CORD-19-Sentences  

CORD-19:b07bb8f6466cb60a903182960e1e57f5cdbc7780 JSONTXT 7 Projects

Annnotations TAB TSV DIC JSON TextAE

Id Subject Object Predicate Lexical cue
TextSentencer_T1 0-129 Sentence denotes The Population Attributable Fraction (PAF) of cases due to gatherings and groups with relevance to COVID-19 mitigation strategies
TextSentencer_T2 131-139 Sentence denotes Abstract
TextSentencer_T3 140-269 Sentence denotes Many countries have banned groups and gatherings as part of their response to the pandemic caused by the coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2.
TextSentencer_T4 270-385 Sentence denotes Although there are outbreak reports involving mass gatherings, the contribution to overall transmission is unknown.
TextSentencer_T5 386-642 Sentence denotes We used data from a survey of social contact behaviour that specifically asked about contact with groups to estimate the Population Attributable Fraction (PAF) due to groups as the relative change in the Basic Reproduction Number when groups are prevented.
TextSentencer_T6 643-1001 Sentence denotes We estimate that PAF due to groups of 50+ people is 2.2% (95%CI 1.1%, 3.6%); the PAF due to groups of 20+ people is 6.4% (5.0%, 8.0%); the PAF due to groups of 10+ is 11.3% (9.9%, 13.0%) Interpretation Large groups of individuals have a small epidemiological impact; small and medium sized groups between 10 and 50 people have a larger impact on an epidemic.
TextSentencer_T7 1003-1200 Sentence denotes Preventing social contacts and mass gatherings has been used worldwide in the response to reduce transmission communicable diseases, including to reduce transmission of the coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2.
TextSentencer_T8 1201-1395 Sentence denotes As of March 2020, As of March 2020, multiple countries have banned all gatherings of 1,000 people or more; with some countries such as the Czech Republic and the USA banning much smaller groups.
TextSentencer_T9 1396-1577 Sentence denotes Given knowledge of transmission mechanisms, bringing together large numbers of people into the same space should prove conducive for the spread of close-contact infectious diseases.
TextSentencer_T10 1578-1719 Sentence denotes Indeed, mass gatherings have been associated with outbreaks of communicable diseases such as measles [1] , influenza [2] and meningitis [3] .
TextSentencer_T11 1720-1875 Sentence denotes And public health agencies, including the World Health Organization (WHO), have specific guidance for preventing disease outbreaks at mass gatherings [4] .
TextSentencer_T12 1876-2114 Sentence denotes Factors such as age of participant [1] , zoonotic transmission and presence of animals [5] , crowding [6, 7] , lack of sanitation [7] , location and event duration [6] are associated with the reporting of mass gathering-related outbreaks.
TextSentencer_T13 2115-2329 Sentence denotes Despite the evidence of the importance of mass gatherings for disease transmission from intuition and individual outbreaks, the population-level impact of different mass gathering policies has not been established.
TextSentencer_T14 2330-2498 Sentence denotes While systematic reviews have identified outbreak reports involving mass gatherings [5, 6] , the overall impact of mass gatherings could not be quantitatively assessed.
TextSentencer_T15 2499-2760 Sentence denotes A detailed modelling study of disease transmission in the state of Georgia, USA, found that in extreme scenarios when 25% of the population participated in a 2day long gathering shortly before the epidemic peak, peak prevalence could increase by up to 10% [8] .
TextSentencer_T16 2761-2836 Sentence denotes More realistic scenarios resulted in minimal population-level changes [8] .
TextSentencer_T17 2837-3043 Sentence denotes Here, we use representative data on individuals' daily social contacts, including group contacts, to estimate the Population Attributable Fraction (PAF) due to mass gatherings and large numbers of contacts.
TextSentencer_T18 3044-3174 Sentence denotes The Social Contact Survey (SCS) [9, 10] collected data on social contacts from 5,388 participants between 2009 and 2010 in the UK.
TextSentencer_T19 3175-3288 Sentence denotes Participants were asked to enumerate other people with whom they had had contact over the course of a single day.
TextSentencer_T20 3289-3430 Sentence denotes Contacts were defined as those with whom participants had a face-to-face conversation within 3 metres and/or physically touched skin-on-skin.
TextSentencer_T21 3431-3604 Sentence denotes Participants were able report individual contacts and up to five groups of contacts, for instance church groups, weddings, large work functions or multiple contacts at work.
TextSentencer_T22 3605-3699 Sentence denotes The 'groups' question was designed to aid participants in reporting multiple similar contacts.
TextSentencer_T23 3700-3900 Sentence denotes Group contacts were defined in the same way as individual contacts, i.e. if a person attended a concert with 1,000 people, but only spoke to 5 people, the number of recorded group contacts would be 5.
TextSentencer_T24 3901-3970 Sentence denotes Participants were asked whether members of the group knew each other.
