ABSTRACT
Objectives With the availability of COVID-19 vaccines, public health focus is shifting to post-vaccination surveillance to identify breakthrough infections in vaccinated populations. Therefore, the objectives of these reviews are to identify scientific evidence and international guidance on surveillance and testing approaches to monitor the presence of the virus in a vaccinated population.
Method We searched Ovid MEDLINE®, including Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase, EBM Reviews - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EBM Reviews - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We also searched the Web of Science Core Collection. A grey literature search was also conducted. This search was limited to studies conducted since December 2020 and current to June 13th, 2021. There were no language limitations. COVID-19 surveillance studies that were published after December 2020 but did not specify whether they tested a vaccinated population were also considered for inclusion.
For the international guidance review, a grey literature search was conducted, including a thorough search of Google, websites of international government organizations (e.g., Center for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], World Health Organization [WHO]), and McMaster Health Forum (CoVID-END). This search was primarily examining surveillance guidance published since December 2020 (to capture guidance specific to vaccinations) and any relevant pre-December 2020 guidance.
Results Thirty-three studies were included for data synthesis of scientific evidence on surveillance of COVID-19. All the studies were published between April and June 2021. Twenty-one studies were from peer-reviewed journals. Five approaches to monitoring post-vaccination COVID-19 cases and emerging variants of concern were identified, including screening with reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and/or a rapid antigen test, genomic surveillance, wastewater surveillance, metagenomics, and testing of air filters on public buses. For population surveillance, the following considerations and limitations were observed: variability in person-to-person testing frequency; lower sensitivity of antigen tests; timing of infections relative to PCR testing can result in missed infections; large studies may fail to identify local variations; and loss of interest in testing by participants in long follow-up studies.
Through comprehensive grey literature searching, 68 international guidance documents were captured for full-text review. A total of 26 documents met the inclusion criteria and were included in our synthesis. Seven overarching surveillance methods emerged in the literature. PCR-testing was the most recommended surveillance method, followed by genomic screening, serosurveillance, wastewater surveillance, antigen testing, health record screening, and syndromic surveillance.
Conclusion Evidence for post-vaccination COVID-19 surveillance was derived from studies in partially or fully vaccinated populations. Population PCR screening, supplemented by rapid antigen tests, was the most frequently used surveillance method and also the most commonly recommended across jurisdictions. Most recent guidance on COVID-19 surveillance is not specific to vaccinated individuals, or it is in effect but has not yet been updated to reflect that. Therefore, more evidence-informed guidance on testing and surveillance approaches in a vaccinated population that incorporates all testing modalities is required.
Objectives With the availability of COVID-19 vaccines, public health focus is shifting to post-vaccination surveillance to identify breakthrough infections in vaccinated populations. Therefore, the objectives of these reviews are to: 1) identify scientific evidence on surveillance and testing approaches to monitor the presence of the virus in a vaccinated population and determine how these influence testing strategies; 2) identify international guidance on testing and surveillance for COVID-19 and its variants of concern in a vaccinated population; and 3) identify emerging technologies for surveillance.
Design A rapid review was conducted to identify scientific evidence on COVID-19 surveillance and testing approaches, and a targeted literature review was conducted on international guidance.
Method We searched Ovid MEDLINE®, including Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase, EBM Reviews - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EBM Reviews - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We also searched the Web of Science Core Collection. We performed all searches on June 13, 2021. A grey literature search was also conducted, including: MedRxiv, Google, McMaster Health Forum (COVID-END), and websites of international government organizations (e.g., Center for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], World Health Organization [WHO]). This search was limited to studies conducted since December 2020 and current to June 13th, 2021. There were no language limitations. COVID-19 surveillance studies that were published after December 2020 but did not specify whether they tested a vaccinated population were also considered for inclusion.
For the international guidance review, a grey literature search was conducted, including a thorough search of Google, websites of international government organizations (e.g., Center for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], World Health Organization [WHO]), and McMaster Health Forum (CoVID-END). This search was primarily examining surveillance guidance published since December 2020 (to capture guidance specific to vaccinations) and any relevant pre-December 2020 guidance. Although the primary focus was on surveillance guidance in a vaccinated population, guidance that was published after December 2020 but was not vaccine-specific was also considered for inclusion; it was assumed that this guidance was still in effect and was not yet updated. There were no language limitations. A patient partner was engaged during the co-production of a plain language summary for both the rapid review of primary literature and the review of international guidance.
Results Thirty-three studies were included for data synthesis of scientific evidence on surveillance of COVID-19. All the studies were published between April and June 2021. Twenty-one studies were from peer-reviewed journals. Five approaches to monitoring post-vaccination COVID-19 cases and emerging variants of concern were identified including, screening with reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and/or a rapid antigen test, genomic surveillance, wastewater surveillance, metagenomics, and testing of air filters on public buses. Population surveillance with RT-PCR testing and/or rapid antigen testing was utilized in 22 studies, mostly in healthcare settings, but also in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) and in the community. The frequency of testing varied depending on whether there was an outbreak.
For population surveillance, the following considerations and limitations were observed: studies with discretionary access to testing have highly variable person-to-person testing frequency; antigen tests have lower sensitivity, therefore some positive cases may be missed; timing of infections relative to PCR testing as well as the sensitivity of the tests can result in missed infections; large sample sizes from multicentre studies increase generalizability, but fail to identify local variations from individual centres; with electronic database surveillance, it is difficult to confirm whether patients with a breakthrough infection and a previous positive SARS-CoV-2 test result had a true reinfection or had prolonged shedding from the previous infection; and participants lose interest in studies with long follow-up, with decrease in testing rates over time.
Six wastewater surveillance and three genomic surveillance studies were identified in this review. A number of benefits such as, good correlation with clinical data, ability to predict major outbreaks, and rapid turnaround time were observed with wastewater surveillance. However, challenges such as, inconsistencies in variant representation depending on where the samples were taken within the community, differences in the capacity of wastewater to predict case numbers based on the size of the wastewater treatment plants, and cost, were noted. Emerging technologies like viral detection in public transport filters, novel sampling, and assay platforms were also identified.
Through comprehensive grey literature searching, 68 international guidance documents were captured for full-text review. A total of 26 documents met the inclusion criteria and were included in our synthesis. Most were not specific to vaccinated populations but reported on a surveillance method of COVID-19 and were therefore included in the review; it was assumed that they were still in effect but have not yet been updated. Eleven countries/regions were represented, including Australia, Brazil, France, Germany, India, New Zealand, Spain, United Kingdom, United States, Europe, and International. All of the guidance documents included surveillance methods appropriate for community settings. Other settings of interest were healthcare settings, including hospitals and primary care centres, long-term care facilities, points of entry for travel, schools, and other sentinel sites (e.g., prisons and closed settings). Seven overarching surveillance methods emerged in the literature. PCR-testing was the most recommended surveillance method, followed by genomic screening, serosurveillance, wastewater surveillance, antigen testing, health record screening, and syndromic surveillance.
