Distinguishing Viruses Responsible for Influenza-Like Illness

Julie A. Spencer, Deborah P. Shutt, Sarah K. Moser, Hannah Clegg, Helen J. Wearing, Harshini Mukundan, Carrie A. Manore
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.04.20020404

Abstract

The many respiratory viruses that cause influenza-like illness (ILI) are reported and tracked as one entity, defined by the CDC as a group of symptoms that include a fever of 100 degrees Fahrenheit and a cough and/or a sore throat. In the United States alone, ILI impacts 9-49 million people every year. While tracking ILI as a single clinical syndrome is informative in many respects, the underlying viruses differ in their parameters and outbreak properties. Most existing models treat either a single respiratory virus or ILI as a whole. However, there is a need for models capable of comparing several individual ILI viruses. To address this need, here we present a flexible model and simulations of epidemics for influenza, RSV, rhinovirus, seasonal coronavirus, adenovirus, and SARS/MERS, parameterized by a systematic literature review and accompanied by a global sensitivity analysis. We find that for these biological causes of ILI, their parameter values, timing, prevalence, and proportional contributions differ substantially. These results demonstrate that distinguishing the viruses that cause influenza-like illness will be an important aspect of future work on ILI diagnostics, mitigation, modeling, and preparation for future unknown pandemics.

1. Introduction

Emerging infectious diseases are a major threat to global health security, as exemplified by the recent COVID-19 pandemic. The ease of transmissibility makes respiratory pathogens especially suited for epidemic spread [1]. Viral respiratory infections account for a large burden of annual morbidity and mortality worldwide [2] and are the cause more than 400,000 hospitalizations in children less than 18 years old [3] in the United States every year, demonstrating the perpetual scale of the challenge.

Most of these viral infections are categorized as Influenza-like Illnesses (ILI), which are defined as cases of possible influenza, or other illnesses resulting in a set of symptoms that are indistinguishable from those attributed to influenza viruses [4]. The CDC characterizes ILI as infections presenting with a fever of 100ºF, and a cough and/or a sore throat [5], although common symptoms attributed to ILI include fever, chills, malaise, dry cough, loss of appetite, body aches, and nausea, combinations of which manifest depending on various pathogen-specific, environment specific, and host-determined factors [6].

The number of people impacted by ILI in the USA and beyond is significant every single year, notwithstanding the COVID pandemic. ILINet, which consists of outpatient healthcare providers in all 50 states, Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands, reports over 60 million patient visits during the 2018-19 season [7, 8]. Indeed, 8% of the US population is considered to be infected with symptomatic influenza-like illness every year [9].

Defining ILI as a syndromic cluster rather than a specific disease or diseases is informative for keeping track of syndromic case counts, as well as for important analysis and forecasting [10]. However, the cluster of symptoms known as ILI is caused by many underlying pathogens [11, 12], most commonly, influenza viruses, common cold viruses, such as rhinovirus, adenovirus, human respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), parainfluenza virus (PIV), human metapneumovirus (hMPV) [13], and human coronaviruses (HCoV), a novel variant of which is responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic [14].

Despite the multifaceted biological etiology of ILI, diagnostic testing for specific viruses underlying ILI is relatively rare [5], and many of the diagnostic outcomes are based on syndromic evaluation at the point of care. There are no tailored discriminatory diagnostics for use at the point of care, to evaluate pathogens that impact 9-49 million people every year in the United States alone [5]. This creates a knowledge gap in which an emergent novel respiratory pathogen such as COVID-19 can go undetected [15]. An increased understanding of the biological dynamics of specific pathogens causing ILI is needed to prevent unnecessary suffering and death [16, 17, 18].

Although clinical studies have been conducted to assess the contribution of different viruses to ILI [19, 12, 20, 21, 22, 23], the reliance on syndromic diagnostics and the consequent impact on identification and of novel threats has not been assessed until recently [24]. Modeling studies that explore the mechanism of transmission and spread of ILI pathogens have also been conducted [25]. A recent study has shown that aggregrating the underlying ILI viruses separately rather than considering ILI as a single pathogen can improve ILI forecasts [24]. However, modeling studies using diagnostics measurements, and aimed at gaining insight into differing epidemic properties of the viruses underlying ILI, have been less abundant [26, 27].

To address the need for a flexible, abstract system that enables comparison of several ILI viruses in one paper, here we provide a deterministic model for five of the most common viral pathogens responsible for ILI. Our aim is to explore how pathogens with similar syndromes (and hence grouped together as ILI), can present with varied outbreak properties, thereby requiring varied interventions. We chose the pathogens on the basis of available literature, and the outcomes of a parallel clinical study conducted in Northern New Mexico Influenza (A and B), Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV), rhinovirus, Human Coronavirus (HCoV), and Adenovirus. We parameterized the model by conducting a systematic literature review, and aligned the associated sensitivity analysis with the gap analysis performed in our clinical studies.

This study presents a shift in perspective that contributes a practical foundation for advancement of diagnostics, interventions and improved pandemic preparedness of anticipated and novel ILI pathogens, and for developing modeling strategies that can support biosurveillance architectures and pandemic preparedness.

2. Methods

2.1. Model Structure

The equations governing this model of common upper respiratory virus dynamics are given by Embedded Image Embedded Image Embedded Image Embedded Image Embedded Image Embedded Image Embedded Image

The total population is N = S + E + I1 + I2 + H + R + D.

To model five viruses that underly ILI during the course of one seasonal infection cycle, we developed a deterministic system of ordinary differential equations (Eq. 1). We then simulated daily infections of the five seasonal viruses after subtracting probable coinfections, and calculated the proportion of total daily infections contributed by each virus during the course of a hypothetical ILI season.

The model diagram (Fig. 1) illustrates the progression of ILI for 365 days in a human population of a hypothetical town containing 10,000 individuals. Five common seasonal ILI viruses, along with the historic outbreak coronaviruses SARS-CoV and MERS-Cov, are assumed to similar determininistic transmission structure.

Figure 1:
Figure 1:

Transfer diagram for ILI virus transmission

The total population (N) consists of seven classes: susceptible (S), exposed but not infectious (E), first infectious class (I1), second (non-hospitalized) infectious class (I2), hospitalized (H), recovered (R), or deceased (D) (Table 1). Individuals are considered susceptible until they contact an infectious individual from (I1), (I2), or (H).

View this table:
Table 1:

Descriptions of state variables

We modeled the progression of disease as follows: Given contact with an infectious individual, transmission takes place with some probability. After transmission has occurred, susceptible people move to the exposed class (E), where they spend a number of days equal to the period between infection and the onset of infectiousness (the latent period). In accordance with accepted literature, we assume that the latent period equals the incubation period, which is the period of time between exposure to the virus and the onset of symptoms.

