareness increases, times to isolation may decline.\n* From family cluster.\n† Parametric distributions fit to cases with known dates of exposure or travel to and from Wuhan."}

LitCovid-sentences

{"project":"LitCovid-sentences","denotations":[{"id":"T82","span":{"begin":0,"end":8},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T83","span":{"begin":10,"end":123},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T84","span":{"begin":124,"end":257},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T85","span":{"begin":258,"end":359},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T86","span":{"begin":360,"end":405},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T87","span":{"begin":406,"end":620},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T88","span":{"begin":621,"end":721},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T89","span":{"begin":722,"end":791},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T90","span":{"begin":792,"end":816},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T91","span":{"begin":817,"end":841},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T92","span":{"begin":842,"end":861},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T93","span":{"begin":862,"end":1349},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T94","span":{"begin":1350,"end":1393},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T95","span":{"begin":1395,"end":1753},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T96","span":{"begin":1754,"end":1972},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T97","span":{"begin":1973,"end":2148},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T98","span":{"begin":2149,"end":2213},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T99","span":{"begin":2214,"end":2310},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T100","span":{"begin":2311,"end":2479},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T101","span":{"begin":2480,"end":2612},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T102","span":{"begin":2614,"end":2895},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T103","span":{"begin":2896,"end":2918},"obj":"Sentence"},{"id":"T104","span":{"begin":2919,"end":3016},"obj":"Sentence"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"_base","uri":"http://pubannotation.org/ontology/tao.owl#"}],"text":"Table 1. Parameter values estimated in currently available studies, along with accompanying uncertainties and assumptions.\nRanges in the final column reflect confidence interval, credible interval, standard error or range reported by each study referenced.\nParameter Best estimate (Used in Figure 2) Plausible range (Used in Figure 3) References and notes\nMean incubation period 5.5 days Sensitivity: 4.5 or 6.5 days 4.5–6.5 days 3–6 days, n = 4 (Chan et al., 2020)* 5.2 (4.1–7.0) days, n \u003c 425 (Li et al., 2020)† 5.2 (4.4–6.0) days, n = 101 (Lauer et al., 2020)† 6.5 (5.6–7.9) days, n = 88 (Backer et al., 2020)†\nIncubation period distribution Gamma distribution with mean as above, and standard deviation = 2.25\nPercent of cases subclinical (No fever or cough) Best case scenario: 5% Middle case scenario: 25% Worst case scenario: 50% Clinical data: 83% fever, 67% cough, n = 6 (Chan et al., 2020) 83% fever, 82% cough, n = 99 (Chen et al., 2020) 98% fever, 76% cough, n = 41 (Huang et al., 2020) 43.8% fever at hospital admission, 88.7% fever during hospitalization, n = 1099 (Guan et al., 2020) Active monitoring after repatriation flights or on cruise ships: % asymptomatic at diagnosis 31.2% (111/355) (Japan Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, 2020) 65.2% (5 of 8) (Nishiura et al., 2020) 70.0% (7 of 10) (Dorigatti et al., 2020)\nR0 No effect in individual-level analysis. 1.5–4.0 2.2 (1.4–3.8) (Riou and Althaus, 2020) 2.2 (1.4–3.9) (Li et al., 2020) 2.6 (1.5–3.5) (Imai et al., 2020) 2.7 (2.5–2.9) (Wu et al., 2020) 4.5 (4.4-4.6) (Liu et al., 2020) 3.8 (3.6-4.0) (Read et al., 2020) 4.08 (3.37–4.77) (Cao et al., 2020) 4.7 (2.8–7.6) (Sanche et al., 2020) 6.3 (3.3-11.3) (Sanche et al., 2020) 6.47 (5.71–7.23) (Tang et al., 2020)\nPercent of travellers aware of exposure risk 20% 5–40% We assume a low percentage, as no specific risk factors have been identified, and known times or sources of exposure are rarely reported in existing line lists.\nSensitivity of infrared thermal scanners for fever 70% 60–90% Most studies estimated sensitivity between 60–88% (Bitar et al., 2009; Priest et al., 2011; Tay et al., 2015). But a handful of studies estimated very low sensitivity (4–30%). In general, sensitivity depended on the device used, body area targeted and ambient temperature.\nProbability that travellers self-report exposure risk 25% 5–25% 25% is an upper-bound estimate based on outcomes of past screening initiatives. (Gostic et al., 2015)\nTime from symptom onset to patient isolation (After which we assume travel is not possible) No effect in individual-level analysis. 3–7 days Median 7 days from onset to hospitalization (n = 6) (Chan et al., 2020) Mean 2.9 days onset to patient isolation (n = 164) (Liu et al., 2020) Median 7 days from onset to hospitalization (n = 41) (Huang et al., 2020) As awareness increases, times to isolation may decline.\n* From family cluster.\n† Parametric distributions fit to cases with known dates of exposure or travel to and from Wuhan."}