Only one document (published by Public Health England) was identified that provided guidance on surveillance specific to vaccinated populations. The document outlined a plan to surveil and monitor COVID-19 in vaccinated populations through a series of targeted longitudinal studies, routine surveillance, enhanced surveillance, use of electronic health records, surveillance of vaccine failure (including follow-up with viral whole genome sequencing), and sero-surveillance (including blood donor samples, routine blood tests, and residual sera).
Conclusion Evidence for post-vaccination COVID-19 surveillance was derived from studies in partially or fully vaccinated populations. Population PCR screening, supplemented by rapid antigen tests, was the most frequently used surveillance method and also the most commonly recommended across jurisdictions. The selection of testing method and the frequency of testing was determined by the intensity of the disease and the scale of testing. Other common testing methods included wastewater surveillance and genomic surveillance. A few novel technologies are emerging, however, many of these are yet to be utilized in the real-world setting. There is limited evidence-based guidance on surveillance in a vaccinated population. Most recent guidance on COVID-19 surveillance is not specific to vaccinated individuals, or it is in effect but has not yet been updated to reflect that. Therefore, more evidence-informed guidance on testing and surveillance approaches in a vaccinated population that incorporates all testing modalities is required.
Protocol/Topic Registration PROSPERO-CRD42021261215.
Key Definitions Antigen: a foreign protein which induces an immune response in the body, especially the production of antibodies
Fully vaccinated: refers to individuals who have received complete dosage of a given vaccine
Partially vaccinated: refers to individuals who have received an incomplete dosage of a given vaccine
Sero-surveillance: estimation of antibody levels against infectious diseases
Surveillance: ongoing systematic collection, analysis, and interpretation of health data that are essential to the planning, implementation, and evaluation of public health practice
Variants of Concern: a variant for which there is evidence of an increase in transmissibility and/or more severe disease
Variants: virus with a permanent change in its genetic sequence
Introduction
Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). As of June 2021, there have been more than 179,000,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19, which have resulted in more than 3,800,000 confirmed deaths worldwide.1 Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world observational studies have found vaccines to be safe and effective at preventing COVID-19.2 At the time of writing, more than 2,700,000 vaccine doses have been administered across the world, with several countries (e.g., Israel, the UK) approaching the 70% benchmark of having their population fully vaccinated with the goal of reaching herd immunity.1, 3
As the number of partially and fully vaccinated people continues to grow, countries may be pivoting their population-level surveillance methods to capture the presence and resurgence of COVID-19 and its variants of concern (VOCs). RT-PCR testing of nose and throat swabs is a widely used method to identify new cases of COVID-19; however, the ability of RT-PCR testing to slow viral spread may be impacted by slow laboratory turnaround times and restricted availability of the tests.4 As a result, there may be interest in alternative population-level testing modalities that can detect the presence and resurgence of the virus in a setting before an outbreak.
This rapid review aims to answer the following research questions:
What scientific evidence exists on surveillance approaches to monitor the presence of the virus in a fully vaccinated population (i.e., monitoring for resurgence and variants of concern through wastewater surveillance and metagenomics, population screening with rapid antigen testing)? How does this influence testing strategies?
What technologies are emerging to identify infection caused by variants of concern in a vaccinated population?
What international guidance exists on testing and surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 and its variants of concern in a fully vaccinated population?
Recognizing that the evidence on surveillance in fully vaccinated populations may be limited, this review also includes literature assessing surveillance broadly in a partially vaccinated population to ensure that all relevant literature is captured.
Section 1: Scientific Evidence on Surveillance Methods in a Vaccinated Population
Methods
This rapid review is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), number CRD42021261215. An experienced medical information specialist developed and tested the search strategies through an iterative process in consultation with the review team. Another senior information specialist peer reviewed the MEDLINE strategy prior to execution using the PRESS Checklist.5 Using the multifile option and deduplication tool available on the OVID platform, we searched Ovid MEDLINE®, including Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase, EBM Reviews - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EBM Reviews - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We also searched the Web of Science Core Collection. We performed all searches on June 13, 2021.
The strategies utilized a combination of controlled vocabulary (e.g., “COVID-19”, “Epidemiological Monitoring”, “Population Surveillance”) and keywords (e.g., “nCoV”, “vaccinated”, “surveillance”). Vocabulary and syntax were adjusted across the databases (full search strategies included in Appendix A). No language restrictions were applied but results were limited to the publication years 2020 to the present. Results were downloaded and deduplicated using EndNote version 9.3.3 (Clarivate Analytics) and uploaded to Microsoft Word.
A grey literature search was also conducted, including: MedRxiv, Google, McMaster Health Forum (CoVID-END), and websites of international government organizations (e.g., Center for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], World Health Organization [WHO]). This search was limited to studies conducted since December 2020 and current to June 13th, 2021. There were no language limitations.
A screening form based on the eligibility criteria was prepared. Citations identified as potentially relevant from the literature search were screened by single reviewer across a team of four reviewers and subsequently read in full text by two reviewers and assessed for eligibility based on the criteria outlined below (Table 1). Discrepancies were resolved by discussion or by a third reviewer. Reference lists of included studies were hand searched to ensure all relevant literature is captured.
A standardized data extraction sheet was used to extract the month and year of publication, country, study design, surveillance method, variant surveillance, dates of enrollment, vaccination status, population, setting, primary outcomes, and implementation considerations. All reviewers completed a calibration exercise whereby data from two sample studies were extracted by all four reviewers and areas of disagreement were discussed. Data were extracted by one reviewer.
Given the rapid nature of this request, a formal risk of bias assessment was not conducted. A high-level discussion of quality of the evidence (i.e., peer-reviewed vs. preprints) is included below.
Due to the heterogeneity in study designs and outcomes across included studies, data were synthesized narratively; a meta-analysis was not conducted. A high-level summary of the different surveillance methods, populations assessed by the methods, and outcomes is presented in the next section. A patient partner was engaged during the co-production of a plain language summary, which is presented in a separate document.
Results
A total of 1197 articles were identified from database search. After removing duplicates, 914 unique citations were included; 90 of which were assessed in full text articles. Thirty-three studies were included for data synthesis (Figure 1). All the studies were published between April and June 2021. Thirteen were national studies; there were seven regional and city-wide studies each; five were single-centre studies (e.g., hospitals and long-term care facilities [LTCFs]); and one was an international study. Sixteen studies were conducted in the USA, four were from England, three each from Israel and Spain, two from Italy, and one study from each of the following: the UK, Canada, India, Indonesia, and Uruguay. The majority of the studies (n=21) were from peer-reviewed journals (Table 2).