After the latent period, individuals move to the first infectious class, (I1). The duration of the first infectious period differs according to the underlying virus. Symptoms worsen for some proportion of individuals in the first infectious class, who then require hospitalization (H), where they remain infectious, with reduced transmission c. From the hospital, individuals either recover (R) or die (D). Individuals who remain sick, but do not require hospitalization for the duration of the second infectious period (I2), typically do not suffer from serious manifestations of the disease, and we assume that they recover entirely. We assume that hospitalized individuals have 25% less contact with susceptible individuals than do infectious people outside the hospital, which results in 25% less transmission during hospitalization. We further assume that all recovered individuals (R) gain full immunity to the virus causing the illness.

We assume that the total infected population (T = E + I1 + I2 + H) and the total infectious population (TI = I1 + I2 + H) are homogeneously mixed. We assume that in the duration of a single year, demographics (natural birth or death) are negligible, and they are not modeled. We assume that the viruses act independently, although coinfection is not ruled out. Each epidemic begins with a single infected individual, and we calculate the transmission rate β for each virus is by solving for β in the expression for R0 in Appendix B, using the mean R0 values for each virus from the literature.

2.2. Model Parameterization

To parameterize the model, we reviewed the literature for epidemiological measurements of incubation period, infectious period, hospitalization period, hospitalized proportion, case fatality proportion, and R0 (cf. Table 2) for influenza A and B, RSV, rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, and adenoviruses. We included results from experimental and observational studies, as well as from systematic reviews. We also included estimates of R0 from modeling studies, for even when symptomatically similar, many viral pathogens vary in their reproductive number. In the case of SARS, we included an estimate for the infectious period, since values were lacking in the literature [28]. We searched Google Scholar for each virus, using the name of the virus, a description of the parameter, and the type of study. For example, “influenza AND incubation period AND experimental” yielded a list of papers reporting the results of experimental studies to determine incubation period of influenza virus infections in humans. We then read the top 10 cited papers, examined the details of each study, and recorded the results (Table 3).

View this table:
Table 2:

Parameter descriptions and dimensions

View this table:
Table 3:

ILI parameters from literature. Coronavirus refer to the six pre-SARS-CoV-2 strains.

We iterated this process for each pathogen, until either no additional studies could be found, or the information garnered had already been incorporated in our assessment. We consulted modeling and review studies only when experimental and observational studies were not available for a given pathogen. We obtained from two to nine values for each parameter, with the exceptions of R0 for Adenoviruses, and the hospitalization period for SARS and MERS, for which we found only one value each. We calculated the mean and standard deviation of each parameter (Table 3).

SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is a member of genus Beta-coronavirus, along with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV [29]. Our parameter review includes values for strains 229E, NL63, OC43, HKU1, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV, the six commonly circulating strains of Coronaviruses that existed prior to the advent of COVID-19. We generated a separate Coronavirus parameter table, focused on comparing the parameter values of the seasonal strains to those of the more recent SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV (Table 4). We collected means when possible; and when means were not available, we recorded medians.

View this table:
Table 4:

This table distinguishes between endemic seasonal coronaviruses (229E, NL63, OC43, and HKU1) and historic sporadic outbreak coronaviruses (SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV).

2.3. Global Sensitivity Analysis

To prioritize the impact of parameters on model outputs for this nonlinear system, we carried out a global sensitivity analysis. We bounded the parameter space with the minimum and maximum parameters from the literature (Tables 3, 4, Appendix C.4). We simulated epidemics of five common upper respiratory viruses implicated in ILI: influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), Rhinovirus, seasonal human coronavirus (HCoV), and adenovirus, alongside outbreak strains of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, grouped together.

We assessed the impact of five model input variables of β (basic transmission rate), γ1 (1/incubation period), γ2 (1/onset to hospitalization), γ3 (1/hospitalized period), and γ4 (1/non-hospitalized period) on three response variables of total number of infections, magnitude of epidemic peak (peak height), and time to epidemic peak. We used Latin Hypercube Sampling (LHS) [30] to generate 10,000 sets of values from the total parameter space for each of the five parameters, for each of the viruses. We considered the parameter ranges for seasonal coronaviruses (HCoV) separately from SARS-CoV/MERS-CoV. We calculated β ranges by solving Equation B.4 for β and substituting the minimum and maximum values from the literature (Table D.5). In the case of adenovirus, we found only one R0 value in the literature, and assumed minimum and maximum values of −20% and +20% from this single value. We solved the ODE system numerically for these sample input values using the default integration routine “ode” in R package deSolve, then constructed a dataframe of the marginal relations between the individual parameters and outputs. We generated sensitivity plots in R using Smoothed Conditional Means (“statsmooth”) and trend lines using weighted least squares method Local Polynomial Regression Fitting in R (“loess”) [31]. We assumed a uniform distribution on the parameters.

3. Results

3.1. Model Simulation Results

We find that when we numerically simulate seasonal epidemics for five common ILI viruses, setting all of their starting times at October 1st, the varied ranges of historic parameter values for each virus result in varied timing, prevalence, and contributions of these underlying biological causes of ILI (Figure 2). RSV peaks in December, followed by rhinovirus. Seasonal coronavirus peaks in January, adenovirus peaks in February, and influenza peaks in March. RSV has the greatest total cumulative infections and the highest peak (greatest maximum daily number of infections), while influenza has the least total cumulative infections and the lowest peak. The numerical simulation of SARS and MERS, not illustrated here as an epidemic curve because not considered seasonal, has the greatest overall number of cumulative infections.

Figure 2:
Figure 2:

Seasonal and outbreak simulations. Panel 2A displays a numerical simulation of daily infections for five seasonal ILI viruses for one hypothetical year. The x-axis shows time in days; the y-axis shows number of infections. Each virus begins by infecting one individual, with 9,999 susceptible individuals. We assume no background immunity, vaccination, or mitigations; each virus acts independently; probable coinfections are subtracted. Inputted parameter values are the means from the literature (Table 3). Values for coronavirus are the means for the pre-SARS-CoV-2, endemic, seasonal coronaviruses OC43, 229E, HKU1, and NL63, considered as a group. Panel 2B displays six snapshots of the proportion contributed by each virus on the first day of each month of the hypothetical “flu” season. The x-axis shows the first day of each month; the y-axis shows the proportional contributions. Panels 2C and 2D are the analogous plots, with the inclusion of the outbreak coronaviruses SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, considered as a group.