TextSentencer_T25 3971-4187 Sentence denotes As well as the number of contacts, participants were asked to estimate the length of time spent with each contact or group of contacts as either: less than 10 minutes, 11-30 minutes, 31-60 minutes or over 60 minutes.
TextSentencer_T26 4188-4263 Sentence denotes The SCS data are available to download at http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/54273/.
TextSentencer_T27 4264-4373 Sentence denotes The Population Attributable Fraction (PAF) is a quantity borrowed from non-communicable disease epidemiology.
TextSentencer_T28 4374-4516 Sentence denotes The PAF due with a risk factor is the percentage of disease burden or mortality that can be attributed to the presence of that increased risk.
TextSentencer_T29 4517-4805 Sentence denotes In previous work, we demonstrated that for infectious diseases, the PAF can be estimated as the percentage change in the Basic Reproduction Number (average number of secondary cases per infectious case in an otherwise susceptible population [11] ) in the absence of the risk factor [12] .
TextSentencer_T30 4806-4950 Sentence denotes Here, we treat participation in a group as the risk factor and calculate the Basic Reproduction Number with and without groups of various sizes.
TextSentencer_T31 4951-5062 Sentence denotes For each participant, we use their contact reports to calculate their individual Basic Reproduction Number, ! .
TextSentencer_T32 5063-5249 Sentence denotes We assumed that ! is proportional to the number of individuals reported in the contact, " , ( " = 1 for single contacts, " > 1 for groups) multiplied by the duration of each contact, " :
TextSentencer_T33 5250-5404 Sentence denotes CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license It is made available under a author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
TextSentencer_T34 5405-5548 Sentence denotes is the (which was not peer-reviewed) The copyright holder for this preprint . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.20.20039537 doi: medRxiv preprint
TextSentencer_T35 5549-5710 Sentence denotes The duration of each contact is taken as the mid-point of each time interval, i.e. 5 minutes, 20 minutes, 45 minutes and 6 hours, as recorded by the participant.
TextSentencer_T36 5711-5889 Sentence denotes For group contacts with more than 20 individuals, we observe a saturation of contact duration, therefore we divide the contact duration by the number of individuals in the group.
TextSentencer_T37 5890-5957 Sentence denotes 95% Confidence Intervals in R0 were calculated using bootstrapping.
TextSentencer_T38 5958-6082 Sentence denotes We calculated the PAF for groups of size or greater is calculated as the percentage change in the Basic Reproduction Number:
TextSentencer_T39 6083-6192 Sentence denotes We investigate the PAF for groups of greater than 10, and up to groups greater than 100, in increments of 10.
TextSentencer_T40 6193-6297 Sentence denotes We investigated differences between groups that knew each other and groups that did not know each other.
TextSentencer_T41 6298-6357 Sentence denotes 48,001 unique contacts were reported by 5,388 participants.
TextSentencer_T42 6358-6479 Sentence denotes Of those, 42,945 (89%) were individual contacts and 5,056 groups were reported (accounting for 11% of reported contacts).
TextSentencer_T43 6480-6566 Sentence denotes The median and mean number of contacts per person was 11.5 and 27.0, range 1 to 3,011.
TextSentencer_T44 6567-6619 Sentence denotes 2,427 (45%) of participants reported group contacts.
TextSentencer_T45 6620-6707 Sentence denotes The majority of groups reported (3,860; 76%) were groups of people who knew each other.
TextSentencer_T46 6708-6832 Sentence denotes 2,979 (59%) groups had 10 or fewer members; the median and mean reported group size was 9 and 20.3 individuals respectively.
TextSentencer_T47 6833-7220 Sentence denotes Restricting contacts to groups of size 50 or less, reduces the median and mean number of individual contacts per person to 11.0 and 18.8; restricting contact to groups of size 20 or less, reduces the median and mean number of contacts per person to 10.0 and 14.1; restricting contacts to groups of size 10 or less, reduces the median and mean number of contacts per person to 9 and 11.0.
TextSentencer_T48 7221-7365 Sentence denotes Figure 1 shows the degree distribution (number of contacts) per person with and without contacts associated with groups of size greater than 10.
TextSentencer_T49 7366-7425 Sentence denotes The PAF due to groups decreased with increasing group size.
TextSentencer_T50 7426-7525 Sentence denotes For the largest groups with more than 100 individuals the PAF100 is estimated at 0.8% (0.3%, 1.7%).
TextSentencer_T51 7526-7594 Sentence denotes The PAF50 is estimated at 2.2% (95% Confidence Interval of the mean:
TextSentencer_T52 7595-7684 Sentence denotes 1.1%, 3.6%); the PAF20 is 6.4% (5.0%, 8.0%); the PAF10 is 11.4% (9.9%, 13.0%) (figure 2).
TextSentencer_T53 7685-7865 Sentence denotes The pattern of decreasing PAF with increasing group size is seen for both groups of individuals who are known to each other and groups of individuals who are unknown to each other.
