Quarantine and serial testing for variants of SARS-CoV-2 with benefits of vaccination and boosting on consequent control of COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quarantine and serial testing strategies for a disease depend principally on its incubation period and infectiousness profile. In the context of COVID-19, these primary public health tools must be modulated with successive SARS CoV-2 variants of concern that dominate transmission. Our analysis shows that (1) vaccination status of an individual makes little difference to the determination of the appropriate quarantine duration of an infected case, whereas vaccination coverage of the population can have a substantial effect on this duration, (2) successive variants can challenge disease control efforts by their earlier and increased transmission in the disease time course relative to prior variants, and (3) sufficient vaccine boosting of a population substantially aids the suppression of local transmission through frequent serial testing. For instance, with Omicron, increasing immunity through vaccination and boosters-for instance with 100% of the population is fully immunized and at least 24% having received a third dose-can reduce quarantine durations by up to 2 d, as well as substantially aid in the repression of outbreaks through serial testing. Our analysis highlights the paramount importance of maintaining high population immunity, preferably by booster uptake, and the role of quarantine and testing to control the spread of SARS CoV-2.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".