DPH note about change from 7-day to 14-day metrics: As of 10/15/2020, this dataset is no longer being updated. Starting on 10/15/2020, these metrics will be calculated using a 14-day average rather than a 7-day average. The new dataset using 14-day averages can be accessed here: https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-case-rate-per-100-000-population-and-perc/hree-nys2

As you know, we are learning more about COVID-19 all the time, including the best ways to measure COVID-19 activity in our communities. CT DPH has decided to shift to 14-day rates because these are more stable, particularly at the town level, as compared to 7-day rates. In addition, since the school indicators were initially published by DPH last summer, CDC has recommended 14-day rates and other states (e.g., Massachusetts) have started to implement 14-day metrics for monitoring COVID transmission as well.

With respect to geography, we also have learned that many people are looking at the town-level data to inform decision making, despite emphasis on the county-level metrics in the published addenda. This is understandable as there has been variation within counties in COVID-19 activity (for example, rates that are higher in one town than in most other towns in the county).

This dataset includes a weekly count and weekly rate per 100,000 population for COVID-19 cases, a weekly count of COVID-19 PCR diagnostic tests, and a weekly percent positivity rate for tests among people living in community settings. Dates are based on date of specimen collection (cases and positivity).

A person is considered a new case only upon their first COVID-19 testing result because a case is defined as an instance or bout of illness. If they are tested again subsequently and are still positive, it still counts toward the test positivity metric but they are not considered another case.

These case and test counts do not include cases or tests among people residing in congregate settings, such as nursing homes, assisted living facilities, or correctional facilities.

These data are updated weekly; the previous week period for each dataset is the previous Sunday-Saturday, known as an MMWR week (https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/document/MMWR_week_overview.pdf). The date listed is the date the dataset was last updated and corresponds to a reporting period of the previous MMWR week. For instance, the data for 8/20/2020 corresponds to a reporting period of 8/9/2020-8/15/2020.

Notes: 9/25/2020: Data for Mansfield and Middletown for the week of Sept 13-19 were unavailable at the time of reporting due to delays in lab reporting.

Note: DPH is updating and streamlining the COVID-19 cases, deaths, and testing data. As of 6/27/2022, the data will be published in four tables instead of twelve.

The COVID-19 Cases, Deaths, and Tests by Day dataset contains cases and test data by date of sample submission. The death data are by date of death. This dataset is updated daily and contains information back to the beginning of the pandemic. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-Cases-Deaths-and-Tests-by-Day/g9vi-2ahj.

The COVID-19 State Metrics dataset contains over 93 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 21, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-State-Level-Data/qmgw-5kp6 .

The COVID-19 County Metrics dataset contains 25 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 16, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-County-Level-Data/ujiq-dy22 .

The COVID-19 Town Metrics dataset contains 16 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 16, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-Town-Level-Data/icxw-cada . To protect confidentiality, if a town has fewer than 5 cases or positive NAAT tests over the past 7 days, those data will be suppressed.

This dataset includes a count and rate per 100,000 population for COVID-19 cases, a count of COVID-19 molecular diagnostic tests, and a percent positivity rate for tests among people living in community settings for the previous two-week period. Dates are based on date of specimen collection (cases and positivity).

A person is considered a new case only upon their first COVID-19 testing result because a case is defined as an instance or bout of illness. If they are tested again subsequently and are still positive, it still counts toward the test positivity metric but they are not considered another case.

Percent positivity is calculated as the number of positive tests among community residents conducted during the 14 days divided by the total number of positive and negative tests among community residents during the same period. If someone was tested more than once during that 14 day period, then those multiple test results (regardless of whether they were positive or negative) are included in the calculation.

These case and test counts do not include cases or tests among people residing in congregate settings, such as nursing homes, assisted living facilities, or correctional facilities.

These data are updated weekly and reflect the previous two full Sunday-Saturday (MMWR) weeks (https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/document/MMWR_week_overview.pdf).

