Entry screening and multi-layer mitigation of COVID-19 cases for a safe university reopening

  1. Ahmed Elbanna
  2. George N. Wong
  3. Zach J. Weiner
  4. Tong Wang
  5. Hantao Zhang
  6. Zhiru Liu
  7. Alexei Tkachenko
  8. Sergei Maslov
  9. Nigel Goldenfeld

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

We have performed detailed modeling of the COVID-19 epidemic within the State of Illinois at the population level, and within the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign at a more detailed level of description that follows individual students as they go about their educational and social activities.

We ask the following questions:

  • How many COVID-19 cases are expected to be detected by entry screening?

  • Will this initial “bump” in cases be containable using the mitigation steps being undertaken at UIUC?

    • Our answers are:

  • Assuming that there are approximately 45,000 students returning to campus in the week beginning August 15, 2020, our most conservative estimate predicts that a median of 270 ± 90 (minimum-maximum range) COVID-19 positive cases will be detected by entry screening. The earliest estimate for entry screening that we report was made on July 24 th and predicted 198 ± 90 (68% CI) positive cases.

  • If the number of returning students is less, then our estimate just needs to be scaled proportionately.

  • This initial bump will be contained by entry screening initiated isolation and contact tracing, and once the semester is underway, by universal masking, a hybrid teaching model, twice-weekly testing, isolation, contact tracing, quarantining and the use of the Safer Illinois exposure notification app.

    • Article activity feed

    1. ScreenIT

      SciScore for 10.1101/2020.08.29.20184473: (What is this?)

      Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

      Table 1: Rigor

      Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
      Randomizationnot detected.
      Blindingnot detected.
      Power Analysisnot detected.
      Sex as a biological variablenot 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 found bar graphs of continuous data. We recommend replacing bar graphs with more informative graphics, as many different datasets can lead to the same bar graph. The actual data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. For more information, please see Weissgerber et al (2015).

      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.

      About SciScore

      SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

    2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.08.29.20184473 on medRxiv