Surveillance Methods for COVID-19 Cases
Five approaches to monitoring post-vaccination COVID-19 cases and emerging variants of concern were identified in this review. These include population screening with reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and or a rapid antigen test, genomic surveillance, wastewater surveillance, metagenomics, and testing of air filters on public buses (Figure 2).
Population Screening with RT-PCR and or Rapid Antigen Testing
RT-PCR testing and or rapid antigen testing was utilized in 22 studies. The majority of these studies were in healthcare settings (10 studies), seven were in LTCFs, and two in the community. In two studies, surveillance was conducted among healthcare and essential workers, while another two studies involved LTCFs and the community (Table 2).
Healthcare Setting
The studies involving healthcare workers (HCWs) were mostly conducted at single hospitals (7 studies); while two studies were national,6, 7 and one was a regional study.8 In some studies, routine post-exposure screening of symptomatic or asymptomatic HCWs using RT-PCR based testing of samples obtained from nasal or oropharyngeal swabs were implemented;9–12 while some other studies implemented periodic (typically weekly) asymptomatic screenings.6, 13–15 Although the majority of the surveillance involving HCWs utilized only RT-PCR testing, two studies used a combination of RT-PCR and rapid antigen testing. One was a biweekly national surveillance study of HCWs in England,7 and the other was at a single hospital in India.16 Seven of the hospital-based studies also implemented genetic sequencing to identify variants following a positive RT-PCR test. All the studies identified breakthrough cases among vaccinated individuals, some sequenced for VOCs, while also demonstrating the effectiveness of vaccination against infections.
Long Term Care Facilities
There were four national LTCFs studies,17–20 two regional studies21, 22 and one city-wide study.23 Five of the seven LTCF surveillance studies utilized RT-PCR and or rapid antigen testing.18, 20–23
The frequency of testing appeared to vary depending on whether there was an outbreak. In one study involving LTCFs in Catalonia, Spain, the public health guidelines required routine two-to-four weekly screening of residents and staff with RT-PCR or antigen tests,21 another study reported two weekly screenings in the absence of an outbreak with an additional daily rapid antigen testing (with confirmatory RT-PCR for positive tests) during an outbreak.22 Other studies reported a more frequent screening schedule varying between five-to-seven days during an outbreak.18, 19 Of note, one national USA study reported that the Centres for Medicare and Medicaid services required all nursing homes in the same county to test all their staff and residents at the same frequency based on the county COVID-19 rate.17 A number of the LTCF studies conducted genetic sequencing to identify variants.19, 22 Although breakthrough cases were found among vaccinated individuals, the studies generally demonstrated the effectiveness of vaccination in the prevention of infection.
Community
The two community-based population surveillance studies identified in this review were national studies and were conducted in Israel and England.24, 25 The English study utilized self-administered throat and nose swabs and questionnaire data from a random sample of the population ages 5 years and above. From this study, it was observed that 92.3% of infections in England at the time were from the B.1.1.7 lineage and 7.7% from the B.1.617.2 lineage.24 The Israeli national study conducted surveillance in LTCFs and the community (using samples from random drive-through testing centres)26 and showed that the B.1.1.7 variant was 45% more transmissible than the wild-type strain in Israel. These studies identified COVID-19 cases among vaccinated individuals, and also determined the prevalence and transmissibility of variants.
Implementation Considerations and Limitations of Population Surveillance
The following implementation considerations for and limitations to population surveillance were identified in the reviewed studies:
For studies allowing discretionary access to testing, the frequency of testing tends to be highly variable from person to person.12
Antigen tests have lower sensitivity, therefore some positive cases may be missed during asymptomatic screening.9
The timing of infections relative to PCR testing and the sensitivity of the PCR tests can result in infections being missed during follow-up.7
While large sample sizes from multicentre studies increase generalizability, several studies observed that details of local variation in practices (in healthcare settings or long-term care facilities) are lost when findings from different centres are pooled and analyzed together. Therefore, the findings of such studies may not be generalizable.19–21 For example, the Centres for Medicare and Medicaid Services in the USA required all nursing homes to test residents and staff at the same frequency dictated by the rate of COVID-19 in the community (not in the facility).17
Teran et al noted that, with electronic databases, it was impossible to confirm whether patients with a breakthrough infection and a previous positive SARS-CoV-2 test result had a true reinfection or had prolonged shedding from the previous infection.23
In a study with prolonged follow up period, the authors observed a progressive decline in participants’ interest.24
Genomic Surveillance
Three genomic surveillance studies were identified in this review.27, 28 Two were city-wide surveillance studies conducted in the USA,27, 29 and one was a national scale study conducted in Uruguay.28 All three were community-based studies. Two of the studies identified the emergence of variants in the communities. The Uruguayan national genomic surveillance study, for example, showed that variant P.1 was introduced in Uruguay at multiple times over a period of increasing mobility.28 Similarly, Wang et al. demonstrated the rapid emergence of L452R mutation in the San Francisco Bay Area population, with a prevalence of 24.8% in December 2020 that increased to 62.5% in March 2021.29
Wastewater surveillance
There were six wastewater surveillance studies: two were from Spain30, 31 and the USA32, 33, respectively, and one each from Canada34 and the UK.35 The frequency of wastewater sampling varied between once a week30, 32, 35 to three times a week.34
A number of benefits of wastewater surveillance were noted across studies. In Spain,31 wastewater surveillance predicted major outbreaks by several weeks and showed good correlation with clinical data, providing information at local level;30 while another study in the USA reported a rapid turnaround time (average of 1.6 days).32 The challenges observed included: inconsistencies in variant representation depending on where the samples were taken within the community33 and differences in the capacity of wastewater to predict case numbers based on the size of the wastewater treatment plants.35 One study reported that laboratory build-out costs approximately $100,000 USD in capital equipment and took 3 months to complete.32
Testing Air Filters on Public Buses
In one study, Hoffman et al. placed and retrieved filters in the existing air filtration systems on public buses in Seattle to test for the presence of trapped SARS-CoV-2 RNA using phenol-chloroform extraction and RT-PCR. The study detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in 14% of public bus filters tested.36
Metagenomics
Using the nextstrain.org database, Quinonez et al. were able to predict that the rate of B.1.1.7 lineage is going to sharply decrease (near to zero) in the coming months. The authors suggested a cautious generalizability because of the lack of validation of this approach in an experimental study.37
Emerging Technologies
New surveillance technologies for COVID-19 are emerging and some of these have been validated, but not yet studied in a real-world setting. Examples include the use of wearable monitoring device to continuously monitor skin temperature, heart rate, and respiratory rate for early detection of COVID-19 symptoms38 and the use of deep learning-based model to detect COVID-19 infection via CT scans and chest X-rays.39 A number of new assay methods (Table 3) and novel sample collection methods were also identified in this review; however, not all met inclusion criteria and were therefore not included in the broader synthesis. For example, Reeves et al. described a composite autosampler that withdraws samples from wastewater outfall within surface-accessible manholes that can be used to monitor and detect SARS-CoV-2 in individual buildings and communities.40
Discussion
This review suggests that population surveillance with PCR and or rapid antigen tests were the most commonly used surveillance methods. Other approaches include: genomic surveillance, wastewater surveillance, metagenomics, and sampling of filters on public transport.