DPH note about change from 7-day to 14-day metrics: Prior to 10/15/2020, these metrics were calculated using a 7-day average rather than a 14-day average. The 7-day metrics are no longer being updated as of 10/15/2020 but the archived dataset can be accessed here: https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-case-rate-per-100-000-population-and-perc/s22x-83rd

As you know, we are learning more about COVID-19 all the time, including the best ways to measure COVID-19 activity in our communities. CT DPH has decided to shift to 14-day rates because these are more stable, particularly at the town level, as compared to 7-day rates. In addition, since the school indicators were initially published by DPH last summer, CDC has recommended 14-day rates and other states (e.g., Massachusetts) have started to implement 14-day metrics for monitoring COVID transmission as well.

With respect to geography, we also have learned that many people are looking at the town-level data to inform decision making, despite emphasis on the county-level metrics in the published addenda. This is understandable as there has been variation within counties in COVID-19 activity (for example, rates that are higher in one town than in most other towns in the county).

Additional notes: As of 11/5/2020, CT DPH has added antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2 to reported test counts in this dataset. The tests included in this dataset include both molecular and antigen datasets. Molecular tests reported include polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and nucleic acid amplicfication (NAAT) tests.

The population data used to calculate rates is based on the CT DPH population statistics for 2019, which is available online here: https://portal.ct.gov/DPH/Health-Information-Systems--Reporting/Population/Population-Statistics. Prior to 5/10/2021, the population estimates from 2018 were used.

Data suppression is applied when the rate is <5 cases per 100,000 or if there are <5 cases within the town. Information on why data suppression rules are applied can be found online here: https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/uscs/technical_notes/stat_methods/suppression.htm

DPH is updating and streamlining the COVID-19 cases, deaths, and testing data. As of 6/27/2022, the data will be published in four tables instead of twelve. The COVID-19 Cases, Deaths, and Tests by Day dataset contains cases and test data by date of sample submission. The death data are by date of death. This dataset is updated daily and contains information back to the beginning of the pandemic. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-Cases-Deaths-and-Tests-by-Day/g9vi-2ahj. The COVID-19 State Metrics dataset contains over 93 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 21, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-State-Level-Data/qmgw-5kp6 . The COVID-19 County Metrics dataset contains 25 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 16, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-County-Level-Data/ujiq-dy22 . The COVID-19 Town Metrics dataset contains 16 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 16, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-Town-Level-Data/icxw-cada . To protect confidentiality, if a town has fewer than 5 cases or positive NAAT tests over the past 7 days, those data will be suppressed. COVID-19 cases, tests, and associated deaths from COVID-19 that have been reported among Connecticut residents. All data in this report are preliminary; data for previous dates will be updated as new reports are received and data errors are corrected. Deaths reported to the either the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (OCME) or Department of Public Health (DPH) are included in the daily COVID-19 update. The case rate per 100,000 includes probable and confirmed cases. Probable and confirmed are defined using the CSTE case definition, which is available online: https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.cste.org/resource/resmgr/2020ps/Interim-20-ID-01_COVID-19.pdf The population data used to calculate rates is based on the CT DPH population statistics for 2019, which is available online here: https://portal.ct.gov/DPH/Health-Information-Systems--Reporting/Population/Population-Statistics. Prior to 5/10/2021, the population estimates from 2018 were used. Data on Connecticut deaths were obtained from the Connecticut Deaths Registry maintained by the DPH Office of Vital Records. Cause of death was determined by a death certifier (e.g., physician, APRN, medical examiner) using their best clinical judgment. Additionally, all COVID-19 deaths, including suspected or related, are required to be reported to OCME. On April 4, 2020, CT DPH and OCME released a joint memo to providers and facilities within Connecticut providing guidelines for certifying deaths due to COVID-19 that were consistent with the CDC’s guidelines and a reminder of the required reporting to OCME.25,26 As of July 1, 2021, OCME had reviewed every case reported and performed additional investigation on about one-third of reported deaths to better ascertain if COVID-19 did or did not cause or contribute to the death. Some of these investigations resulted in the OCME performing postmortem swabs for PCR testing on individuals whose deaths were suspected to be due to COVID-19, but antemortem diagnosis was unable to be made.31 The OCME issued or re-issued about 10% of COVID-19 death certificates and, when appropriate, removed COVID-19 from the death certificate. For standardization and tabulation of mortality statistics, written cause of death statements made by the certifiers on death certificates are sent to the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) at the CDC which assigns cause of death codes according to the International Causes of Disease 10th Revision (ICD-10) classification system.25,26 CO