We find that on the first day of any given month during the simulated ILI season, the composition of ILI attributable to the individual viruses varies considerably (see the stacked bar chart in (Figure 2)). On October 1st, each represents 20% of the total five infections, reflecting the initial condition that each epidemic begins with one infection. On November 1st and December 1st respectively, RSV constitutes 55% and 56% of total ILI infections. On January 1st, seasonal coronavirus contributes 50% of the total; on February 1st, adenovirus contributes 54%; on March 1st, influenza contributes 73%.

3.2. Model Parameterization Results

We find 104 studies that contained relevant parameter values (Table 3). According to our literature review, adenovirus exhibits the longest mean incubation period, seasonal coronavirus has the longest total mean infection period, and RSV has the highest mean R0. Notably, out of the viruses studied, RSV incubation period values have the least standard deviation, while adenovirus values have the greatest standard deviation. Rhinovirus infectious period values have the least standard deviation, while SARS/MERS has the greatest. And finally, rhinovirus R0 values have the least variation, while RSV R0 values have the greatest variation.

We find that the seasonal and historical outbreak coronaviruses differ considerably in their defining epidemiological parameters. The incubation and hospitalization periods of SARS and MERS are almost double that of their seasonal counterparts, while their infectious period is more than double. The mean R0 for the betacoronaviruses SARS and MERS is 3.81, while that of the seasonal coronavirus strains is 2.84 (Table 4).

Of the 104 studies, 10 provide values for the percentage of each of the five viruses in question identified among ILI patients. In these 10 studies, on average, at least one virus is identified in 62% of individuals with ILI symptoms. Out of these 62% (mean values), influenza is identified in a 21.3% of samples, RSV in 13.5%, rhinovirus in 22.6%, human coronavirus in 8.8%, and adenovirus in 8.1%. The presence or absence of co-infection is not taken into account in the percentages reported by these studies.

3.3. Global Sensitivity Results

The global sensitivity analysis for our nonlinear system reveals several differences between the six viruses under consideration: influenza, RSV, rhinovirus, seasonal coronavirus, adenovirus, and SARS/MERS.

The impact of the basic transmission rate β on total cumulative infections is relatively tightly constrained for all six viruses (Appendix E). The trend line for influenza is slightly sigmoid, while the trend lines appear exponential for the other five, approaching 100% of the population asymptotically near their mean β values. For influenza and RSV, the Latin Hypercube Samples (LHS) for all five input variables have bimodal distributions for cumulative cases and time to peak. That is, for influenza and RSV, but not for the other four viruses, there are trivial numerical solutions for the system in which epidemics never take off, as well as nontrivial solutions, where they do take off. This is reflected in the disease-free equilibrium (Appendix A) and in the histograms (Appendix E).

The impact of β on peak height for the 10,000 LHS samples is not as constrained overall as for cumulative cases, although the variance is narrower than that of the other four input variables. The LHS sample distributions for output variable time to peak are bimodal for influenza and RSV, while they are unimodal for the other four viruses. Distributions for seasonal coronaviruses and historic outbreak coronaviruses (SARS/MERS) are unimodal (Appendix E).

An important difference between the seasonal and outbreak coronaviruses may be seen in Figure 3. Note that the y-axis for the outbreak coronaviruses represents approximately double the time period of the y-axis for seasonal coronaviruses. In both cases, the relationship of the transmission rate to the number of days to the epidemic peak is logarithmic and well constrained. In both cases, as the transmission rate increases, the time to peak shortens; conversely, as the transmission rate decreases, the time to peak is delayed. The other four input variables, representing speed of progression through the stages of disease, have unremarkable impacts on the output variables.

Figure 3:
Figure 3:

Global sensitivity analysis for seasonal coronaviruses (top) and historic outbreak coronaviruses SARS and MERS (bottom), showing the impact of five input variables on model output variable of time to epidemic peak. Note the different scale of the y axes on the β plots. Complete sensitivity results may be found in Appendix E.

4. Discussion

Although the five viruses considered here present clinically with similar symptoms, their parameters and epidemic characteristics differ, illustrating the vast potential not only for misdiagnosis and uninformed mitigation strategies, but for missing early signals of future novel emerging diseases. These results support those in Pei and Shaman’s recent paper [24] that demonstate differing outbreak properties of individual viruses that contribute to ILI.

From our sensitivity analysis, it is apparent that virus transmission rates, and therefore also effective reproduction numbers, have much greater impact on the output variables than do the other four input variables, more biologically intrinsic to each virus, that represent speed of the phases of disease progression. From a mitigation perspective, the transmission rate is the variable we can impact with public health policies. For example, by implementing mask-wearing and physical distancing, we can reduce and delay epidemic peak(s) of outbreak respiratory viruses, reducing cases and deaths as well as the burden on the healthcare system.

Many of the studies that generated parameter values evaluated populations treated at clinics or admitted at hospitals. However, a significant proportion of illness and death may occur outside of hospitals and clinics (see Cohen et al. 2017). Our formula for R0 is based on the traditional assumption of a naïve population; however, our parameter review reports many values from clinical studies conducted on populations that have been exposed to the seasonal ILI viruses in circulation, and therefore have some level of background immunity. Thus, these values likely reflect the effective reproductive number (Re) rather than R0, with the exception of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, which were novel zoonoses when they appeared. Further, the studies reviewed herein have taken place over many decades, during which viral evolution may be presumed to have occurred.

In our simulations, we treat the viruses contributing to the clinical syndrome of influenza-like illness as though they act independently, although a recent theoretical study has shown that even noninteracting pathogens are not necessarily mathematically independent [131]. A recent clinical study has shown rhinovirus can function to block subsequent infection by influenza [132]. Further studies are needed to assess the potential for both within-host and between-host viral interactions.

A limitation of our simulation results is that we have based them on mean historic parameter values, which does not take into account seasonal impacts on those parameters. Further, we have uniformly introduced the first infected individual for all viruses on October 1st of our hypothetical ILI season; however, in real world phenomena, these initial infections may happen at different times in different populations, and could happen in varied orders in different years.

The flexible deterministic model, numerical simulations, and sensitivity analysis included herein set the stage for future studies to investigate potential interactions of individual viruses that contribute to ILI. The parameterization study provides a meta-analysis of clinical studies during the past century that have provided the basic epidemiological parameters for modeling five of the common viruses contributing to the clinical syndrome of influenza-like illness. Along with previous work, the results presented herein indicate that in order to improve diagnosis, mitigation, and modeling of respiratory viruses, as well as to be prepared for the next pandemic, individual viruses contributing to influenza-like illness should be considered separately.

CREdiT authorship contribution statement

Julie A. Spencer: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Visualization, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing. Deborah P. Shutt: Conceptualization, Methodology. Sarah K. Moser: Investigation, Visualization. Hannah Clegg: Conceptualization, Investigation. Helen J. Wearing: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Supervision, Writing - Review & Editing. Harshini Mukundan: Conceptualization, Project administration, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Writing - Review & Editing. Carrie A. Manore: Conceptualization, Methodology, Funding acquisition, Supervision, Writing - Review & Editing.