The RT-PCR detects the RNA genome of SARS-CoV-2 and has been the mainstay of COVID-19 diagnosis.47 As observed in several studies in this review, rapid antigen testing was often used complementarily with RT-PCR and rarely alone as a surveillance tool. This test detects the presence of viral proteins,47 is easy to perform, and can be interpreted without specialized training or equipment, thus can be widely distributed with a rapid turnaround time between sampling and results. Rapid antigen tests have generally relatively lower sensitivities compared with RT-PCR.47–49 Consequently, the European Centres for Disease Control (ECDC) suggested a more nuanced approach to rapid antigen testing, suggesting that in a high prevalence setting, a positive result from an antigen test is likely to indicate a true infection and may not require confirmation by RT-PCR;50 while any negative test result should be confirmed by RT-PCR immediately.50 Conversely, the ECDC suggests that in a low prevalence setting, rapid antigen tests should be able to rule out a highly infectious case; as such, a negative test result may not require confirmation by RT-PCR, whereas a positive test will need immediate sampling for a confirmation by RT-PCR.50
Population-level tracking of the origin, distribution, and trends of Covid-19 is challenging, especially considering the rapidly evolving profile of the virus. Wastewater surveillance may provide a non-invasive, anonymous and scalable method of tracking the virus within the population, within a geographic area, at a point in time.51 However, challenges such as inconsistencies in variant representation,33 differences in the capacity of wastewater to predict cases35 and build-out cost32 were identified in this review.
A limitation of this review is the lack of details on the methodological approaches to COVID-19 surveillance in the included studies. The majority of the studies were designed as epidemiological studies of existing surveillance programs, therefore, the authors focused on the prespecified study outcomes rather than the practicality of the surveillance programs. Although all the studies included vaccinated populations, there were variations in the reporting of vaccination rate. While some small hospital-based and LTCF studies reported institutional vaccination rates, several large studies did not.
Section 2: International Guidance on Surveillance Methods in a Vaccinated Population
Methods
Due to the anticipation that the primary evidence would stem from websites of international government organizations, a database search was not conducted. A grey literature search was conducted, including a thorough search of Google, websites of international government organizations (e.g., Center for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], World Health Organization [WHO]), and McMaster Health Forum (COVID-END). This search was primarily examining surveillance guidance published since December 2020 (to capture guidance specific to vaccinations); however, it was expanded to include guidance on surveillance programs that would have been established prior to December 2020 but were still in place. There were no language limitations.
A screening form based on the eligibility criteria was prepared. Citations identified as potentially relevant from the literature search were screened by single reviewer across a team of four reviewers and subsequently read in full text by two reviewers and assessed for eligibility based on the criteria outlined below (Table 4). Discrepancies were resolved by discussion or by a third reviewer. Reference lists of included studies were hand searched to ensure all relevant literature is captured.
A standardized data extraction sheet was used to extract the month and year of publication, country, scope (e.g., national), surveillance method, vaccination status, population, setting, intended outcomes (e.g., variant surveillance), platform used for surveillance (e.g., any database), guidance summary, and implementation considerations. All reviewers completed a calibration exercise whereby data from two sample studies were extracted by all four reviewers and areas of disagreement were discussed. Data were extracted by one reviewer.
A high-level summary of the guidance pertaining to surveillance across different countries is presented below, followed by a brief discussion of the evidence included in this review; given the rapid nature of this request, a formal risk of bias assessment was not conducted. A patient partner was engaged during the co-production of a plain language summary, which is presented in a separate document.
Results
Through hand searching of grey literature, 68 guidance documents were captured and screened for eligibility. After full-text review, a total of 42 guideline documents were excluded. The most common reason for exclusion was publication date prior to December 2020, without clear indication the surveillance methods were ongoing (n=18). Other reasons for exclusion were: not a guidance document (n=15), not surveillance method(s) (n=6), or duplicate (n=3). A total of 26 guidance documents were included in the synthesis (Table 5); see Table 6 in Appendix B for a summary of the guidance provided across included documents. Most were not specific to vaccinated populations but reported on a surveillance method of COVID-19 and were therefore included in the review; it was assumed that they were still in effect but have not yet updated.
Guidance documents from 11 countries/regions were identified including Australia,52, 53, 57 Brazil,75 Europe,67, 71, 77 France,58, 62, 68 Germany,54 India,59 International,60, 64, 70 New Zealand,78 Spain,65, 69 the United Kingdom55, 63, 72 and the United States.56, 61, 66, 73, 74, 76 Documents were derived from government websites (Departments/Ministries of Health, National Governments), subsidiaries of national governments (e.g., Public Health England, Centre for Disease Control), or from international organizations (e.g., World Health Organization, Pan American Health Association, and European Centre for Disease Control). The scope of the guidance documents was mostly national-focused (n=17), however there were some that were international- (n=6) and regional-focused (n=3).
All of the guidance documents included surveillance methods conducive for community settings. Other settings of interest were healthcare setting including hospitals and primary care centres,55, 63, 65, 68, 70 long-term care facilities,63, 65 points of entry for travel,68, 70 schools,55 and other sentinel sites (e.g., prisons and closed settings).65, 70
Seven overarching surveillance methods emerged in the literature. PCR-testing was the most recommended surveillance method (n=11), followed by genomic screening (n=9), serosurveillance (n=5), wastewater surveillance (n=5), antigen testing (n=3), health record screening (n=2), and syndromic surveillance (n=2) (Figure 3).
Vaccine-Specific Surveillance
Only one document was specific to surveillance methods to be deployed in a vaccinated population. The Public Health England COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance Strategy63 recommends surveillance methods including PCR-testing, health record screening, serosurveillance, and genome sequencing with the following objectives:
To monitor coverage of the vaccine in targeted populations and identify under-vaccinated groups;
to rapidly detect and evaluate possible adverse events associated with vaccination;
to estimate the effectiveness of the vaccine at preventing a spectrum of disease outcomes and onwards transmission in different targeted populations, and against different viral variants, as well as the duration of any protective effect;
to identify risk factors for and outcomes of vaccine failure, including any impact on strain evolution;
to monitor the overall impact of the vaccination program on COVID-19 in the wider population including the indirect effect on groups not targeted by the vaccination program;
to monitor the impact of the vaccination program on prevalence of antibodies against COVID-19 as an indicator of population level immunity, and to monitor antibody waning in the population;
to monitor attitudes to vaccination and identify barriers to high vaccine uptake, and;
to monitor inequalities in each of these outcome measures.