DPH note about change from 7-day to 14-day metrics:

As of 10/15/2020, this dataset is no longer being updated. Starting on 10/15/2020, the school learning model indicator metrics will be calculated using a 14-day average rather than a 7-day average. The new school learning model indicators dataset using 14-day averages can be accessed here: https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/CT-School-Learning-Model-Indicators-by-County-14-d/e4bh-ax24

As you know, we are learning more about COVID-19 all the time, including the best ways to measure COVID-19 activity in our communities. CT DPH has decided to shift to 14-day rates because these are more stable, particularly at the town level, as compared to 7-day rates. In addition, since the school indicators were initially published by DPH last summer, CDC has recommended 14-day rates and other states (e.g., Massachusetts) have started to implement 14-day metrics for monitoring COVID transmission as well.

With respect to geography, we also have learned that many people are looking at the town-level data to inform decision making, despite emphasis on the county-level metrics in the published addenda. This is understandable as there has been variation within counties in COVID-19 activity (for example, rates that are higher in one town than in most other towns in the county).

This dataset includes the leading and secondary metrics identified by the Connecticut Department of Health (DPH) and the Department of Education (CSDE) to support local district decision-making on the level of in-person, hybrid (blended), and remote learning model for Pre K-12 education.

Data represent daily averages for each week by date of specimen collection (cases and positivity), date of hospital admission, or date of ED visit. Hospitalization data come from the Connecticut Hospital Association and are based on hospital location, not county of patient residence. COVID-19-like illness includes fever and cough or shortness of breath or difficulty breathing or the presence of coronavirus diagnosis code and excludes patients with influenza-like illness. All data are preliminary.

These data are updated weekly; the previous week period for each dataset is the previous Sunday-Saturday, known as an MMWR week (https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/document/MMWRweekoverview.pdf). The date listed is the date the dataset was last updated and corresponds to a reporting period of the previous MMWR week. For instance, the data for 8/20/2020 corresponds to a reporting period of 8/9/2020-8/15/2020.

These metrics were adapted from recommendations by the Harvard Global Institute and supplemented by existing DPH measures.

For national data on COVID-19, see COVID View, the national weekly surveillance summary of U.S. COVID-19 activity, at https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/covidview/index.html

Notes:

9/25/2020: Data for Mansfield and Middletown for the week of Sept 13-19 were unavailable at the time of reporting due to delays in lab reporting.

Splitgraph serves as an HTTP API that lets you run SQL queries directly on this data to power Web applications. For example:

See the Splitgraph documentation for more information.

June 8, 2023: Daily transmission is no longer available.

Summary of COVID-19 statistics for Connecticut correctional facilities including:

Total # of Staff Positive for COVID-19 Total # of Inmates Pos. for COVID-19 COVID-19 Pos. Inmates Housed at Northern CI Medical Isolation Unit COVID-19 Pos. Inmates Housed at MacDougall-Walker Medical Isolation Unit COVID-19 Pos. Staff Returned to Work Total # of Inmates Medically Cleared Total # of COVID-19 Pos. Inmate Deaths

More information can be found on the DOC website: https://portal.ct.gov/DOC/Common-Elements/Common-Elements/Health-Information-and-Advisories

Data will be updated every weekday.

Additional notes: The data on 7/15 reflects a decrease in the number of inmates testing positive for COVID-19 and those who have recovered; this decrease was due to an internal data audit that led to the removal of some duplicate information.

The data on 6/2/2020 reflects an increase in the number of inmates who had been medically cleared; this increase was the result of 146 asymptomatic positive inmates who had completed a 14-day isolation period.