Data Availability

The spreadsheets that contain the details of our parameter review are included in the paper, after the reference section.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Appendix A. Disease-free Equilibrium

In the disease-free state, all infected classes are zero, that is, E = I1 = I2 = H = 0. Substituting and setting the derivatives equal to zero, it is evident that in the disease-free state, the other state variables R and D will continue to contain zero individuals, and that the Susceptible class S will remain equal to the total population N.

If we set any one of E, I1, I2, or H to zero, the other three state variables representing infected classes must also be zero. In this case, N=S=10000. Thus, where x = (S, E, I1, I2, H, R, D) denotes solutions of the system, xdfe = (10000, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0) represents the disease-free equilibrium for the system.

Appendix B. Derivation of Basic Reproductive Number

The basic reproductive number (R0) is defined as the average number of secondary infections produced when one infected individual is introduced into a fully susceptible population. Four compartments, latently infected individuals (E), symptomatic and infected individuals (I1), symptomatic and infected and non-hospitalized individuals (I2), and hospitalized individuals (H), together characterize the total infected population for the ILI virus system. To calculate R0 for this system, we derive the next generation matrix [133].

Method:

  1. Derive the matrix for the transmission term describing everyone entering (E): the “F” matrix;

  2. Derive the matrix for the transition terms describing everyone transitioning between infected classes (E, I1, I2, H): the “V” matrix;

  3. Next Generation Matrix (NGM) = (F)(V −1);

  4. The largest dominant eigenvalue or spectral radius of the NGM = R0 for the system.

The transmission term for the system is βS(I1 + I2 + cH) Embedded Image

The transition terms for the system are (−γ1E), (γ1E − γ2I1), (γ2(1 − p1)I1 − γ4I2), (γ2p1I1 − γ3H). Embedded Image

The next generation matrix is thus Embedded Image

The spectral radius, or the largest positive eigenvalue of the next generation matrix, is the basic reproductive number of the system at the disease-free equilibrium. Embedded Image Embedded Image

This expression for the basic reproductive number (R0) depends on the parameters β, c, p1, γ2, γ3 and γ4, and on the initial conditions of the state variables. Equation B.5 shows that R0 for this system is a combination of the transmission that takes place in the pre-symptomatic (I1), symptomatic, (I2), and hospitalized (H) compartments. This is the per-day transmission rate (β) multiplied by the time spent in each of these compartments.

Appendix C. Parameter Ranges

Figure C.4:
Figure C.4:

Parameter ranges for five common ILI viruses from literature review

Appendix D. Transmission Rates

View this table:
Table D.5:

This table reports β (basic transmission rate) values calculated from solving Equation (6) for β, and substituting in the parameter values from the literature review (Tables 3 and 4).

Appendix F. References

Footnotes

  • Abstract updated; Introduction updated; Methods reorganized for clarity; Figure 1 (now Figure 2) expanded to include epidemic simulations and timing of contributions; Table 2 (now Table 4) expanded to contrast seasonal and outbreak coronaviruses; Global sensitivity analysis added; Results reorganized to reflect order of methods; Discussion expanded.

