COVID-19 outbreak at a large homeless shelter in Boston: Implications for universal testing
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
The circumstances of homelessness create the potential for rapid transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in this vulnerable population. Upon observing a cluster of COVID-19 cases from a single large homeless shelter in Boston, Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program conducted symptom assessments and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2 among all guests residing at the shelter over a 2-day period. Of 408 participants, 147 (36.0%) were PCR-positive for SARS-CoV-2. COVID-positive individuals were more likely to be male (p<0.001) but did not differ significantly from COVID-negative individuals with respect to other demographic and clinical characteristics. Cough (7.5%), shortness of breath (1.4%), and fever (0.7%) were all uncommon among COVID-positive individuals. Our findings illustrate the rapidity with which COVID-19 can be widely transmitted in a homeless shelter setting and suggest that universal PCR testing, rather than a symptom triggered approach, may be a better strategy for identifying and mitigating COVID-19 among people experiencing homelessness.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.12.20059618: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: This study was exempted by the Partners HealthCare Human Research Committee with a waiver of informed consent.
Consent: This study was exempted by the Partners HealthCare Human Research Committee with a waiver of informed consent.Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this …SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.12.20059618: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: This study was exempted by the Partners HealthCare Human Research Committee with a waiver of informed consent.
Consent: This study was exempted by the Partners HealthCare Human Research Committee with a waiver of informed consent.Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