Note: DPH is updating and streamlining the COVID-19 cases, deaths, and testing data. As of 6/27/2022, the data will be published in four tables instead of twelve.

The COVID-19 Cases, Deaths, and Tests by Day dataset contains cases and test data by date of sample submission. The death data are by date of death. This dataset is updated daily and contains information back to the beginning of the pandemic. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-Cases-Deaths-and-Tests-by-Day/g9vi-2ahj.

The COVID-19 State Metrics dataset contains over 93 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 21, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-State-Level-Data/qmgw-5kp6 .

The COVID-19 County Metrics dataset contains 25 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 16, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-County-Level-Data/ujiq-dy22 .

The COVID-19 Town Metrics dataset contains 16 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 16, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-Town-Level-Data/icxw-cada . To protect confidentiality, if a town has fewer than 5 cases or positive NAAT tests over the past 7 days, those data will be suppressed.

COVID-19 cases and associated deaths that have been reported among Connecticut residents, broken down by race and ethnicity. All data in this report are preliminary; data for previous dates will be updated as new reports are received and data errors are corrected. Deaths reported to the either the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (OCME) or Department of Public Health (DPH) are included in the COVID-19 update.

The following data show the number of COVID-19 cases and associated deaths per 100,000 population by race and ethnicity. Crude rates represent the total cases or deaths per 100,000 people. Age-adjusted rates consider the age of the person at diagnosis or death when estimating the rate and use a standardized population to provide a fair comparison between population groups with different age distributions. Age-adjustment is important in Connecticut as the median age of among the non-Hispanic white population is 47 years, whereas it is 34 years among non-Hispanic blacks, and 29 years among Hispanics. Because most non-Hispanic white residents who died were over 75 years of age, the age-adjusted rates are lower than the unadjusted rates. In contrast, Hispanic residents who died tend to be younger than 75 years of age which results in higher age-adjusted rates.

The population data used to calculate rates is based on the CT DPH population statistics for 2019, which is available online here: https://portal.ct.gov/DPH/Health-Information-Systems--Reporting/Population/Population-Statistics. Prior to 5/10/2021, the population estimates from 2018 were used.

Rates are standardized to the 2000 US Millions Standard population (data available here: https://seer.cancer.gov/stdpopulations/). Standardization was done using 19 age groups (0, 1-4, 5-9, 10-14, ..., 80-84, 85 years and older). More information about direct standardization for age adjustment is available here: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/statnt/statnt06rv.pdf

Categories are mutually exclusive. The category “multiracial” includes people who answered ‘yes’ to more than one race category. Counts may not add up to total case counts as data on race and ethnicity may be missing. Age adjusted rates calculated only for groups with more than 20 deaths. Abbreviation: NH=Non-Hispanic.

Data on Connecticut deaths were obtained from the Connecticut Deaths Registry maintained by the DPH Office of Vital Records. Cause of death was determined by a death certifier (e.g., physician, APRN, medical

Splitgraph serves as an HTTP API that lets you run SQL queries directly on this data to power Web applications. For example:

See the Splitgraph documentation for more information.

NOTE: This dataset pertains only to the 2020-2021 school year and is no longer being updated. For additional data on COVID-19, visit data.ct.gov/coronavirus.

This dataset includes the leading and secondary metrics identified by the Connecticut Department of Health (DPH) and the Department of Education (CSDE) to support local district decision-making on the level of in-person, hybrid (blended), and remote learning model for Pre K-12 education.

Data represent daily averages for two-week periods by date of specimen collection (cases and positivity), date of hospital admission, or date of ED visit. Hospitalization data come from the Connecticut Hospital Association and are based on hospital location, not county of patient residence. COVID-19-like illness includes fever and cough or shortness of breath or difficulty breathing or the presence of coronavirus diagnosis code and excludes patients with influenza-like illness. All data are preliminary.

These data are updated weekly and reflect the previous two full Sunday-Saturday (MMWR) weeks (https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/document/MMWR_week_overview.pdf).

