Factors Associated with Timely Test Seeking, Test Turnaround, and Public Reporting of COVID-19: a retrospective analysis in Ontario, Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Minimizing delays in disease identification and reporting improves the timeliness of surveillance data, and can reduce transmission of COVID-19. Our study investigates factors associated with timely testing and reporting of COVID-19 during the first pandemic wave in one province of Canada. Methods We identified all persons with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection residing in private households across the largest province of Canada, Ontario from the date of the first confirmed case in Ontario (January 25) to July 19, 2020. Our primary outcomes consisted of: (1) specimen collection within 1 day of symptom onset (test seeking), (2) test result reported to local public health within 1 day of specimen collection (test turnaround), and (3) entry of case data into the provincial database within 1 day of reporting test results (reporting). We examined 14 covariates including eight case characteristics, and six neighborhood characteristics. In addition to descriptive measures, logistic regression models were fitted. Unadjusted models included the covariate alone, while adjusted models included age, gender, month, and region. Findings Among 27,198 COVID-19 cases from January 25 2020 to July 19 2020, 28·7% had timely test seeking, 40·2% had timely test turnaround, and 75·5% had timely reporting. Male gender had lower odds of timely test seeking (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·79 [95% CI: 0·74-0·85]) compared to females. Healthcare worker status (aOR 2·77 [95% CI: 2·52-3·05] compared to non-healthcare workers), and age ≥80 years (aOR 1·59 [95% CI: 1·33-1·91] compared to 40-59 year olds) were associated with timely test seeking. Specimen collection on Fridays and Saturdays (aOR 0·88 [95% CI: 0·79-0·98], aOR 0·83 [95% CI: 0·74-0·92] respectively, compared to Wednesdays) had lower odds of timely test turnaround. Urban areas (aOR 1·55 [95% CI: 1·41-1·70] compared to rural areas) were associated with timely test turnaround. Urban areas (aOR 0·79 [95% CI: 0·70-0·89] compared to rural areas) were less likely to have timely reporting. Interpretation Individual, neighborhood, and administrative factors are associated with timely testing and reporting of SARS-CoV-2 infections. These findings present considerations for developing targeted strategies to minimize delays and improve timely testing and reporting of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Funding This study was funded by Public Health Ontario. Research in Context Evidence before this study We searched PubMed and medRxiv up to November 30 2020 to identify studies examining the impact of delays in the disease reporting process on the public health response to COVID-19. We used the search terms (“2019-nCoV” OR “COVID-19” OR “SARS-CoV-2”) AND (“delays” OR “timely” OR “reporting” OR “test” OR “turnaround”), and reviewed reference lists of any relevant articles in the original search. Numerous modeling studies have highlighted the importance of timely testing and reporting to effectively control the spread of COVID-19. Additional studies have also identified delays of only 1 day in testing were associated with increased risk of secondary transmission within households. However no study has described the multiple delays in the disease reporting process of COVID-19 and examined factors associated with timely disease reporting using a large population cohort. Added value of this study Our study described timely test seeking, test turnaround, and reporting for laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases in Ontario, Canada and identified associated individual, neighbourhood, and administrative factors. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to describe detailed delays in the disease reporting process of COVID-19 and identified associated factors using a large population cohort. Implications of all the available evidence Numerous individual, neighborhood, and administrative characteristics are associated with timely testing and reporting of COVID-19. These identified factors may be used to develop strategies such as broadened test access, prioritization of vulnerable populations, and increased testing capacity to reduce delays in testing and reporting and improve the effectiveness of public health response to COVID-19.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».