Discussion
Comprehensive hand-searching for international guidance on surveillance methods of COVID-19 yielded 26 documents. Most were not specific to vaccinated populations but reported on a surveillance method of COVID-19 and were therefore included in the review; it was assumed that they were still in effect but have not yet been updated. Seven surveillance methods emerged from the guidance documents: PCR-testing, genomic screening, serosurveillance, wastewater surveillance, antigen testing, health record screening, and syndromic surveillance. Many of the surveillance methods were recommended for use in community settings, however PCR-testing, antigen testing, genomic screening, serosurveillance, and health record screening were also recommended for targeted settings such as health care facilities, long-term care facilities, schools, and points of entry for travelers.
The objectives of the surveillance methods were consistent across countries. PCR-testing, antigen-testing, syndromic surveillance, health record screening, and serosurveillance should be used to: monitor the intensity, spread, and severity of COVID-19 in order to estimate the burden of disease, identify at-risk populations, identify outbreaks, to adjust public health measures as needed. Additionally, genomic sequencing should be used to identify variations and evolution of SARS-CoV-2 to identify variants of concern. Wastewater surveillance should be used to complement other surveillance methods, to detect if COVID-19 and its variants are present in a community setting.
Only one document (published by Public Health England) was identified that provided guidance specific to surveillance of vaccinated populations. Public Health England details their plan to surveil and monitor COVID-19 in vaccinated populations in the UK, including conducting cohort studies such as SIREN, VIVALDI, and CONSENSUS studies.63 These will involve routine surveillance, enhanced surveillance, use of electronic health records, surveillance of vaccine failure (including follow-up with viral whole genome sequencing) and sero-surveillance (including blood donor samples, routine blood tests, and residual sera).
There are several limitations to this review. Given the rapid nature of this report and the evidence of interest (i.e., international guidance), we were unable to carry-out an exhaustive systematic search of the literature. Therefore, the international guidance captured here may not include all countries’/institutes’ guidance for surveillance. Additionally, we were unable to address the quality of evidence reported in the guidance documents because of the variation in reporting and level of detail in the included documents.
Conclusions
Evidence for post-vaccination COVID-19 surveillance was derived from studies in partially or fully vaccinated populations. Population PCR screening, supplemented by rapid antigen tests, was the most frequently used surveillance method and also the most commonly recommended across jurisdictions. The selection of testing method and the frequency of testing was determined by the intensity of the disease and the scale of testing. Other common testing methods included wastewater surveillance and genomic surveillance. A few novel technologies are emerging, however, many of these are yet to be utilized in the real-world setting. There is limited evidence-based guidance on surveillance in a vaccinated population. Most recent guidance on COVID-19 surveillance is not specific to vaccinated individuals, or it is in effect but has not yet been updated to reflect that. Therefore, more evidence-informed guidance on testing and surveillance approaches in a vaccinated population that incorporates all testing modalities is required.
Data Availability
All datasets supporting the conclusions of this article are included within the article
Funding Acknowledgement(s)
The SPOR Evidence Alliance (SPOR EA) is supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) under the Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) initiative.
COVID-19 Evidence Network to support Decision-making (COVID-END) is supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) through the Canadian 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Rapid Research Funding opportunity.
Third-Party Materials
If you wish to reuse non-textual material from this report that is attributed to a third party, such as tables, figures or images, it is your responsibility to determine whether permission is required for such use and to obtain necessary permission from the copyright holder. The risk of claims resulting from infringement of any third-party-owned material rests solely with the user.
General Disclaimer
This report was prepared by the University of Calgary Health Technology Assessment Unit on behalf of the SPOR Evidence Alliance and COVID-END. It was developed through the analysis, interpretation and synthesis of scientific research and/or health technology assessments published in peer-reviewed journals, institutional websites and other distribution channels. It also incorporates selected information provided by experts and patient/citizen partners with lived experience on the subject matter. This document may not fully reflect all the scientific evidence available at the time this report was prepared. Other relevant scientific findings may have been reported since completion of this synthesis report.
SPOR Evidence Alliance, COVID-END and the project team make no warranty, express or implied, nor assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, data, product, or process disclosed in this report. Conclusions drawn from, or actions undertaken on the basis of, information included in this report are the sole responsibility of the user.
Appendix A: Search Strategies for Scientific Evidence of Surveillance
Ovid Multifile
Database: EBM Reviews - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials <MAY 2021>, EBM Reviews - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews <2005 to June 9, 2021>, Embase <1974 to 2021 June 11>, Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process, In-Data-Review & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily <1946 to June 11, 2021>