These metrics were adapted from recommendations by the Harvard Global Institute and supplemented by existing DPH measures.

For national data on COVID-19, see COVID View, the national weekly surveillance summary of U.S. COVID-19 activity, at https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/covidview/index.html

DPH note about change from 7-day to 14-day metrics: Prior to 10/15/2020, these metrics were calculated using a 7-day average rather than a 14-day average. The 7-day metrics are no longer being updated as of 10/15/2020 but the archived dataset can be accessed here: https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/CT-School-Learning-Model-Indicators-by-County/rpph-4ysy

As you know, we are learning more about COVID-19 all the time, including the best ways to measure COVID-19 activity in our communities. CT DPH has decided to shift to 14-day rates because these are more stable, particularly at the town level, as compared to 7-day rates. In addition, since the school indicators were initially published by DPH last summer, CDC has recommended 14-day rates and other states (e.g., Massachusetts) have started to implement 14-day metrics for monitoring COVID transmission as well.

With respect to geography, we also have learned that many people are looking at the town-level data to inform decision making, despite emphasis on the county-level metrics in the published addenda. This is understandable as there has been variation within counties in COVID-19 activity (for example, rates that are higher in one town than in most other towns in the county).

Note: DPH is updating and streamlining the COVID-19 cases, deaths, and testing data. As of 6/27/2022, the data will be published in four tables instead of twelve. The COVID-19 Cases, Deaths, and Tests by Day dataset contains cases and test data by date of sample submission. The death data are by date of death. This dataset is updated daily and contains information back to the beginning of the pandemic. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-Cases-Deaths-and-Tests-by-Day/g9vi-2ahj. The COVID-19 State Metrics dataset contains over 93 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 21, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-State-Level-Data/qmgw-5kp6 . The COVID-19 County Metrics dataset contains 25 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 16, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-County-Level-Data/ujiq-dy22 . The COVID-19 Town Metrics dataset contains 16 columns of data. This dataset is updated daily and currently contains information starting June 16, 2022 to the present. The data can be found at https://data.ct.gov/Health-and-Human-Services/COVID-19-Town-Level-Data/icxw-cada . To protect confidentiality, if a town has fewer than 5 cases or positive NAAT tests over the past 7 days, those data will be suppressed. COVID-19 cases and associated deaths that have been reported among Connecticut residents, broken out by age group. All data in this report are preliminary; data for previous dates will be updated as new reports are received and data errors are corrected. Deaths reported to the either the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (OCME) or Department of Public Health (DPH) are included in the daily COVID-19 update. Data are reported daily, with timestamps indicated in the daily briefings posted at: portal.ct.gov/coronavirus. Data are subject to future revision as reporting changes. Starting in July 2020, this dataset will be updated every weekday. Additional notes: A delay in the data pull schedule occurred on 06/23/2020. Data from 06/22/2020 was processed on 06/23/2020 at 3:30 PM. The normal data cycle resumed with the data for 06/23/2020. A network outage on 05/19/2020 resulted in a change in the data pull schedule. Data from 5/19/2020 was processed on 05/20/2020 at 12:00 PM. Data from 5/20/2020 was processed on 5/20/2020 8:30 PM. The normal data cycle resumed on 05/20/2020 with the 8:30 PM data pull. As a result of the network outage, the timestamp on the datasets on the Open Data Portal differ from the timestamp in DPH's daily PDF reports. Starting 5/10/2021, the date field will represent the date this data was updated on data.ct.gov. Previously the date the data was pulled by DPH was listed, which typically coincided with the date before the data was published on data.ct.gov. This change was made to standardize the COVID-19 data sets on data.ct.gov.

Analysis of the proposed model in the COVID-CT dataset.

Correlation between clinical laboratory data and CT severity score in COVID-19 patients at Fayoum University Hospital in Egypt.

