tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Can Commun Dis Rep
. 2021 Nov 10;47(11):446-460.
doi: 10.14745/ccdr.v47i11a02.
Decision analysis support for evaluating transmission risk of COVID-19 in places where people gather
Valerie Hongoh[SUP] 1 [/SUP], David Maybury[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Jérôme Levesque[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Aamir Fazil[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Ainsley Otten[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Patricia Turgeon[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Lisa Waddell[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Nicholas H Ogden[SUP] 1 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Abstract
Background: The coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has presented an unprecedented public health challenge. Prior to vaccination, non-pharmaceutical interventions, including closures, were necessary to help control the epidemic. With the arrival of variants of concern and insufficient population vaccination coverage, ongoing evaluation of transmission risk in settings and the use of non-pharmaceutical interventions are necessary to help control the epidemic. This study aimed to produce a framework for evaluating transmission risk in settings where individuals gather and inform decision-making.
Methods: A multi-criteria decision analysis process was used to structure the framework. Fifteen criteria were identified as important to consider for COVID-19 transmission risk based on the literature. This list was ranked by experts and then categorized. The analysis was structured by the consensus list of criteria and relative positioning of each criteria within the list to produce sets of factors to consider when assessing transmission risk at gatherings.
Results: Fifteen experts from across Canada participated in ranking the criteria. Strong consensus was found on the relative importance of criteria and this relative consensus was used to create four categories: critical (3 criteria); important (6 criteria); good to consider (5 criteria); and if time permits (1 criterion).
Conclusion: The resulting consensus list and categories constitutes a set of important elements that can be applied to any setting as an objective and transparent framework to assess transmission risk in the venue. In conjunction with further consideration of the local epidemiology of COVID-19, an overall risk of transmission assessment can be established and uniformly implemented.
Keywords: COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; gatherings; systematic evaluation; transmission risk.
. 2021 Nov 10;47(11):446-460.
doi: 10.14745/ccdr.v47i11a02.
Decision analysis support for evaluating transmission risk of COVID-19 in places where people gather
Valerie Hongoh[SUP] 1 [/SUP], David Maybury[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Jérôme Levesque[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Aamir Fazil[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Ainsley Otten[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Patricia Turgeon[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Lisa Waddell[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Nicholas H Ogden[SUP] 1 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 34880707
- PMCID: PMC8601102
- DOI: 10.14745/ccdr.v47i11a02
Abstract
Background: The coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has presented an unprecedented public health challenge. Prior to vaccination, non-pharmaceutical interventions, including closures, were necessary to help control the epidemic. With the arrival of variants of concern and insufficient population vaccination coverage, ongoing evaluation of transmission risk in settings and the use of non-pharmaceutical interventions are necessary to help control the epidemic. This study aimed to produce a framework for evaluating transmission risk in settings where individuals gather and inform decision-making.
Methods: A multi-criteria decision analysis process was used to structure the framework. Fifteen criteria were identified as important to consider for COVID-19 transmission risk based on the literature. This list was ranked by experts and then categorized. The analysis was structured by the consensus list of criteria and relative positioning of each criteria within the list to produce sets of factors to consider when assessing transmission risk at gatherings.
Results: Fifteen experts from across Canada participated in ranking the criteria. Strong consensus was found on the relative importance of criteria and this relative consensus was used to create four categories: critical (3 criteria); important (6 criteria); good to consider (5 criteria); and if time permits (1 criterion).
Conclusion: The resulting consensus list and categories constitutes a set of important elements that can be applied to any setting as an objective and transparent framework to assess transmission risk in the venue. In conjunction with further consideration of the local epidemiology of COVID-19, an overall risk of transmission assessment can be established and uniformly implemented.
Keywords: COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; gatherings; systematic evaluation; transmission risk.