MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3214009804 · doi:10.1101/2021.11.05.21265763

Surveillance of COVID-19 in a Vaccinated Population: A Rapid Literature Review

2021· preprint· en· W3214009804 sur OpenAlexafffund
Oluwaseun Egunsola, Brenlea Farkas, Jordyn Flanagan, Charleen Salmon, Liza Mastikhina, Fiona Clement

Notice bibliographique

RevuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Établissements canadiensSouth Health Campus
Organismes subventionnairesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
Mots-clésGrey literatureMEDLINESystematic reviewMedicinePopulationGovernment (linguistics)VaccinationFamily medicinePublic healthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthPolitical scienceDiseasePathologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objectives With the availability of COVID-19 vaccines, public health focus is shifting to post-vaccination surveillance to identify breakthrough infections in vaccinated populations. Therefore, the objectives of these reviews are to identify scientific evidence and international guidance on surveillance and testing approaches to monitor the presence of the virus in a vaccinated population. Method We searched Ovid MEDLINE®, including Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase, EBM Reviews - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EBM Reviews - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We also searched the Web of Science Core Collection. A grey literature search was also conducted. This search was limited to studies conducted since December 2020 and current to June 13th, 2021. There were no language limitations. COVID-19 surveillance studies that were published after December 2020 but did not specify whether they tested a vaccinated population were also considered for inclusion. For the international guidance review, a grey literature search was conducted, including a thorough search of Google, websites of international government organizations (e.g., Center for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], World Health Organization [WHO]), and McMaster Health Forum (CoVID-END). This search was primarily examining surveillance guidance published since December 2020 (to capture guidance specific to vaccinations) and any relevant pre-December 2020 guidance. Results Thirty-three studies were included for data synthesis of scientific evidence on surveillance of COVID-19. All the studies were published between April and June 2021. Twenty-one studies were from peer-reviewed journals. Five approaches to monitoring post-vaccination COVID-19 cases and emerging variants of concern were identified, including screening with reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and/or a rapid antigen test, genomic surveillance, wastewater surveillance, metagenomics, and testing of air filters on public buses. For population surveillance, the following considerations and limitations were observed: variability in person-to-person testing frequency; lower sensitivity of antigen tests; timing of infections relative to PCR testing can result in missed infections; large studies may fail to identify local variations; and loss of interest in testing by participants in long follow-up studies. Through comprehensive grey literature searching, 68 international guidance documents were captured for full-text review. A total of 26 documents met the inclusion criteria and were included in our synthesis. Seven overarching surveillance methods emerged in the literature. PCR-testing was the most recommended surveillance method, followed by genomic screening, serosurveillance, wastewater surveillance, antigen testing, health record screening, and syndromic surveillance. Conclusion Evidence for post-vaccination COVID-19 surveillance was derived from studies in partially or fully vaccinated populations. Population PCR screening, supplemented by rapid antigen tests, was the most frequently used surveillance method and also the most commonly recommended across jurisdictions. Most recent guidance on COVID-19 surveillance is not specific to vaccinated individuals, or it is in effect but has not yet been updated to reflect that. Therefore, more evidence-informed guidance on testing and surveillance approaches in a vaccinated population that incorporates all testing modalities is required. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Objectives With the availability of COVID-19 vaccines, public health focus is shifting to post-vaccination surveillance to identify breakthrough infections in vaccinated populations. Therefore, the objectives of these reviews are to: 1) identify scientific evidence on surveillance and testing approaches to monitor the presence of the virus in a vaccinated population and determine how these influence testing strategies; 2) identify international guidance on testing and surveillance for COVID-19 and its variants of concern in a vaccinated population; and 3) identify emerging technologies for surveillance. Design A rapid review was conducted to identify scientific evidence on COVID-19 surveillance and testing approaches, and a targeted literature review was conducted on international guidance. Method We searched Ovid MEDLINE®, including Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase, EBM Reviews - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EBM Reviews - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We also searched the Web of Science Core Collection. We performed all searches on June 13, 2021. A grey literature search was also conducted, including: MedRxiv, Google, McMaster Health Forum (COVID-END), and websites of international government organizations (e.g., Center for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], World Health Organization [WHO]). This search was limited to studies conducted since December 2020 and current to June 13th, 2021. There were no language limitations. COVID-19 surveillance studies that were published after December 2020 but did not specify whether they tested a vaccinated population were also considered for inclusion. For the international guidance review, a grey literature search was conducted, including a thorough search of Google, websites of international government organizations (e.g., Center for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], World Health Organization [WHO]), and McMaster Health Forum (CoVID-END). This search was primarily examining surveillance guidance published since December 2020 (to capture guidance specific to vaccinations) and any relevant pre-December 2020 guidance. Although the primary focus was on surveillance guidance in a vaccinated population, guidance that was published after December 2020 but was not vaccine-specific was also considered for inclusion; it was assumed that this guidance was still in effect and was not yet updated. There were no language limitations. A patient partner was engaged during the co-production of a plain language summary for both the rapid review of primary literature and the review of international guidance. Results Thirty-three studies were included for data synthesis of scientific evidence on surveillance of COVID-19. All the studies were published between April and June 2021. Twenty-one studies were from peer-reviewed journals. Five approaches to monitoring post-vaccination COVID-19 cases and emerging variants of concern were identified including, screening with reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and/or a rapid antigen test, genomic surveillance, wastewater surveillance, metagenomics, and testing of air filters on public buses. Population surveillance with RT-PCR testing and/or rapid antigen testing was utilized in 22 studies, mostly in healthcare settings, but also in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) and in the community. The frequency of testing varied depending on whether there was an outbreak. For population surveillance, the following considerations and limitations were observed: studies with discretionary access to testing have highly variable person-to-person testing frequency; antigen tests have lower sensitivity, therefore some positive cases may be missed; timing of infections relative to PCR testing as well as the sensitivity of the tests can result in missed infections; large sample sizes from multicentre studies increase generalizability, but fail to identify local variations from individual centres; with electronic database surveillance, it is difficult to confirm whether patients with a breakthrough infection and a previous positive SARS-CoV-2 test result had a true reinfection or had prolonged shedding from the previous infection; and participants lose interest in studies with long follow-up, with decrease in testing rates over time. Six wastewater surveillance and three genomic surveillance studies were identified in this review. A number of benefits such as, good correlation with clinical data, ability to predict major outbreaks, and rapid turnaround time were observed with wastewater surveillance. However, challenges such as, inconsistencies in variant representation depending on where the samples were taken within the community, differences in the capacity of wastewater to predict case numbers based on the size of the wastewater treatment plants, and cost, were noted. Emerging technologies like viral detection in public transport filters, novel sampling, and assay platforms were also identified. Through comprehens

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,018
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,081
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: Revue systématique
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,029
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,096

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0180,081
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0060,006
Bibliométrie0,0290,020
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0040,006
Science ouverte0,0020,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0070,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,049
Tête enseignante GPT0,380
Écart entre enseignants0,331 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2021
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuemedRxiv→Même sujetSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research→Travaux en français237 207→