The COVID-19 pandemic has been part of Slovakia since March 2020. Intensive laboratory testing ended in October 2022, when the number of tests dropped significantly, but the state of the pandemic continues to this day. For the management of COVID-19, it is important to find an indicator that can predict pandemic changes in the community. The average daily/weekly Ct value with a certain time delay can predict changes in the number of cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection, which can be a useful indicator for the healthcare system. The study analyzed the results of 1,420,572 RT-qPCR tests provided by one accredited laboratory during the ongoing pandemic in Slovakia from March 2020 to September 2022. The total positivity of the analyzed tests was 24.64%. The average Ct values found were the highest in the age group of 3–5 years, equal to the number 30.75; the lowest were in the age group >65 years, equal to the number 27. The average weekly Ct values ranged from 22.33 (pandemic wave week) to 30.12 (summer week). We have summarized the results of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic testing in Slovakia with the scope defined by the rate and positivity of tests carried out at Medirex a.s. laboratories.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to provide a basis for epidemic prevention and control measures as well as the management of re-positive personnel by analyzing and summarizing the characteristics of re-positive patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Delta variant infections discharged from a hospital in the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region in 2021.MethodsThis case-control study included a total of 45 patients with Delta variant infections diagnosed in the Fourth People's Hospital of the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region between October 17 and November 28, 2021. Based on the nucleic acid test results post-discharge, the patients were dichotomized into re-positive and non-re-positive groups. Based on the time of the first re-positive test, the re-positive group was further divided into <7 and ≥7 days groups to compare their clinical characteristics and explore the possible influencing factors of this re-positivity.ResultsOf the 45 total patients, 16 were re-positive (re-positivity rate: 35.6%), including four patients who were re-positive after 2 weeks (re-positivity rate: 8.8%). The median time of the first re-positive after discharge was 7 days (IQR: 14-3). The re-positive group was younger than the non-re-positive group (35 vs. 53, P < 0.05), had a higher proportion of patients who were not receiving antiviral therapy (56.2 vs. 17.2%, P < 0.05). The median CT value of nucleic acid in the re-positive group was considerably greater than that at admission (36.7 vs. 22.6 P < 0.05). The findings demonstrated that neutralizing antibody treatment significantly raised the average IgG antibody level in patients, particularly in those who had not received COVID-19 vaccine (P < 0.05). The median lowest nucleic acid CT value of the ≥7 days group during the re-positive period and the immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody level at discharge were lower than those in the <7 days group (P < 0.05). When compared to the non-positive group, patients in the ≥7 days group had a higher median virus nucleic acid CT value (27.1 vs. 19.2, P < 0.05) and absolute number of lymphocytes at admission (1,360 vs. 952, P < 0.05), and a lower IgG antibody level at discharge (P < 0.05).ConclusionsIn conclusion, this study found that: (1) The re-positivity rate of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant infection in this group was 35.6%, while the re-positivity rate was the same as that of the original strain 2 weeks after discharge (8.0%). (2) Young people, patients who did not use antiviral therapy or had low IgG antibody levels at discharge were more likely to have re-positive. And the CT value of nucleic acid at the time of initial infection was higher in re-positive group. We speculated that the higher the CT value of nucleic acid at the time of initial infection, the longer the intermittent shedding time of the virus. (3) Re-positive patients were asymptomatic. The median CT value of nucleic acid was > 35 at the re-positive time, and the close contacts were not detected as positive. The overall transmission risk of re-positive patients is low.

BackgroundThe 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic remains rampant in many countries/regions. Improving the positive detection rate of COVID-19 infection is an important measure for the control and prevention of this pandemic. This meta-analysis aims to systematically summarize the current characteristics of the computed tomography (CT) auxiliary screening methods for COVID-19 infection in the real world.MethodsWeb of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, CNKI, and Wanfang databases were searched for relevant articles published prior to 1 September 2022. Data on specificity, sensitivity, positive/negative likelihood ratio, area under curve (AUC), and diagnostic odds ratio (dOR) were calculated purposefully.ResultsOne hundred and fifteen studies were included with 51,500 participants in the meta-analysis. Among these studies, the pooled estimates for AUC of CT in confirmed cases, and CT in suspected cases to predict COVID-19 diagnosis were 0.76 and 0.85, respectively. The CT in confirmed cases dOR was 5.51 (95% CI: 3.78–8.02). The CT in suspected cases dOR was 13.12 (95% CI: 11.07–15.55).ConclusionOur findings support that CT detection may be the main auxiliary screening method for COVID-19 infection in the real world.

