Wastewater Surveillance Pilot at US Military Installations: Cost Model Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for pathogen surveillance systems to augment both early warning and outbreak monitoring/control efforts. Community wastewater samples provide a rapid and accurate source of environmental surveillance data to complement direct patient sampling. Due to its global presence and critical missions, the US military is a leader in global pandemic preparedness efforts. Clinical testing for COVID-19 on US Air Force (USAF) bases (AFBs) was effective but costly with respect to direct monetary costs and indirect costs due to lost time. To remain operating at peak capacity, such bases sought a more passive surveillance option and piloted wastewater surveillance (WWS) at 17 AFBs to demonstrate feasibility, safety, utility, and cost-effectiveness from May 2021 to January 2022. Objective: We model the costs of a wastewater program for pathogens of public health concern within the specific context of US military installations using assumptions based on the results of the USAF and Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Defense pilot program. The objective was to determine the cost of deploying WWS to all AFBs relative to clinical swab testing surveillance regimes. Methods: A WWS cost projection model was built based on subject matter expert input and actual costs incurred during the WWS pilot program at USAF AFBs. Several SARS-CoV-2 circulation scenarios were considered, and the costs of both WWS and clinical swab testing were projected. Analysis was conducted to determine the break-even point and how a reduction in swab testing could unlock funds to enable WWS to occur in parallel. Results: Our model confirmed that WWS is complementary and highly cost-effective when compared to existing alternative forms of biosurveillance. We found that the cost of WWS was between US $10.5-$18.5 million less expensive annually in direct costs as compared to clinical swab testing surveillance. When the indirect cost of lost work was incorporated, including lost work associated with required clinical swab testing, we estimated that over two-thirds of clinical swab testing could be maintained with no additional costs upon implementation of WWS. Conclusions: Our results support the adoption of WWS across US military installations as part of a more comprehensive and early warning system that will enable adaptive monitoring during disease outbreaks in a more cost-effective manner than swab testing alone.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".