References

  1. [1].↵
    J. S. Kutter, M. I. Spronken, P. L. Fraaij, R. A. Fouchier, S. Herfst, Transmission routes of respiratory viruses among humans, Current opinion in virology 28 (2018) 142–151.
    OpenUrl
  2. [2].↵
    A. D. Iuliano, K. M. Roguski, H. H. Chang, D. J. Muscatello, R. Palekar, S. Tempia, C. Cohen, J. M. Gran, D. Schanzer, B. J. Cowling, et al., Estimates of global seasonal influenza-associated respiratory mortality: a modelling study, The Lancet 391 (10127) (2018) 1285–1300.
    OpenUrl
  3. [3].↵
    K. J. Henrickson, Advances in the laboratory diagnosis of viral respiratory disease, The Pediatric infectious disease journal 23 (1) (2004) S6–S10.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. [4].↵
    A. Fowlkes, A. Giorgi, D. Erdman, J. Temte, K. Goodin, S. Di Lonardo, Y. Sun, K. Martin, M. Feist, R. Linz, R. Boulton, E. Bancroft, L. McHugh, J. Lojo, K. Filbert, L. Finelli, IISP Working Group, Viruses associated with acute respiratory infections and influenza-like illness among outpatients from the Influenza Incidence Surveillance Project, 2010-2011, J Infect Dis 209 (11) (2014) 1715–25. doi:10.1093/infdis/jit806.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. [5].↵
    C. for Disease Control, P. (CDC), U.S. influenza surveillance system: Purpose and methods, FluView Website (downloaded October 29, 2020 2020) [cited 1/28/2020]. URL https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/overview.htm
  6. [6].↵
    B. Michiels, I. Thomas, P. Van Royen, S. Coenen, Clinical prediction rules combining signs, symptoms and epidemiological context to distinguish influenza from influenza-like illnesses in primary care: a cross sectional study, BMC family practice 12 (1) (2011) 4.
    OpenUrl
  7. [7].↵
    C. for Disease Control (CDC), National, regional, and state level outpatient illness and viral surveillance, https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/fluportaldashboard.html (data downloaded on 10-28-2020 2020).
  8. [8].↵
    J. D. Silverman, N. Hupert, A. D. Washburne, Using influenza surveillance networks to estimate state-specific prevalence of sars-cov-2 in the united states, Science translational medicine 12 (554).
  9. [9].↵
    J. I. Tokars, S. J. Olsen, C. Reed, Seasonal incidence of symptomatic influenza in the united states, Clinical Infectious Diseases 66 (10) (2018) 1511–1518.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  10. [10].↵
    D. Osthus, K. R. Moran, Multiscale influenza forecasting (2019). arxiv:1909.13766. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.13766
  11. [11].↵
    S. Taylor, P. Lopez, L. Weckx, C. Borja-Tabora, R. Ulloa-Gutierrez, E. Lazcano-Ponce, A. Kerdpanich, M. Angel Rodriguez Weber, A. Mascareñas de Los Santos, J.-C. Tinoco, M. A. P. Safadi, F. S. Lim, M. Hernandez-de Mezerville, I. Faingezicht, A. Cruz-Valdez, Y. Feng, P. Li, S. Durviaux, G. Haars, S. Roy-Ghanta, D. W. Vaughn, T. Nolan, Respiratory viruses and influenza-like illness: Epidemiology and outcomes in children aged 6 months to 10 years in a multi-country population sample, J Infect 74 (1) (2017) 29–41. doi:10.1016/j.jinf.2016.09.003.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  12. [12].↵
    A. Galindo-Fraga, A. A. Ortiz-Hernández, A. Ramírez-Venegas, R. V. Vázquez, S. Moreno-Espinosa, B. Llamosas-Gallardo, S. Pérez-Patrigeon, M. Salinger, L. Freimanis, C.-y. Huang, W. Gu, M. L. Guerrero, J. Beigel, G. M. Ruiz-Palacios, La Red ILI 002 Study Group, Clinical characteristics and outcomes of influenza and other influenza-like illnesses in Mexico City, Int J Infect Dis 17 (7) (2013) e510–7. doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2013.01.006.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. [13].↵
    X. Yang, Y. Yao, M. Chen, X. Yang, Y. Xie, Y. Liu, X. Zhao, Y. Gao, L. Wei, Etiology and clinical characteristics of influenza-like illness (ili) in outpatients in beijing, june 2010 to may 2011, PloS one 7 (1) (2012) e28786.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. [14].↵
    N. Chen, M. Zhou, X. Dong, J. Qu, F. Gong, Y. Han, Y. Qiu, J. Wang, Y. Liu, Y. Wei, et al., Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in wuhan, china: a descriptive study, The Lancet 395 (10223) (2020) 507–513.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  15. [15].↵
    S. Zayet, Q. Lepiller, H. Zahra, P.-Y. Royer, L. Toko, V. Gendrin, T. Klopfenstein, et al., Clinical features of covid-19 and influenza: a comparative study on nord franche-comte cluster, Microbes and infection.
  16. [16].↵
    D. N. T. Nguyen, L. Q. Mai, J. E. Bryant, N. L. K. Hang, L. N. M. Hoa, B. Nadjm, P. Q. Thai, T. N. Duong, D. D. Anh, P. Horby, H. R. van Doorn, H. F. L. Wertheim, A. Fox, Epidemiology and etiology of influenza-like-illness in households in Vietnam; it’s not all about the kids!, J Clin Virol 82 (2016) 126–132. doi:10.1016/j.jcv.2016.07.014.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  17. [17].↵
    L. van Asten, C. van den Wijngaard, W. van Pelt, J. van de Kassteele, A. Meijer, W. van der Hoek, M. Kretzschmar, M. Koopmans, Mortality attributable to 9 common infections: significant effect of influenza A, respiratory syncytial virus, influenza B, norovirus, and parainfluenza in elderly persons, J Infect Dis 206 (5) (2012) 628–39. doi:10.1093/infdis/jis415.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. [18].↵
    K. A. Pawelek, C. Salmeron, S. Del Valle, Connecting within and betweenhosts dynamics in the influenza infection-staged epidemiological models with behavior change, J Coupled Syst Multiscale Dyn 3 (3) (2015) 233– 243. doi:10.1166/jcsmd.2015.1082.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  19. [19].↵
    H. Li, Q. Wei, A. Tan, L. Wang, Epidemiological analysis of respiratory viral etiology for influenza-like illness during 2010 in zhuhai, china, Virology journal 10 (1) (2013) 143.
    OpenUrl
  20. [20].↵
    R. Gilca, R. Amini, M. Douville-Fradet, H. Charest, J. Dubuque, N. Boulianne, D. M. Skowronski, G. De Serres, Other respiratory viruses are important contributors to adult respiratory hospitalizations and mortality even during peak weeks of the influenza season, in: Open forum infectious diseases, Vol. 1, Oxford University Press, 2014.
  21. [21].↵
    K. Bollaerts, J. Antoine, V. Van Casteren, G. Ducoffre, N. Hens, S. Quoilin, Contribution of respiratory pathogens to influenza-like illness consultations, Epidemiol Infect 141 (10) (2013) 2196–204. doi: 10.1017/S0950268812002506.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. [22].↵
    M. Sansone, Å. Wiman, M. L. Karlberg, M. Brytting, L. Bohlin, L.-M. Andersson, J. Westin, R. Nordén, Molecular characterization of a noso-comial outbreak of influenza B virus in an acute care hospital setting, J Hosp Infect 101 (1) (2019) 30–37. doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2018.06.004.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  23. [23].↵