Early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection is key to managing the current global pandemic, as evidence shows the virus is most contagious on or before symptom onset. Here, we introduce a low-cost, high-throughput method for diagnosing and studying SARS-CoV-2 infection. Dubbed Pathogen-Oriented Low-Cost Assembly & Re-Sequencing (POLAR), this method amplifies the entirety of the SARS-CoV-2 genome. This contrasts with typical RT-PCR-based diagnostic tests, which amplify only a few loci. To achieve this goal, we combine a SARS-CoV-2 enrichment method developed by the ARTIC Network (https://artic.network/) with short-read DNA sequencing and de novo genome assembly. Using this method, we can reliably (>95% accuracy) detect SARS-CoV-2 at a concentration of 84 genome equivalents per milliliter (GE/mL). The vast majority of diagnostic methods meeting our analytical criteria that are currently authorized for use by the United States Food and Drug Administration with the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Emergency Use Authorization require higher concentrations of the virus to achieve this degree of sensitivity and specificity. In addition, we can reliably assemble the SARS-CoV-2 genome in the sample, often with no gaps and perfect accuracy given sufficient viral load. The genotypic data in these genome assemblies enable the more effective analysis of disease spread than is possible with an ordinary binary diagnostic. These data can also help identify vaccine and drug targets. Finally, we show that the diagnoses obtained using POLAR of positive and negative clinical nasal mid-turbinate swab samples 100% match those obtained in a clinical diagnostic lab using the Center for Disease Control’s 2019-Novel Coronavirus test. Using POLAR, a single person can manually process 192 samples over an 8-hour experiment at the cost of ~$36 per patient (as of December 7th, 2022), enabling a 24-hour turnaround with sequencing and data analysis time. We anticipate that further testing and refinement will allow greater sensitivity using this approach.

In 2019, the novel coronavirus swept the world, exposing the monitoring and early warning problems of the medical system. Computer-aided diagnosis models based on deep learning have good universality and can well alleviate these problems. However, traditional image processing methods may lead to high false positive rates, which is unacceptable in disease monitoring and early warning. This paper proposes a low false positive rate disease detection method based on COVID-19 lung images and establishes a two-stage optimization model. In the first stage, the model is trained using classical gradient descent, and relevant features are extracted; in the second stage, an objective function that minimizes the false positive rate is constructed to obtain a network model with high accuracy and low false positive rate. Therefore, the proposed method has the potential to effectively classify medical images. The proposed model was verified using a public COVID-19 radiology dataset and a public COVID-19 lung CT scan dataset. The results show that the model has made significant progress, with the false positive rate reduced to 11.3% and 7.5%, and the area under the ROC curve increased to 92.8% and 97.01%.

Clinical laboratory data of patients included in the study.

Chest CT and PFTs among COVID-19 survivors at the follow-up.