Search Strategy
COVID-19/ (85559)
SARS-CoV-2/ (81242)
Coronavirus/ (13278)
Betacoronavirus/ (40986)
Coronavirus Infections/ (57260)
COVID-19 or COVID19).tw,kf. (253916)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) and (hubei or wuhan or beijing or shanghai)).tw,kf. (9779)
(wuhan adj5 virus*).tw,kf. (519)
2019-nCoV or 19nCoV or 2019nCoV).tw,kf. (3166)
(nCoV or n-CoV or “CoV 2” or CoV2).tw,kf. (92137)
(SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-CoV2 or SARSCoV-2 or SARSCoV2 or SARS2 or SARS-2 or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2).tw,kf. (93701)
(2019-novel CoV or Sars-coronavirus2 or Sars-coronavirus-2 or SARS-like coronavirus* or ((novel or new or nouveau) adj2 (CoV or nCoV or covid or coronavirus* or corona virus or Pandemi*2)) or (coronavirus* and pneumonia)).tw,kf. (35999)
(novel coronavirus* or novel corona virus* or novel CoV).tw,kf. (18244)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) adj2 “2019”).tw,kf. (58052)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) adj2 “19”).tw,kf. (9366)
(”coronavirus 2” or “corona virus 2”).tw,kf. (29952)
(OC43 or NL63 or 229E or HKU1 or HCoV* or Sars-coronavirus*).tw,kf. (7566)
COVID-19.rx,px,ox. or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.os. (6367)
(coronavirus* or corona virus*).ti. (43970)
(”B.1.1.7” or “B.1.351” or “B.1.617” or “B.1.427” or “B.1.429”).tw,kf,rx,px,ox. (626)
(”P.1” and (Brazil* or variant?)).tw,kf,rx,px,ox. (3431)
((alpha or beta or delta or gamma) adj3 variant?).tw,kf. (11593)
or/1-22 [COVID-19] (329554)
vaccinated.tw,kf. (97271)
inoculated.tw,kf. (153237)
immuni#ed.tw,kf. (119849)
post-vaccinat*.tw,kf. (11845)
post-inoculat*.tw,kf. (11629)
post-immuni*.tw,kf. (3943)
((after or already or full or fully or post or received) adj3 (immunis* or immuniz* or immunity or inoculat* or vaccin*)).tw,kf. (185626)
(status* adj3 (immunis* or immuniz* or immunity or inoculat* or vaccin*)).tw,kf. (17479)
or/24-31 [VACCINATED] (472108)
and 32 (5627)
Health Surveys/ (249807)
((health or population?) adj3 survey?).tw,kf. (175676)
((disease* or pandemic*) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).tw,kf. (54464)
((COVID or COVID-19 or COVID19) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).tw,kf. (1920)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).tw,kf. (216)
((2019-nCoV or nCoV or n-CoV or SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-CoV2 or SARSCoV-2 or SARSCoV2 or SARS2) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).tw,kf. (449)
((BNT162 or BNT162-01 or BNT162a1 or BNT162b1 or BNT162b2 or BNT162c2) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).tw,kf. (3)
((alpha or beta or delta or gamma) adj3 variant? adj3 (monitor* or survey*)).tw,kf. (6)
*Epidemiological Methods/ (6485)
Epidemiological Monitoring/ (10263)
(epidemiolog* adj3 monitor*).tw,kf. (3222)
Seroepidemiologic Studies/ (26333)
((seroepidemiol* or sero-epidemiol*) adj3 (monitor* or survey* or study or studies)).tw,kf. (7085)
(seromonitor* or sero-monitor* or serological monitor*).tw,kf. (568)
(seroprevalen* or sero-prevalen* or serological prevalen*).tw,kf. (46051)
(serosurveillan* or sero-surveillan*).tw,kf. (1271)
(serosurvey? or sero-survey? or serological survey?).tw,kf. (8888)
Wastewater-Based Epidemiological Monitoring/ (2419)
Waste Water/ (50317)
(sewage* or wastewater or waste water).tw,kf. (179449)
Norman score?.tw,kf. (84)
Data Collection/ (305772)
((collect* or monitor*) adj3 data).tw,kf. (1017644)
Public Health Practice/ (70070)
((community health or public health) adj3 (practice? or activit* or endeavo?r?)).tw,kf. (15598)
exp Population Surveillance/ (306931)
surveillance*.tw,kf. (471636)
(biosurveillance* or bio-surveillance*).tw,kf. (688)
Mass Screening/ (167946)
screening.tw,kf. (1426501)
((mass or population*) adj3 screen*).tw,kf. (56691)
(screen* or detect* or identif* or recogni*).ti,kf. (2180317)
((early or earlier or earliest or ongoing or regular*) adj5 (screen* or detect* or identif* or recogni*)).tw,kf. (528091)
(case finding? or casefinding?).tw,kf. (13173)
Metagenomics/ (24172)
(ecogenomic* or eco-genomic* or metagenomic* or meta-genomic*).tw,kf. (31596)
((communit* or ecologic* or environment* or population) adj3 genomic*).tw,kf. (11485)
COVID-19 Testing/ (5913)
((COVID or COVID-19 or COVID19) adj3 test*).tw,kf. (7582)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) adj3 test*).tw,kf. (1002)
((2019-nCoV or nCoV or n-CoV or SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-CoV2 or SARSCoV-2 or SARSCoV2 or SARS2) adj3 test*).tw,kf. (7627)
((BNT162 or BNT162-01 or BNT162a1 or BNT162b1 or BNT162b2 or BNT162c2) adj3 test*).tw,kf. (8)
((alpha or beta or delta or gamma) adj3 variant? adj3 test*).tw,kf. (41)
(serologic* adj3 test*).tw,kf. (50026)
Point-of-Care Testing/ (18292)
((point-of-care or bedside? or bed side? or POC or rapid*) adj3 (assay? or immunoassay? or immuno-assay? or detect* or diagnos* or screen* or test*)).tw,kf. (225556)
(field adj3 (assay? or immunoassay? or immuno-assay? or detect* or diagnos* or screen* or test*)).tw,kf. (74754)
POCT.tw,kf. (5011)
(rapid adj3 (antigen* adj3 (assay? or immunoassay? or immuno-assay? or test*))).tw,kf. (3251)
(random* adj3 (assay? or immunoassay? or immuno-assay? or detect* or diagnos* or screen* or test*)).tw,kf. (80902)
(random* adj3 sampl*).tw,kf. (173755)
(pool* adj3 sampl*).tw,kf. (18948)
COVID-19/ep [epidemiology] (14412)
Coronavirus Infections/ep [epidemiology] (23494)
Incidence/ (742644)
Prevalence/ (1098179)
(incidence or prevalen*).tw,kf. (3890564)
or/34-90 [SURVEILLANCE - BROAD] (9638102)
33 and 91 (1620)
exp Animals/ not Humans/ (16106641)
92 not 93 [ANIMAL-ONLY REMOVED] (1213)
limit 94 to yr=”2020-current” (1045)
95 use ppez [MEDLINE RECORDS] (557)
coronavirus disease 2019/ (204518)
severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2/ (98155)
Coronavirinae/ (4902)
Betacoronavirus/ (40986)
coronavirus infection/ (58134)