    J. W. Rudge, N. Inthalaphone, R. Pavlicek, P. Paboriboune, B. Flaissier, C. Monidarin, N. Steenkeste, V. Davong, M. Vongsouvath, K. Bonath, et al., “epidemiology and aetiology of influenza-like illness among house-holds in metropolitan vientiane, lao pdr”: A prospective, community-based cohort study, PloS one 14 (4).
  24. [24].↵
    S. Pei, J. Shaman, Aggregating forecasts of multiple respiratory pathogens supports more accurate forecasting of influenza-like illness, PLoS computational biology 16 (10) (2020) e1008301.
    OpenUrl
  25. [25].↵
    W. W. Thompson, L. Comanor, D. K. Shay, Epidemiology of seasonal influenza: use of surveillance data and statistical models to estimate the burden of disease, The Journal of infectious diseases 194 (Supplement 2) (2006) S82–S91.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  26. [26].↵
    J. Reis, J. Shaman, Simulation of four respiratory viruses and inference of epidemiological parameters, Infectious Disease Modelling 3 (2018) 23–34.
    OpenUrl
  27. [27].↵
    L. Opatowski, M. Baguelin, R. M. Eggo, Influenza interaction with cocirculating pathogens and its impact on surveillance, pathogenesis, and epidemic profile: A key role for mathematical modelling, PLoS pathogens 14 (2) (2018) e1006770.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  28. [28].↵
    G. Chowell, C. Castillo-Chavez, P. W. Fenimore, C. M. Kribs-Zaleta, L. Arriola, J. M. Hyman, Model parameters and outbreak control for SARS, Emerg Infect Dis 10 (7) (2004) 1258–63. doi:10.3201/eid1007.030647.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  29. [29].↵
    R. Lu, X. Zhao, J. Li, P. Niu, B. Yang, H. Wu, W. Wang, H. Song, B. Huang, N. Zhu, et al., Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding, The Lancet 395 (10224) (2020) 565–574.
    OpenUrl
  30. [30].↵
    M. D. McKay, R. J. Beckman, W. J. Conover, Comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code, Technometrics 21 (2) (1979) 239–245. doi: 10.1080/00401706.1979.10489755. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1979.10489755
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  31. [31].↵
    R. C. Team, et al., R: A language and environment for statistical computing.
  32. [32].
    A. K. Zaas, M. Chen, J. Varkey, T. Veldman, A. O. Hero III, J. Lucas, Y. Huang, R. Turner, A. Gilbert, R. Lambkin-Williams, et al., Gene expression signatures diagnose influenza and other symptomatic respiratory viral infections in humans, Cell host & microbe 6 (3) (2009) 207–217.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  33. [33].
    R. S. Fritz, F. G. Hayden, D. P. Calfee, L. M. Cass, A. W. Peng, W. G. Alvord, W. Strober, S. E. Straus, Nasal cytokine and chemokine responses in experimental influenza A virus infection: results of a placebo-controlled trial of intravenous zanamivir treatment, J Infect Dis 180 (3) (1999) 586– 93. doi:10.1086/314938.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  34. [34].
    R. B. Couch, R. G. Douglas, Jr, D. S. Fedson, J. A. Kasel, Correlated studies of a recombinant influenza-virus vaccine. 3. protection against experimental influenza in man, J Infect Dis 124 (5) (1971) 473–80. doi:10.1093/infdis/124.5.473.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  35. [35].
    A. F. Oner, A. Bay, S. Arslan, H. Akdeniz, H. A. Sahin, Y. Cesur, S. Epcacan, N. Yilmaz, I. Deger, B. Kizilyildiz, H. Karsen, M. Ceyhan, Avian influenza A (H5N1) infection in eastern Turkey in 2006, N Engl J Med 355 (21) (2006) 2179–85. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa060601.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  36. [36].
    M. R. Moser, T. R. Bender, H. S. Margolis, G. R. Noble, A. P. Kendal, D. G. Ritter, An outbreak of influenza aboard a commercial airliner, Am J Epidemiol 110 (1) (1979) 1–6. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112781.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  37. [37].
    L. Kaiser, M. S. Briones, F. G. Hayden, Performance of virus isolation and directigen flu A to detect influenza A virus in experimental human infection, J Clin Virol 14 (3) (1999) 191–7. doi:10.1016/s1386-6532(99)00058-x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  38. [38].
    S. Kondo, K. Abe, The effects of influenza virus infection on FEV1 in asthmatic children. the time-course study, Chest 100 (5) (1991) 1235–8. doi:10.1378/chest.100.5.1235.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  39. [39].
    J. Lessler, N. G. Reich, R. Brookmeyer, T. M. Perl, K. E. Nelson, D. A. T. Cummings, Incubation periods of acute respiratory viral in-fections: a systematic review, Lancet Infect Dis 9 (5) (2009) 291–300. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(09)70069-6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  40. [40].
    D. Wat, The common cold: a review of the literature, Eur J Intern Med 15 (2) (2004) 79–88. doi:10.1016/j.ejim.2004.01.006.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. [41].
    K. M. Johnson, R. M. Chanock, D. Rifkind, H. M. Kravetz, V. Knight, Respiratory syncytial virus. IV. correlation of virus shedding, serologic response, and illness in adult volunteers, JAMA 176 (1961) 663–7.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  42. [42].
    C. R. Pringle, A. H. Filipiuk, B. S. Robinson, P. J. Watt, P. Higgins, D. A. Tyrrell, Immunogenicity and pathogenicity of a triple temperature-sensitive modified respiratory syncytial virus in adult volunteers, Vaccine 11 (4) (1993) 473–8. doi:10.1016/0264-410x(93)90290-e.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. [43].
    D. Tyrrell, S. Cohen, J. Schilarb, Signs and symptoms in common colds, Epidemiology & Infection 111 (1) (1993) 143–156.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  44. [44].
    N. G. Reich, T. M. Perl, D. A. T. Cummings, J. Lessler, Visualizing clinical evidence: citation networks for the incubation periods of respiratory viral infections, PLoS One 6 (4) (2011) e19496. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0019496.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. [45].
    R. G. Douglas, Jr, R. D. Rossen, W. T. Butler, R. B. Couch, Rhinovirus neutralizing antibody in tears, parotid saliva, nasal secretions and serum, J Immunol 99 (2) (1967) 297–303.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  46. [46].
    P. C. Avila, J. A. Abisheganaden, H. Wong, J. Liu, S. Yagi, D. Schnurr, J. L. Kishiyama, H. A. Boushey, Effects of allergic inflammation of the nasal mucosa on the severity of rhinovirus 16 cold, J Allergy Clin Immunol 105 (5) (2000) 923–32. doi:10.1067/mai.2000.106214.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  47. [47].
    C. L. Drake, T. A. Roehrs, H. Royer, G. Koshorek, R. B. Turner, T. Roth, Effects of an experimentally induced rhinovirus cold on sleep, performance, and daytime alertness, Physiol Behav 71 (1-2) (2000) 75–81. doi:10.1016/s0031-9384(00)00322-x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. [48].