TextSentencer_T54 7866-8028 Sentence denotes The PAF due to groups of 10+ known to each other is estimated at 8.4% (7.4%, 9.4%) and due to groups of 50+ known to each other is estimated at 0.8% (0.5%, 1.3%).
TextSentencer_T55 8029-8097 Sentence denotes The remaining contribution to R0 is due to contact with individuals.
TextSentencer_T56 8098-8099 Sentence denotes .
TextSentencer_T57 8100-8254 Sentence denotes CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license It is made available under a author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
TextSentencer_T58 8255-8398 Sentence denotes is the (which was not peer-reviewed) The copyright holder for this preprint . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.20.20039537 doi: medRxiv preprint
TextSentencer_T59 8399-8536 Sentence denotes The low estimated impact of large groups on ! is due to the relative frequency with which they are reported in the Social Contact Survey.
TextSentencer_T60 8537-8640 Sentence denotes These results highlight the relative importance of medium-size groups of between 10 and 20 individuals.
TextSentencer_T61 8641-8753 Sentence denotes In this paper, we analysed social contact data in the context of infectious disease transmission and gatherings.
TextSentencer_T62 8754-8854 Sentence denotes Our findings suggest that large groups of individuals have a relatively small impact on an epidemic.
TextSentencer_T63 8855-8985 Sentence denotes This is due to the relative rarity of large-scale gatherings and the sublinear scaling between number of contacts and infectivity.
TextSentencer_T64 8986-9178 Sentence denotes The Social Contact Survey (SCS) is one of a number of social contact surveys that have been conducted to quantify the impact of social mixing on disease transmission [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] .
TextSentencer_T65 9179-9239 Sentence denotes The SCS specifically asked about groups of similar contacts.
TextSentencer_T66 9240-9372 Sentence denotes These groups are not necessarily public or mass gatherings, and represented groups that both knew each other and those that did not.
TextSentencer_T67 9373-9579 Sentence denotes The SCS asked about contacts on a single day, therefore did not capture multi-day events; simulation studies have shown that prolonged mass gatherings were necessary to alter the course of an epidemic [8] .
TextSentencer_T68 9580-9712 Sentence denotes Our analysis was based on social contact data collected between 2009 and 2010; contact patterns may have altered in the past decade.
TextSentencer_T69 9713-9813 Sentence denotes We also did not account for individuals changing their behaviour if group activities were cancelled.
TextSentencer_T70 9814-9930 Sentence denotes In the context of COVID-19 mitigation, this analysis considered one aspect of gatherings: the impact on an epidemic.
TextSentencer_T71 9931-10041 Sentence denotes However, there may be other valid reasons for preventing mass events, such as policing and managing resources.
TextSentencer_T72 10042-10351 Sentence denotes Our analysis implicitly assumes that infection is already present in the population as is the case for COVID-19; for other diseases, mass gatherings can be associated with increased global travel which can bring new strains into an area or result in out-of-season outbreaks, which were also not captured here.
TextSentencer_T73 10352-10442 Sentence denotes Our findings illustrate the difficult choices that are necessary to limit COVID-19 spread.
TextSentencer_T74 10443-10588 Sentence denotes Meetings of large groups of more than 100 individuals are relatively infrequent, and their prohibition may have a limited impact on the epidemic.
TextSentencer_T75 10589-10797 Sentence denotes More epidemiologically relevant are groups of 10 to 20 people, as they occur more frequently and could potentially have a larger impact on transmission; they may also involve inter-generational family groups.
TextSentencer_T76 10798-10982 Sentence denotes This analysis was designed to aid policy-making and should be considered against alternative control strategies so that the most effective measures can be implemented in the long term.
TextSentencer_T77 10983-11144 Sentence denotes Funding source EBP was partly supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Evaluation of Interventions.
TextSentencer_T78 11145-11267 Sentence denotes The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.
TextSentencer_T79 11268-11342 Sentence denotes The NIHR had no role in writing the manuscript or the decision to publish.
TextSentencer_T80 11343-11344 Sentence denotes .
TextSentencer_T81 11345-11499 Sentence denotes CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license It is made available under a author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
TextSentencer_T82 11500-11602 Sentence denotes is the (which was not peer-reviewed) The copyright holder for this preprint Contacts with all groups .
TextSentencer_T83 11603-11757 Sentence denotes CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license It is made available under a author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
TextSentencer_T84 11758-11942 Sentence denotes is the (which was not peer-reviewed) The copyright holder for this preprint . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.20.20039537 doi: medRxiv preprint All groups Groups that know each other .
TextSentencer_T85 11943-12097 Sentence denotes CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license It is made available under a author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.
TextSentencer_T86 12098-12241 Sentence denotes is the (which was not peer-reviewed) The copyright holder for this preprint . https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.20.20039537 doi: medRxiv preprint