The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic forced researchers to reconsider in-person assessments due to transmission risk. We conducted a pilot study to evaluate the feasibility of using the Tasso-SST (Tasso, Inc, Seattle, Washington) device for blood self-collection for use in SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing in an ongoing COVID-19 prevalence and immunity research study. 100 participants were recruited between January and March 2021 from a previously identified sub-cohort of the Cabarrus County COVID-19 Prevalence and Immunity (C3PI) Study who were under-going bimonthly COVID-19 antibody testing. Participants were given a Tasso-SST kit and asked to self-collect blood during a scheduled visit where trained laboratory personnel performed routine phlebotomy. All participants completed an after-visit survey about their experience. Overall, 70.0% of participants were able to collect an adequate sample for testing using the device. Among those with an adequate sample, there was a high concordance in results between the Tasso-SST and phlebotomy blood collection methods (Cohen’s kappa coefficient = 0.88, Interclass correlation coefficient 0.98 [0.97, 0.99], p < 0.0001). The device received a high-level (90.0%) of acceptance among all participants. Overall, the Tasso-SST could prove to be a valuable tool for seroprevalence testing. However, future studies in larger, diverse populations over longer periods may provide a better understanding of device usability and acceptance among older participants and those with comorbidities in various use scenarios.

Research on the COVID-19 pandemic revealed a disproportionate burden of COVID-19 infection and death among underserved populations and exposed low rates of SARS-CoV-2 testing in these communities. A landmark National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding initiative, the Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics-Underserved Populations (RADx-UP) program, was developed to address the research gap in understanding the adoption of COVID-19 testing in underserved populations.

Background: Mitigation behaviors reduce the incidence of COVID-19 infection. Determining characteristics of groups defined by mitigation behaviors compliance may be useful to inform targeted public health policies and interventions. This study aimed to identify groups of individuals according to self-reported compliance with COVID-19 mitigation behaviors, define compliance class characteristics, and explore associations between compliance classes and important study and public health outcomes. Methods and findings: We studied 1,410 participants in the Cabarrus County COVID-19 Prevalence and Immunity longitudinal cohort study (June 2020 to December 2021) who were asked 10 questions regarding compliance with recommended COVID-19 mitigation behaviors. By Latent Class Analysis, 1,381 participants were categorized into 3 classes (most [49.4%], moderately [45.0%], and least [5.6%] compliant). Compared with the most compliant class, the least and moderately compliant classes were younger (mean = 61.9 v. 59.0 v. 53.8 years), had fewer medical conditions per individual (1.37 v. 1.08 v. 0.77), and differed in Hispanic ethnicity (6.2% v. 2.8% v. 9.1%) and COVID-19 vaccine intention (65.8% v. 59.8% v. 35.1%). Compared to the most compliant class, the least compliant class had fewer women (54.6% v. 76.3%), fewer insured individuals (92.2% v. 97.4%), and more withdrew from study participation early (28.6% v. 16.0%). Relative to the most compliant class, the least compliant class had a higher likelihood of COVID-19 infection (OR = 2.08 [95% CI 1.13, 3.85]), lower rate of COVID-19 vaccination (72.6% v. 95.1%), and longer time to 50% COVID-19 vaccination following eligibility (8–9 vs 16 days). Conclusions: Classes defined by mitigation behaviors compliance had distinct characteristics, including age, sex, medical history, and ethnicity, and were associated with important study and public health outcomes. Targeted public health policies and interventions according to the compliance group characteristics may be of value in current and future pandemic responses to increase compliance.

Influenza causes an estimated 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness annually, along with substantial morbidity and mortality, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Currently, Sri Lanka has no influenza vaccination policies and does not offer vaccination within the public healthcare sector. Therefore, we performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of influenza vaccine implementation for the Sri Lankan population. We designed a static Markov model that followed a population cohort of Sri Lankans in three age groups, 0–4, 5–64, and 65+ years, through two potential scenarios: trivalent inactivated vaccination (TIV) and no TIV across twelve-monthly cycles using a governmental perspective at the national level. We also performed probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses to identify influential variables and account for uncertainty. The vaccination model arm reduced influenza outcomes by 20,710 cases, 438 hospitalizations, and 20 deaths compared to no vaccination in one year. Universal vaccination became cost-effective at approximately 98.01% of Sri Lanka’s 2022 GDP per capita (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = 874,890.55 Rs/DALY averted; 3624.84 USD/DALY averted). Results were most sensitive to the vaccine coverage in the 5–64-year-old age group, the cost of the influenza vaccine dose in the 5–64-years-old age group, vaccine effectiveness in the under-5-years-old age group, and the vaccine coverage in the under-5-years-old age group. No value for a variable within our estimated ranges resulted in ICERs above Rs. 1,300,000 (USD 5386.15) per DALY adverted. Providing influenza vaccines was considered highly cost-effective compared to no vaccines. However, large-scale national studies with improved data are needed to better inform estimates and determine the impact of vaccination implementation.

Molecular HIV surveillance is used to in effort to enhance HIV prevention efforts by identifying emerging clusters of rapid HIV transmission. In the United States, it relies upon data from antiretroviral resistance testing done in the context of clinical care. However, information about the public health uses of these data are not always disclosed to patients at the time of testing, which raises ethical concerns. Building upon accumulating data about this practice, a multidisciplinary group argues that there is a need to increase transparency of the practice through active disclosure.

Background: Surveillance estimates of SARS-CoV-2 infections over time have relied on mandatory clinician and laboratory reporting. These estimates increasingly underestimated true viral incidence due to asymptomatic infections, variable access to testing, and self-administered diagnostics. To overcome these limitations, the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services partnered with academic researchers to conduct three concurrent population-based longitudinal cohort studies in three distinct North Carolina counties to offer more accurate estimates of the incidence, prevalence, and vaccination rates for SARS-CoV-2. Methods: We enrolled and followed adult residents of three North Carolina counties from August 2020-February 2022. Demographic and health information was collected in biweekly surveys. Nasal swabs were collected biweekly and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using PCR testing. Blood samples were collected monthly and tested for antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid and spike proteins. We calculated monthly seroprevalence, sero-incidence, PCR test positivity, and vaccination uptake. Results: We enrolled 646 participants. Routine blood samples and nasal swab samples were contributed by 639 and 642 participants, respectively. By February 2022, 98% (95% CI: 97.4–98.2) had antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, and 13% (95% CI: 12.4–14.2) had antibodies to the nucleocapsid protein, indicating viral exposure. PCR testing detected infection among 14% (95% CI: 13.1–15.0) of participants, but cumulative PCR test positivity was only 1.3% (95% CI: 1.2–1.4). Over half of PCR-detected infections were asymptomatic. By February 2022, 97% of participants had completed the primary vaccine series, and 52% had received a booster dose. Conclusions: Nearly all participants had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies by the end of follow-up, primarily through vaccination. The incidence of PCR-detected infections was similar to antibody testing, but PCR test positivity substantially underestimated incident infections. These findings emphasize the importance of prospective infection monitoring via antibody testing in a comprehensive approach to tracking viral infections in the community setting.