Interactions among common non‐SARS‐CoV‐2 respiratory viruses and influence of the COVID‐19 pandemic on their circulation in New York City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and voluntary behavioral changes during the COVID-19 pandemic have influenced the circulation of non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory infections. We aimed to examine interactions among common non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory virus and further estimate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on these viruses. METHODS: We analyzed incidence data for seven groups of respiratory viruses in New York City (NYC) during October 2015 to May 2021 (i.e., before and during the COVID-19 pandemic). We first used elastic net regression to identify potential virus interactions and further examined the robustness of the found interactions by comparing the performance of Seasonal Auto Regressive Integrated Moving Average (SARIMA) models with and without the interactions. We then used the models to compute counterfactual estimates of cumulative incidence and estimate the reduction during the COVID-19 pandemic period from March 2020 to May 2021, for each virus. RESULTS: We identified potential interactions for three endemic human coronaviruses (CoV-NL63, CoV-HKU, and CoV-OC43), parainfluenza (PIV)-1, rhinovirus, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). We found significant reductions (by ~70-90%) in cumulative incidence of CoV-OC43, CoV-229E, human metapneumovirus, PIV-2, PIV-4, RSV, and influenza virus during the COVID-19 pandemic. In contrast, the circulation of adenovirus and rhinovirus was less affected. CONCLUSIONS: Circulation of several respiratory viruses has been low during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may lead to increased population susceptibility. It is thus important to enhance monitoring of these viruses and promptly enact measures to mitigate their health impacts (e.g., influenza vaccination campaign and hospital infection prevention) as societies resume normal activities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".