    R. M. Naclerio, D. Proud, L. M. Lichtenstein, A. Kagey-Sobotka, J. O. Hendley, J. Sorrentino, J. M. Gwaltney, Kinins are generated during experimental rhinovirus colds, J Infect Dis 157 (1) (1988) 133–42. doi: 10.1093/infdis/157.1.133.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  49. [49].
    J. M. Harris, J. M. Gwaltney Jr, Incubation periods of experimental rhinovirus infection and illness, Clinical infectious diseases 23 (6) (1996) 1287–1290.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  50. [50].
    A. F. Bradburne, M. L. Bynoe, D. A. Tyrrell, Effects of a “new” human respiratory virus in volunteers, Br Med J 3 (5568) (1967) 767–9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.3.5568.767.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  51. [51].
    M. Valtonen, M. Waris, T. Vuorinen, E. Eerola, A. J. Hakanen, K. Mjosund, W. Grönroos, O. J. Heinonen, O. Ruuskanen, Common cold in Team Finland during 2018 Winter Olympic Games (PyeongChang): epidemiology, diagnosis including molecular point-of-care testing (POCT) and treatment, Br J Sports Med 53 (17) (2019) 1093–1098. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2018-100487.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  52. [52].
    A. Assiri, J. A. Al-Tawfiq, A. A. Al-Rabeeah, F. A. Al-Rabiah, S. Al-Hajjar, A. Al-Barrak, H. Flemban, W. N. Al-Nassir, H. H. Balkhy, R. F. Al-Hakeem, H. Q. Makhdoom, A. I. Zumla, Z. A. Memish, Epidemiological, demographic, and clinical characteristics of 47 cases of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus disease from Saudi Arabia: a descriptive study, Lancet Infect Dis 13 (9) (2013) 752–61. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(13)70204-4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  53. [53].
    V. Virlogeux, M. Park, J. T. Wu, B. J. Cowling, Association between severity of MERS-CoV infection and incubation period, Emerg Infect Dis 22 (3) (2016) 526–8. doi:10.3201/eid2203.151437.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  54. [54].
    R. M. Anderson, C. Fraser, A. C. Ghani, C. A. Donnelly, S. Riley, N. M. Ferguson, G. M. Leung, T. H. Lam, A. J. Hedley, Epidemiology, transmission dynamics and control of sars: the 2002–2003 epidemic, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 359 (1447) (2004) 1091–1105.
  55. [55].
    J. M. Sendra-Gutiérrez, D. Martín-Rios, I. Casas, P. Sáez, A. Tovar, C. Moreno, An outbreak of adenovirus type 8 keratoconjunctivitis in a nursing home in Madrid, Euro Surveill 9 (3) (2004) 27–30. doi: 10.2807/esm.09.03.00453-en.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  56. [56].
    D. R. Feikin, J. F. Moroney, D. F. Talkington, W. L. Thacker, J. E. Code, L. A. Schwartz, D. D. Erdman, J. C. Butler, M. S. Cetron, An outbreak of acute respiratory disease caused by Mycoplasma pneumoniae and adenovirus at a federal service training academy: new implications from an old scenario, Clin Infect Dis 29 (6) (1999) 1545–50. doi:10.1086/313500.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  57. [57].
    S. Berger, Infectious Diseases of Bhutan, O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2010.
  58. [58].
    1. R. Kliegman,
    2. P. Lye,
    3. B. Bordini,
    4. H. Toth,
    5. D. Basel
    R. R. Tanz, Sore throat, in: R. Kliegman, P. Lye, B. Bordini, H. Toth, D. Basel (Eds.), Nelson Pediatric Symptom-Based Diagnosis E-Book, Elsevier Health Sciences, 2017. URL https://books.google.com/books?id=OwRODgAAQBAJ
  59. [59].
    1. P. Murray,
    2. E. Baron,
    3. J. Jorgensen,
    4. M. Landry,
    5. M. Pfaller
    C. Robinson, M. Echavarria, Adenoviruses, in: P. Murray, E. Baron, J. Jorgensen, M. Landry, M. Pfaller (Eds.), Manual of clinical microbiology, 9th Edition, Washington, DC, 2007, p. 1589.
  60. [60].
    B. J. Cowling, V. J. Fang, S. Riley, J. S. Malik Peiris, G. M. Leung, Estimation of the serial interval of influenza, Epidemiology 20 (3) (2009) 344–7. doi:10.1097/EDE.0b013e31819d1092.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  61. [61].
    C. B. Hall, C. E. Long, K. C. Schnabel, Respiratory syncytial virus infections in previously healthy working adults, Clin Infect Dis 33 (6) (2001) 792–6. doi:10.1086/322657.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  62. [62].
    A. Weber, M. Weber, P. Milligan, Modeling epidemics caused by respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), Math Biosci 172 (2) (2001) 95–113. doi:10.1016/s0025-5564(01)00066-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  63. [63].
  64. [64].
    K. G. Nicholson, J. Kent, V. Hammersley, E. Cancio, Risk factors for lower respiratory complications of rhinovirus infections in elderly people living in the community: prospective cohort study, BMJ 313 (7065) (1996) 1119–23. doi:10.1136/bmj.313.7065.1119.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  65. [65].
    E. Arruda, A. Pitkäranta, T. J. Witek, Jr., C. A. Doyle, F. G. Hayden, Frequency and natural history of rhinovirus infections in adults during autumn, J Clin Microbiol 35 (11) (1997) 2864–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  66. [66].
    R. G. Douglas, Jr., T. R. Cate, P. J. Gerone, R. B. Couch, Quantitative rhinovirus shedding patterns in volunteers, Am Rev Respir Dis 94 (2) (1966) 159–67. doi:10.1164/arrd.1966.94.2.159.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  67. [67].
    1. P. Murray,
    2. E. Baron,
    3. J. Jorgensen,
    4. M. Landry,
    5. M. Pfaller
    M. L. Landry, Rhinoviruses, in: P. Murray, E. Baron, J. Jorgensen, M. Landry, M. Pfaller (Eds.), Manual of clinical microbiology, 9th Edition, Washington, DC, 2007, p. 1405.
  68. [68].
    L. Kaiser, N. Regamey, H. Roiha, C. Deffernez, U. Frey, Human coronavirus NL63 associated with lower respiratory tract symptoms in early life, Pediatr Infect Dis J 24 (11) (2005) 1015–7. doi:10.1097/01.inf.0000183773.80217.12.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  69. [69].
    S. S. Chiu, K. H. Chan, K. W. Chu, S. W. Kwan, Y. Guan, L. L. M. Poon, J. S. M. Peiris, Human coronavirus NL63 infection and other coronavirus infections in children hospitalized with acute respiratory disease in Hong Kong, China, Clin Infect Dis 40 (12) (2005) 1721–9. doi:10.1086/430301.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  70. [70].
    J. Y. Hong, H. J. Lee, P. A. Piedra, E. H. Choi, K. H. Park, Y. Y. Koh, W. S. Kim, Lower respiratory tract infections due to adenovirus in hospitalized Korean children: epidemiology, clinical features, and prognosis, Clin Infect Dis 32 (10) (2001) 1423–9. doi:10.1086/320146.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  71. [71].
    H. W. Kim, C. D. Brandt, J. O. Arrobio, B. Murphy, R. M. Chanock, R. H. Parrott, Influenza A and B virus infection in infants and young children during the years 1957-1976, Am J Epidemiol 109 (4) (1979) 464– 79. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112704.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  72. [72].