(COVID-19 or COVID19).tw,kw. (258126)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) and (hubei or wuhan or beijing or shanghai)).tw,kw. (9934)
(wuhan adj5 virus*).tw,kw. (542)
(2019-nCoV or 19nCoV or 2019nCoV).tw,kw. (3494)
(nCoV or n-CoV or “CoV 2” or CoV2).tw,kw. (91701)
(SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-CoV2 or SARSCoV-2 or SARSCoV2 or SARS2 or SARS-2 or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2).tw,kw. (99684)
(2019-novel CoV or Sars-coronavirus2 or Sars-coronavirus-2 or SARS-like coronavirus* or ((novel or new or nouveau) adj2 (CoV or nCoV or covid or coronavirus* or corona virus or Pandemi*2)) or (coronavirus* and pneumonia)).tw,kw. (36564)
(novel coronavirus* or novel corona virus* or novel CoV).tw,kw. (18583)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) adj2 “2019”).tw,kw. (58746)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) adj2 “19”).tw,kw. (9103)
(”coronavirus 2” or “corona virus 2”).tw,kw. (29862)
(OC43 or NL63 or 229E or HKU1 or HCoV* or Sars-coronavirus*).tw,kw. (7753)
(coronavirus* or corona virus*).ti. (43970)
(”B.1.1.7” or “B.1.351” or “B.1.617” or “B.1.427” or “B.1.429”).tw,kw. (629)
(”P.1” and (Brazil* or variant?)).tw,kw. (3418)
((alpha or beta or delta or gamma) adj3 variant?).tw,kw. (11631)
or/97-117 [COVID-19] (338798)
vaccinated.tw,kw. (97263)
inoculated.tw,kw. (153233)
immuni#ed.tw,kw. (119853)
post-vaccinat*.tw,kw. (11879)
post-inoculat*.tw,kw. (11625)
post-immuni*.tw,kw. (3945)
((after or already or full or fully or post or received) adj3 (immunis* or immuniz* or immunity or inoculat* or vaccin*)).tw,kw. (185537)
(status* adj3 (immunis* or immuniz* or immunity or inoculat* or vaccin*)).tw,kw. (17522)
or/119-126 [VACCINATED] (472056)
118 and 127 (5590)
health survey/ (266784)
((health or population?) adj3 survey?).tw,kw. (180468)
disease surveillance/ (30911)
((disease* or pandemic*) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).tw,kw. (56302)
((COVID or COVID-19 or COVID19) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).tw,kw. (2268)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).tw,kw. (283)
((2019-nCoV or nCoV or n-CoV or SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-CoV2 or SARSCoV-2 or SARSCoV2 or SARS2) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).tw,kw. (523)
((BNT162 or BNT162-01 or BNT162a1 or BNT162b1 or BNT162b2 or BNT162c2) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).tw,kw. (4)
((alpha or beta or delta or gamma) adj3 variant? adj3 (monitor* or survey*)).tw,kw. (6)
epidemiological data/ (34565)
epidemiological monitoring/ (10263)
infection rate/ (33957)
(epidemiolog* adj3 monitor*).tw,kw. (3329)
seroepidemiology/ (4490)
((seroepidemiol* or sero-epidemiol*) adj3 (monitor* or survey* or study or studies)).tw,kw. (7224)
(seromonitor* or sero-monitor* or serological monitor*).tw,kw. (575)
(seroprevalen* or sero-prevalen* or serological prevalen*).tw,kw. (46903)
(serosurveillan* or sero-surveillan*).tw,kw. (1338)
(serosurvey? or sero-survey? or serological survey?).tw,kw. (9023)
waste water/ (50317)
(sewage* or wastewater or waste water).tw,kw. (182355)
Norman score?.tw,kw. (84)
information processing/ (254616)
((collect* or monitor*) adj3 data).tw,kw. (1017125)
((community health or public health) adj3 (practice? or activit* or endeavo?r?)).tw,kw. (15937)
surveillance*.tw,kw. (477847)
(biosurveillance* or bio-surveillance*).tw,kw. (735)
screening/ (289977)
mass screening/ (167946)
screening.tw,kw. (1440549)
((mass or population*) adj3 screen*).tw,kw. (58731)
(screen* or detect* or identif* or recogni*).ti. (2128877)
((early or earlier or earliest or ongoing or regular*) adj5 (screen* or detect* or identif* or recogni*)).tw,kw. (529117)
(case finding? or casefinding?).tw,kw. (13335)
metagenomics/ (24172)
(ecogenomic* or eco-genomic* or metagenomic* or meta-genomic*).tw,kw. (32991)
((communit* or ecologic* or environment* or population) adj3 genomic*).tw,kw. (11715)
immunoassay/ (102667)
antibody detection/ (44387)
((COVID or COVID-19 or COVID19) adj3 test*).tw,kw. (7790)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) adj3 test*).tw,kw. (1062)
((2019-nCoV or nCoV or n-CoV or SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-CoV2 or SARSCoV-2 or SARSCoV2 or SARS2) adj3 test*).tw,kw. (7742)
((BNT162 or BNT162-01 or BNT162a1 or BNT162b1 or BNT162b2 or BNT162c2) adj3 test*).tw,kw. (8)
((alpha or beta or delta or gamma) adj3 variant? adj3 test*).tw,kw. (41)
(serologic* adj3 test*).tw,kw. (50287)
point of care testing/ (18292)
((point-of-care or bedside? or bed side? or POC or rapid*) adj3 (assay? or immunoassay? or immuno-assay? or detect* or diagnos* or screen* or test*)).tw,kw. (226660)
(field adj3 (assay? or immunoassay? or immuno-assay? or detect* or diagnos* or screen* or test*)).tw,kw. (75079)
POCT.tw,kw. (5137)
(rapid adj3 (antigen* adj3 (assay? or immunoassay? or immuno-assay? or test*))).tw,kw. (3272)
(random* adj3 (assay? or immunoassay? or immuno-assay? or detect* or diagnos* or screen* or test*)).tw,kw. (88476)
random sample/ (13341)
sampling/ (79889)
(random* adj3 sampl*).tw,kw. (179585)
(pool* adj3 sampl*).tw,kw. (18959)
coronavirus disease 2019/ep [epidemiology] (25103)
coronavirus infection/ep [epidemiology] (23535)
incidence/ (742644)
prevalence/ (1098179)
(incidence or prevalen*).tw,kw. (3900074)
or/129-188 [SURVEILLANCE - BROAD] (9710465)
128 and 189 (1666)
exp animal/ or exp animal experimentation/ or exp animal model/ or exp animal experiment/ or nonhuman/ or exp vertebrate/ (53905444)
exp human/ or exp human experimentation/ or exp human experiment/ (42359723)
191 not 192 (11547438)
190 not 193 [ANIMAL-ONLY REMOVED] (1263)
limit 194 to yr=”2020-current” (1090)
195 use oemezd [EMBASE RECORDS] (451)
COVID-19/ (85559)
SARS-CoV-2/ (81242)
Coronavirus/ (13278)
Betacoronavirus/ (40986)
Coronavirus Infections/ (57260)
(COVID-19 or COVID19).ti,ab,kw. (258067)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) and (hubei or wuhan or beijing or shanghai)).ti,ab,kw. (9910)
(wuhan adj5 virus*).ti,ab,kw. (535)
(2019-nCoV or 19nCoV or 2019nCoV).ti,ab,kw. (3468)
