Selected article for: "case incidence and disease burden"

Author: Parker, Daniel M.; Bruckner, Tim; Vieira, Verónica M.; Medina, Catalina; Minin, Vladimir N.; Felgner, Philip L.; Dratch, Alissa; Zahn, Matthew; Bartell, Scott M.; Boden-Albala, Bernadette
Title: Predictors of Test Positivity, Mortality, and Seropositivity during the Early Coronavirus Disease Epidemic, Orange County, California, USA
  • Cord-id: tik57zwx
  • Document date: 2021_10_25
  • ID: tik57zwx
    Snippet: We conducted a detailed analysis of coronavirus disease in a large population center in southern California, USA (Orange County, population 3.2 million), to determine heterogeneity in risks for infection, test positivity, and death. We used a combination of datasets, including a population-representative seroprevalence survey, to assess the actual burden of disease and testing intensity, test positivity, and mortality. In the first month of the local epidemic (March 2020), case incidence cluster
    Document: We conducted a detailed analysis of coronavirus disease in a large population center in southern California, USA (Orange County, population 3.2 million), to determine heterogeneity in risks for infection, test positivity, and death. We used a combination of datasets, including a population-representative seroprevalence survey, to assess the actual burden of disease and testing intensity, test positivity, and mortality. In the first month of the local epidemic (March 2020), case incidence clustered in high-income areas. This pattern quickly shifted, and cases next clustered in much higher rates in the north-central area of the county, which has a lower socioeconomic status. Beginning in April 2020, a concentration of reported cases, test positivity, testing intensity, and seropositivity in a north-central area persisted. At the individual level, several factors (e.g., age, race or ethnicity, and ZIP codes with low educational attainment) strongly affected risk for seropositivity and death.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • access healthcare and local state: 1, 2
    • access healthcare and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
    • access healthcare and low income: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
    • access healthcare and low low income level: 1
    • active screening and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4
    • active screening and low income: 1, 2
    • local epidemic and low income: 1
    • local indicator and logistic regression: 1, 2
    • local state and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
    • local state and low income: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
    • logistic regression and low income: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
    • logistic regression and low income area: 1
    • logistic regression and low low income level: 1, 2, 3
    • logistic regression and low median household income: 1
    • logistic regression and low socioeconomic status area: 1