The science around the use of masks by the public to impede COVID-19 transmission is advancing rapidly. In this narrative review, we develop an analytical framework to examine mask usage, synthesizing the relevant literature to inform multiple areas: population impact, transmission characteristics, source control, wearer protection, sociological considerations, and implementation considerations. A primary route of transmission of COVID-19 is via respiratory particles, and it is known to be transmissible from presymptomatic, paucisymptomatic, and asymptomatic individuals. Reducing disease spread requires two things: limiting contacts of infected individuals via physical distancing and other measures and reducing the transmission probability per contact. The preponderance of evidence indicates that mask wearing reduces transmissibility per contact by reducing transmission of infected respiratory particles in both laboratory and clinical contexts. Public mask wearing is most effective at reducing spread of the virus when compliance is high. Given the current shortages of medical masks, we recommend the adoption of public cloth mask wearing, as an effective form of source control, in conjunction with existing hygiene, distancing, and contact tracing strategies. Because many respiratory particles become smaller due to evaporation, we recommend increasing focus on a previously overlooked aspect of mask usage: mask wearing by infectious people (“source control”) with benefits at the population level, rather than only mask wearing by susceptible people, such as health care workers, with focus on individual outcomes. We recommend that public officials and governments strongly encourage the use of widespread face masks in public, including the use of appropriate regulation.

Predictions of COVID-19 case growth and mortality are critical to the decisions of political leaders, businesses, and individuals grappling with the pandemic. This predictive task is challenging due to the novelty of the virus, limited data, and dynamic political and societal responses. We embed a Bayesian time series model and a random forest algorithm within an epidemiological compartmental model for empirically grounded COVID-19 predictions. The Bayesian case model fits a location-specific curve to the velocity (first derivative) of the log transformed cumulative case count, borrowing strength across geographic locations and incorporating prior information to obtain a posterior distribution for case trajectories. The compartmental model uses this distribution and predicts deaths using a random forest algorithm trained on COVID-19 data and population-level characteristics, yielding daily projections and interval estimates for cases and deaths in U.S. states. We evaluated the model by training it on progressively longer periods of the pandemic and computing its predictive accuracy over 21-day forecasts. The substantial variation in predicted trajectories and associated uncertainty between states is illustrated by comparing three unique locations: New York, Colorado, and West Virginia. The sophistication and accuracy of this COVID-19 model offer reliable predictions and uncertainty estimates for the current trajectory of the pandemic in the U.S. and provide a platform for future predictions as shifting political and societal responses alter its course.

Fine particulate air pollution (PM_2.5) is decreasing in most areas of the United States, except for areas most affected by wildfires, where increasing trends in PM_2.5 can be attributed to wildfire smoke. The frequency and duration of large wildfires and the length of the wildfire season have all increased in recent decades, partially due to climate change, and wildfire risk is projected to increase further in many regions including the western United States. Increasingly, empirical evidence suggests differential health effects from air pollution by class and race; however, few studies have investigated such differential health impacts from air pollution during a wildfire event. We investigated differential risk of respiratory health impacts during the 2008 northern California wildfires by a comprehensive list of socio-economic status (SES), race/ethnicity, and smoking prevalence variables. Regardless of SES level across nine measures of SES, we found significant associations between PM_2.5 and asthma hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits during these wildfires. Differential respiratory health risk was found by SES for ED visits for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease where the highest risks were in ZIP codes with the lowest SES levels. Findings for differential effects by race/ethnicity were less consistent across health outcomes. We found that ZIP codes with higher prevalence of smokers had greater risk of ED visits for asthma and pneumonia. Our study suggests that public health efforts to decrease exposures to high levels of air pollution during wildfires should focus on lower SES communities.

In emerging epidemics, early estimates of key epidemiological characteristics of the disease are critical for guiding public policy. In particular, identifying high-risk population subgroups aids policymakers and health officials in combating the epidemic. This has been challenging during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic because governmental agencies typically release aggregate COVID-19 data as summary statistics of patient demographics. These data may identify disparities in COVID-19 outcomes between broad population subgroups, but do not provide comparisons between more granular population subgroups defined by combinations of multiple demographics. We introduce a method that helps to overcome the limitations of aggregated summary statistics and yields estimates of COVID-19 infection and case fatality rates - key quantities for guiding public policy related to the control and prevention of COVID-19 - for population subgroups across combinations of demographic characteristics. Our approach uses pseudo-likelihood based logistic regression to combine aggregate COVID-19 case and fatality data with population-level demographic survey data to estimate infection and case fatality rates for population subgroups across combinations of demographic characteristics. We illustrate our method on California COVID-19 data to estimate test-based infection and case fatality rates for population subgroups defined by gender, age, and race/ethnicity. Our analysis indicates that in California, males have higher test-based infection rates and test-based case fatality rates across age and race/ethnicity groups, with the gender gap widening with increasing age. Although elderly infected with COVID-19 are at an elevated risk of mortality, the test-based infection rates do not increase monotonically with age. The workforce population, especially, has a higher test-based infection rate than children, adolescents, and other elderly people in their 60-80. LatinX and African Americans have higher test-based infection rates than other race/ethnicity groups. The subgroups with the highest 5 test-based case fatality rates are all-male groups with race as African American, Asian, Multi-race, LatinX, and White, followed by African American females, indicating that African Americans are an especially vulnerable California subpopulation.