(nCoV or n-CoV or “CoV 2” or CoV2).ti,ab,kw. (91681)
(SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-CoV2 or SARSCoV-2 or SARSCoV2 or SARS2 or SARS-2 or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2).ti,ab,kw. (99672)
(2019-novel CoV or Sars-coronavirus2 or Sars-coronavirus-2 or SARS-like coronavirus* or ((novel or new or nouveau) adj2 (CoV or nCoV or covid or coronavirus* or corona virus or Pandemi*2)) or (coronavirus* and pneumonia)).ti,ab,kw. (36536)
(novel coronavirus* or novel corona virus* or novel CoV).ti,ab,kw. (18558)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) adj2 “2019”).ti,ab,kw. (58733)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) adj2 “19”).ti,ab,kw. (9089)
(”coronavirus 2” or “corona virus 2”).ti,ab,kw. (29846)
(OC43 or NL63 or 229E or HKU1 or HCoV* or Sars-coronavirus*).ti,ab,kw. (7730)
(coronavirus* or corona virus*).ti. (43970)
(”B.1.1.7” or “B.1.351” or “B.1.617” or “B.1.427” or “B.1.429”).ti,ab,kw. (627)
(”P.1” and (Brazil* or variant?)).ti,ab,kw. (3403)
((alpha or beta or delta or gamma) adj3 variant?).ti,ab,kw. (11631)
or/197-217 [COVID-19] (330858)
vaccinated.ti,ab,kw. (97171)
inoculated.ti,ab,kw. (153204)
immuni#ed.ti,ab,kw. (119795)
post-vaccinat*.ti,ab,kw. (11858)
post-inoculat*.ti,ab,kw. (11624)
post-immuni*.ti,ab,kw. (3940)
((after or already or full or fully or post or received) adj3 (immunis* or immuniz* or immunity or inoculat* or vaccin*)).ti,ab,kw. (185426)
(status* adj3 (immunis* or immuniz* or immunity or inoculat* or vaccin*)).ti,ab,kw. (17468)
or/219-226 [VACCINATED] (471883)
218 and 227 (5617)
Health Surveys/ (249807)
((health or population?) adj3 survey?).ti,ab,kw. (179817)
((disease* or pandemic*) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).ti,ab,kw. (56234)
((COVID or COVID-19 or COVID19) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).ti,ab,kw. (2268)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).ti,ab,kw. (283)
((2019-nCoV or nCoV or n-CoV or SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-CoV2 or SARSCoV-2 or SARSCoV2 or SARS2) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).ti,ab,kw. (523)
((BNT162 or BNT162-01 or BNT162a1 or BNT162b1 or BNT162b2 or BNT162c2) adj3 (monitor* or survey?)).ti,ab,kw. (4)
((alpha or beta or delta or gamma) adj3 variant? adj3 (monitor* or survey*)).ti,ab,kw. (6)
*Epidemiological Methods/ (6485)
Epidemiological Monitoring/ (10263)
(epidemiolog* adj3 monitor*).ti,ab,kw. (3326)
Seroepidemiologic Studies/ (26333)
((seroepidemiol* or sero-epidemiol*) adj3 (monitor* or survey* or study or studies)).ti,ab,kw. (7220)
(seromonitor* or sero-monitor* or serological monitor*).ti,ab,kw. (574)
(seroprevalen* or sero-prevalen* or serological prevalen*).ti,ab,kw. (46880)
(serosurveillan* or sero-surveillan*).ti,ab,kw. (1338)
(serosurvey? or sero-survey? or serological survey?).ti,ab,kw. (9021)
Wastewater-Based Epidemiological Monitoring/ (2419)
Waste Water/ (50317)
(sewage* or wastewater or waste water).ti,ab,kw. (182349)
Norman score?.ti,ab,kw. (81)
Data Collection/ (305772)
((collect* or monitor*) adj3 data).ti,ab,kw. (1015431)
Public Health Practice/ (70070)
((community health or public health) adj3 (practice? or activit* or endeavo?r?)).ti,ab,kw. (15865)
exp Population Surveillance/ (306931)
surveillance*.ti,ab,kw. (477093)
(biosurveillance* or bio-surveillance*).ti,ab,kw. (735)
Mass Screening/ (167946)
screening.ti,ab,kw. (1436256)
((mass or population*) adj3 screen*).ti,ab,kw. (58593)
(screen* or detect* or identif* or recogni*).ti. (2128877)
((early or earlier or earliest or ongoing or regular*) adj5 (screen* or detect* or identif* or recogni*)).ti,ab,kw. (526276)
(case finding? or casefinding?).ti,ab,kw. (13278)
Metagenomics/ (24172)
(ecogenomic* or eco-genomic* or metagenomic* or meta-genomic*).ti,ab,kw. (32988)
((communit* or ecologic* or environment* or population) adj3 genomic*).ti,ab,kw. (11715)
COVID-19 Testing/ (5913)
((COVID or COVID-19 or COVID19) adj3 test*).ti,ab,kw. (7783)
((coronavirus* or corona virus*) adj3 test*).ti,ab,kw. (1061)
((2019-nCoV or nCoV or n-CoV or SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-CoV2 or SARSCoV-2 or SARSCoV2 or SARS2) adj3 test*).ti,ab,kw. (7733)
((BNT162 or BNT162-01 or BNT162a1 or BNT162b1 or BNT162b2 or BNT162c2) adj3 test*).ti,ab,kw. (8)
((alpha or beta or delta or gamma) adj3 variant? adj3 test*).ti,ab,kw. (41)
(serologic* adj3 test*).ti,ab,kw. (50216)
Point-of-Care Testing/ (18292)
((point-of-care or bedside? or bed side? or POC or rapid*) adj3 (assay? or immunoassay? or immuno-assay? or detect* or diagnos* or screen* or test*)).ti,ab,kw. (226456)
(field adj3 (assay? or immunoassay? or immuno-assay? or detect* or diagnos* or screen* or test*)).ti,ab,kw. (74971)
POCT.ti,ab,kw. (5130)
(rapid adj3 (antigen* adj3 (assay? or immunoassay? or immuno-assay? or test*))).ti,ab,kw. (3261)
(random* adj3 (assay? or immunoassay? or immuno-assay? or detect* or diagnos* or screen* or test*)).ti,ab,kw. (87480)
(random* adj3 sampl*).ti,ab,kw. (178562)
(pool* adj3 sampl*).ti,ab,kw. (18914)
COVID-19/ep [epidemiology] (14412)
Coronavirus Infections/ep [epidemiology] (23494)
Incidence/ (742644)
Prevalence/ (1098179)
(incidence or prevalen*).ti,ab,kw. (3893916)
or/229-285 [SURVEILLANCE - BROAD] (9644667)
228 and 286 (1610)
exp Animals/ not Humans/ (16106641)
287 not 288 [ANIMAL-ONLY REMOVED] (1204)
limit 289 to yr=”2020-current” (1050)
290 use coch [CDSR RECORDS] (0)
290 use cctr [CENTRAL] (78)
96 or 196 or 291 or 292 [ALL DATABASES] (1086)
remove duplicates from 293 (737) [TOTAL UNIQUE RECORDS]
294 use ppez [MEDLINE UNIQUE RECORDS] (541)
294 use oemezd [EMBASE UNIQUE RECORDS] (126)
294 use coch [CDSR UNIQUE RECORDS] (0)
294 use cctr [CENTRAL UNIQUE RECORDS] (70)
Web of Science
Appendix B: Additional Details on International Guidance
Abbreviations
- CDC
- Centres for Disease Control and Prevention
- COVID-19
- Coronavirus Disease 2019
- VOC
- Variant of concern
- WHO
- World Health Organization
- RT-PCR
- Reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction
- ECDC
- European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control