BackgroundMicrovascular lung vessels obstructive thromboinflammatory syndrome has been proposed as a possible mechanism of respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients. However, it has only been observed in post-mortem studies and has never been documented in vivo, probably because of a lack of CT scan sensitivity in small pulmonary arteries. The aim of the present study was to assess the safety, tolerability, and diagnostic value of optical coherence tomography (OCT) for the assessment of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia for pulmonary microvascular thromboinflammatory syndrome.MethodsThe COVID-OCT trial was a multicenter, open-label, prospective, interventional clinical study. Two cohorts of patients were included in the study and underwent pulmonary OCT evaluation. Cohort A consisted of patients with COVID-19 with a negative CT scan for pulmonary thrombosis and elevated thromboinflammatory markers (D-dimer > 10,000 ng/mL or 5,000 < D-dimer < 10,000 ng/mL and one of: C-reactive Protein > 100 mg/dL, IL-6 > 6 pg/mL, or ferritin > 900 ng/L). Cohort B consisted of patients with COVID-19 and a CT scan positive for pulmonary thrombosis. The primary endpoints of the study were: (i) to evaluate the overall safety of OCT investigation in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, and (ii) to report on the potential value of OCT as a novel diagnostic tool for the diagnosis of microvascular pulmonary thrombosis in COVID-19 patients.ResultsA total of 13 patients were enrolled. The mean number of OCT runs performed in each patient was 6.1 ± 2.0, both in ground glass and healthy lung areas, achieving a good evaluation of the distal pulmonary arteries. Overall, OCT runs identified microvascular thrombosis in 8 patients (61.5%): 5 cases of red thrombus, 1 case of white thrombus, and 2 cases of mixed thrombus. In Cohort A, the minimal lumen area was 3.5 ± 4.6 mm2, with stenosis of 60.9 ± 35.9% of the area, and the mean length of thrombus-containing lesions was 5.4 ± 3.0 mm. In Cohort B, the percentage area obstruction was 92.6 ± 2.6, and the mean thrombus-containing lesion length was 14.1 ± 13.9 mm. No peri-procedural complications occurred in any of the 13 patients.ConclusionOCT appears to be a safe and accurate method of evaluating the distal pulmonary arteries in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Here, it enabled the first in vivo documentation of distal pulmonary arterial thrombosis in patients with elevated thromboinflammatory markers, even when their CT angiogram was negative for pulmonary thrombosis.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov, identifier NCT04410549.

BackgroundHypoxia is a potentially life-threatening condition that can be seen in pneumonia patients.ObjectiveWe aimed to develop and test an automatic assessment of lung impairment in COVID-19 associated pneumonia with machine learning regression models that predict markers of respiratory and cardiovascular functioning from radiograms and lung CT.Materials and MethodsWe enrolled a total of 605 COVID-19 cases admitted to Al Ain Hospital from 24 February to 1 July 2020 into the study. The inclusion criteria were as follows: age ≥ 18 years; inpatient admission; PCR positive for SARS-CoV-2; lung CT available at PACS. We designed a CNN-based regression model to predict systemic oxygenation markers from lung CT and 2D diagnostic images of the chest. The 2D images generated by averaging CT scans were analogous to the frontal and lateral view radiograms. The functional (heart and breath rate, blood pressure) and biochemical findings (SpO2, HCO3-, K+, Na+, anion gap, C-reactive protein) served as ground truth.ResultsRadiologic findings in the lungs of COVID-19 patients provide reliable assessments of functional status with clinical utility. If fed to ML models, the sagittal view radiograms reflect dyspnea more accurately than the coronal view radiograms due to the smaller size and the lower model complexity. Mean absolute error of the models trained on single-projection radiograms was approximately 11÷12% and it dropped by 0.5÷1% if both projections were used (11.97 ± 9.23 vs. 11.43 ± 7.51%; p = 0.70). Thus, the ML regression models based on 2D images acquired in multiple planes had slightly better performance. The data blending approach was as efficient as the voting regression technique: 10.90 ± 6.72 vs. 11.96 ± 8.30%, p = 0.94. The models trained on 3D images were more accurate than those on 2D: 8.27 ± 4.13 and 11.75 ± 8.26%, p = 0.14 before lung extraction; 10.66 ± 5.83 and 7.94 ± 4.13%, p = 0.18 after the extraction. The lung extraction boosts 3D model performance unsubstantially (from 8.27 ± 4.13 to 7.94 ± 4.13%; p = 0.82). However, none of the differences between 3D and 2D were statistically significant.ConclusionThe constructed ML algorithms can serve as models of structure-function association and pathophysiologic changes in COVID-19. The algorithms can improve risk evaluation and disease management especially after oxygen therapy that changes functional findings. Thus, the structural assessment of acute lung injury speaks of disease severity.

Performance metrics (on testset) of deep learning models on Dataset 2 (CT Scans for COVID-19 detection).