RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Comparison of the 2021 COVID-19 ‘Roadmap’ Projections against Public Health Data
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.03.17.22272535
DO 10.1101/2022.03.17.22272535
A1 Matt J. Keeling
A1 Louise Dyson
A1 Michael J. Tildesley
A1 Edward M. Hill
A1 Samuel Moore
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/03/18/2022.03.17.22272535.abstract
AB Control and mitigation of the COVID-19 pandemic in England has relied on a combination of vaccination and non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as closure of non-essential shops and leisure activities, closure of schools, social distancing, mask wearing, testing followed by isolation and general public health awareness. Some of these measures are extremely costly (both economically and socially), so it is important that they are relaxed promptly but without overwhelming already burdened health services. The eventual policy was a Roadmap of four relaxation steps throughout 2021, taking England from lock-down to the cessation of all restrictions on social interaction; with a minimum of five weeks between each step to allow the data to reflect the changes in restrictions and the results to analysed. Here we present a retrospective analysis of our six Roadmap documents generated in 2021 to assess the likely impacts of future relaxation steps in England. In each case we directly compare results generated at the time with more recent public health data (primarily hospital admissions, but also hospital occupancy and death) to understand discrepancies and potential improvements. We conclude that, in general, the model projections generated a reliable estimation of medium-term hospital admission trends, with the data points up to September 2021 generally lying within our 95% projection intervals. The greatest uncertainties in the modelled scenarios came from estimates of vaccine efficacy, hampered by the lack of data in the early stages of the Alpha and Delta variant waves, and from assumptions about human behaviour in the face of changing restrictions and changing risk. These are clearly avenues for future study.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementMJK, LD and MJT were supported through the JUNIPER modelling consortium [grant number MR/V038613/1]; MJK and SM were supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) [Policy Research Programme, Mathematical and Economic Modelling for Vaccination and Immunisation Evaluation, and Emergency Response; NIHR200411]; MJK, LD, MJT and EMH were supported by the Medical Research Council through the COVID-19 Rapid Response Rolling Call [grant number MR/V009761/1] MJK is affiliated to the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Gastrointestinal Infections at University of Liverpool in partnership with UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), in collaboration with University of Warwick. MJK is also affiliated to the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Genomics and Enabling Data at University of Warwick in partnership with UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care or UK Health Security Agency.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Data from the CHESS and SARI databases were supplied after anonymisation under strict data protection protocols agreed between the University of Warwick and Public Health England. The ethics of the use of these data for these purposes was agreed by Public Health England with the Governments SPI-M(O) / SAGE committees.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData on cases were obtained from the COVID-19 Hospitalisation in England Surveillance System (CHESS) data set that collects detailed data on patients infected with COVID-19. Data on COVID-19 deaths were obtained from Public Health England. These data contain confidential information, with public data deposition non-permissible for socioeconomic reasons. The CHESS data resides with the National Health Service (www.nhs.gov.uk) whilst the death data are available from Public Health England (www.phe.gov.uk). The ethics of the use of these data for these purposes was agreed by Public Health England with the Governments SPI-M(O) / SAGE committees. More aggregate data is freely available from the UK Coronavirus dashboard: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/