MyTest

{"project":"MyTest","denotations":[{"id":"32091395-32109013-27032132","span":{"begin":1103,"end":1107},"obj":"32109013"},{"id":"32091395-19215720-27032133","span":{"begin":2103,"end":2107},"obj":"19215720"},{"id":"32091395-21245928-27032134","span":{"begin":2124,"end":2128},"obj":"21245928"},{"id":"32091395-26296847-27032135","span":{"begin":2142,"end":2146},"obj":"26296847"}],"namespaces":[{"prefix":"_base","uri":"https://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/testbase"},{"prefix":"UniProtKB","uri":"https://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/"},{"prefix":"uniprot","uri":"https://www.uniprot.org/uniprotkb/"}],"text":"Table 1. Parameter values estimated in currently available studies, along with accompanying uncertainties and assumptions.\nRanges in the final column reflect confidence interval, credible interval, standard error or range reported by each study referenced.\nParameter Best estimate (Used in Figure 2) Plausible range (Used in Figure 3) References and notes\nMean incubation period 5.5 days Sensitivity: 4.5 or 6.5 days 4.5–6.5 days 3–6 days, n = 4 (Chan et al., 2020)* 5.2 (4.1–7.0) days, n \u003c 425 (Li et al., 2020)† 5.2 (4.4–6.0) days, n = 101 (Lauer et al., 2020)† 6.5 (5.6–7.9) days, n = 88 (Backer et al., 2020)†\nIncubation period distribution Gamma distribution with mean as above, and standard deviation = 2.25\nPercent of cases subclinical (No fever or cough) Best case scenario: 5% Middle case scenario: 25% Worst case scenario: 50% Clinical data: 83% fever, 67% cough, n = 6 (Chan et al., 2020) 83% fever, 82% cough, n = 99 (Chen et al., 2020) 98% fever, 76% cough, n = 41 (Huang et al., 2020) 43.8% fever at hospital admission, 88.7% fever during hospitalization, n = 1099 (Guan et al., 2020) Active monitoring after repatriation flights or on cruise ships: % asymptomatic at diagnosis 31.2% (111/355) (Japan Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, 2020) 65.2% (5 of 8) (Nishiura et al., 2020) 70.0% (7 of 10) (Dorigatti et al., 2020)\nR0 No effect in individual-level analysis. 1.5–4.0 2.2 (1.4–3.8) (Riou and Althaus, 2020) 2.2 (1.4–3.9) (Li et al., 2020) 2.6 (1.5–3.5) (Imai et al., 2020) 2.7 (2.5–2.9) (Wu et al., 2020) 4.5 (4.4-4.6) (Liu et al., 2020) 3.8 (3.6-4.0) (Read et al., 2020) 4.08 (3.37–4.77) (Cao et al., 2020) 4.7 (2.8–7.6) (Sanche et al., 2020) 6.3 (3.3-11.3) (Sanche et al., 2020) 6.47 (5.71–7.23) (Tang et al., 2020)\nPercent of travellers aware of exposure risk 20% 5–40% We assume a low percentage, as no specific risk factors have been identified, and known times or sources of exposure are rarely reported in existing line lists.\nSensitivity of infrared thermal scanners for fever 70% 60–90% Most studies estimated sensitivity between 60–88% (Bitar et al., 2009; Priest et al., 2011; Tay et al., 2015). But a handful of studies estimated very low sensitivity (4–30%). In general, sensitivity depended on the device used, body area targeted and ambient temperature.\nProbability that travellers self-report exposure risk 25% 5–25% 25% is an upper-bound estimate based on outcomes of past screening initiatives. (Gostic et al., 2015)\nTime from symptom onset to patient isolation (After which we assume travel is not possible) No effect in individual-level analysis. 3–7 days Median 7 days from onset to hospitalization (n = 6) (Chan et al., 2020) Mean 2.9 days onset to patient isolation (n = 164) (Liu et al., 2020) Median 7 days from onset to hospitalization (n = 41) (Huang et al., 2020) As awareness increases, times to isolation may decline.\n* From family cluster.\n† Parametric distributions fit to cases with known dates of exposure or travel to and from Wuhan."}

PMC:7060038 / 15789-18805 JSONTXT

Annnotations TAB JSON ListView MergeView

PMC:7060038 / 15789-18805 JSON TXT