    A. Drăgănescu, O. Săndulescu, D. Florea, O. Vlaicu, A. Streinu-Cercel, D. Oţelea, V. Aramă, M. L. Luminos, A. Streinu-Cercel, M. Niţescu, A. Ivanciuc, R. Bacruban, D. Piţigoi, The influenza season 2016/17 in Bucharest, Romania - surveillance data and clinical characteristics of patients with influenza-like illness admitted to a tertiary infectious diseases hospital, Braz J Infect Dis 22 (5) (2018) 377–386. doi:10.1016/j.bjid.2018.10.275.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  73. [73].
    S. Broor, F. S. Dawood, B. G. Pandey, S. Saha, V. Gupta, A. Krishnan, S. Rai, P. Singh, D. Erdman, R. B. Lal, Rates of respiratory virusassociated hospitalization in children aged <5 years in rural northern India, J Infect 68 (3) (2014) 281–9. doi:10.1016/j.jinf.2013.11.005.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  74. [74].
    T. S. Howard, L. H. Hoffman, P. E. Stang, E. A. Simoes, Respiratory syncytial virus pneumonia in the hospital setting: length of stay, charges, and mortality, J Pediatr 137 (2) (2000) 227–32. doi:10.1067/mpd.2000.107525.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  75. [75].
    B. M. Morrow, M. Hatherill, H. E. M. Smuts, J. Yeats, R. Pitcher, A. C. Argent, Clinical course of hospitalised children infected with human metapneumovirus and respiratory syncytial virus, J Paediatr Child Health 42 (4) (2006) 174–8. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1754.2006.00825.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  76. [76].
    D. K. Shay, R. C. Holman, R. D. Newman, L. L. Liu, J. W. Stout, L. J. Anderson, Bronchiolitis-associated hospitalizations among US children, 1980-1996, JAMA 282 (15) (1999) 1440–6. doi:10.1001/jama.282.15.1440.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  77. [77].
    S. S. Chiu, K.-H. Chan, H. Chen, B. W. Young, W. Lim, W. H.-S. Wong, J. S. M. Peiris, Virologically confirmed population-based burden of hospitalization caused by respiratory syncytial virus, adenovirus, and parainfluenza viruses in children in Hong Kong, Pediatr Infect Dis J 29 (12) (2010) 1088–92. doi:10.1097/INF.0b013e3181e9de24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  78. [78].
    P.-Y. I. Tam, L. Zhang, Z. Cohen, Clinical characteristics and outcomes of human rhinovirus positivity in hospitalized children, Ann Thorac Med 13 (4) (2018) 230–236. doi:10.4103/atm.ATM_291_17.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  79. [79].
    M. K. Iwane, M. M. Prill, X. Lu, E. K. Miller, K. M. Edwards, C. B. Hall, M. R. Griffin, M. A. Staat, L. J. Anderson, J. V. Williams, G. A. Weinberg, A. Ali, P. G. Szilagyi, Y. Zhu, D. D. Erdman, Human rhinovirus species associated with hospitalizations for acute respiratory illness in young US children, J Infect Dis 204 (11) (2011) 1702–10. doi:10.1093/infdis/jir634.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  80. [80].
    G. Boivin, M. Baz, S. Côté, R. Gilca, C. Deffrasnes, E. Leblanc, M. G. Bergeron, P. Déry, G. De Serres, Infections by human coronavirus-NL in hospitalized children, Pediatr Infect Dis J 24 (12) (2005) 1045–8. doi: 10.1097/01.inf.0000183743.68569.c7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  81. [81].
    V. M. Corman, A. M. Albarrak, A. S. Omrani, M. M. Albarrak, M. E. Farah, M. Almasri, D. Muth, A. Sieberg, B. Meyer, A. M. Assiri, T. Binger, K. Steinhagen, E. Lattwein, J. Al-Tawfiq, M. A. Müller, C. Drosten, Z. A. Memish, Viral shedding and antibody response in 37 patients with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus infection, Clin Infect Dis 62 (4) (2016) 477–483. doi:10.1093/cid/civ951.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  82. [82].
    N. Peled, C. Nakar, H. Huberman, E. Scherf, Z. Samra, Y. Finkelstein, V. Hoffer, B.-Z. Garty, Adenovirus infection in hospitalized immunocompetent children, Clin Pediatr (Phila) 43 (3) (2004) 223–9. doi: 10.1177/000992280404300303.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  83. [83].
    M. K. Iwane, K. M. Edwards, P. G. Szilagyi, F. J. Walker, M. R. Griffin, G. A. Weinberg, C. Coulen, K. A. Poehling, L. P. Shone, S. Balter, C. B. Hall, D. D. Erdman, K. Wooten, B. Schwartz, New Vaccine Surveillance Network, Population-based surveillance for hospitalizations associated with respiratory syncytial virus, influenza virus, and parainfluenza viruses among young children, Pediatrics 113 (6) (2004) 1758–64. doi:10.1542/peds.113.6.1758.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  84. [84].
    A. J. Millman, C. Reed, P. D. Kirley, D. Aragon, J. Meek, M. M. Farley, P. Ryan, J. Collins, R. Lynfield, J. Baumbach, S. Zansky, N. M. Bennett, B. Fowler, A. Thomas, M. L. Lindegren, A. Atkinson, L. Finelli, S. S. Chaves, Improving accuracy of influenza-associated hospitalization rate estimates, Emerg Infect Dis 21 (9) (2015) 1595–601. doi: 10.3201/eid2109.141665.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  85. [85].
    L. W. Ang, C. Lim, V. J. M. Lee, S. Ma, W. W. Tiong, P. L. Ooi, R. T. P. Lin, L. James, J. Cutter, Influenza-associated hospitalizations, Singapore, 2004-2008 and 2010-2012, Emerg Infect Dis 20 (10) (2014) 1652–60. doi: 10.3201/eid2010.131768.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  86. [86].
    A. R. Falsey, E. E. Walsh, M. T. Esser, K. Shoemaker, L. Yu, M. P. Griffin, Respiratory syncytial virus-associated illness in adults with advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and/or congestive heart failure, J Med Virol 91 (1) (2019) 65–71. doi:10.1002/jmv.25285.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  87. [87].
    J. P. Mullooly, C. B. Bridges, W. W. Thompson, J. Chen, E. Weintraub, L. A. Jackson, S. Black, D. K. Shay, Vaccine Safety Datalink Adult Working Group, Influenza-and RSV-associated hospitalizations among adults, Vaccine 25 (5) (2007) 846–55. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.09.041.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  88. [88].
    L. F. Avendaño, M. A. Palomino, C. Larrañaga, Surveillance for respiratory syncytial virus in infants hospitalized for acute lower respiratory infection in Chile (1989 to 2000), J Clin Microbiol 41 (10) (2003) 4879–82. doi:10.1128/jcm.41.10.4879-4882.2003.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  89. [89].
    E. K. Miller, J. Linder, D. Kraft, M. Johnson, P. Lu, B. R. Saville, J. V. Williams, M. R. Griffin, H. K. Talbot, Hospitalizations and outpatient visits for rhinovirus-associated acute respiratory illness in adults, J Allergy Clin Immunol 137 (3) (2016) 734–43.e1. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2015.06.017.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  90. [90].
    W.-M. Lee, R. F. Lemanske, Jr., M. D. Evans, F. Vang, T. Pappas, R. Gangnon, D. J. Jackson, J. E. Gern, Human rhinovirus species and season of infection determine illness severity, Am J Respir Crit Care Med 186 (9) (2012) 886–91. doi:10.1164/rccm.201202-0330OC.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  91. [91].
    N. Bastien, K. Anderson, L. Hart, P. Van Caeseele, K. Brandt, D. Milley, T. Hatchette, E. C. Weiss, Y. Li, Human coronavirus nl63 infection in Canada, J Infect Dis 191 (4) (2005) 503–6. doi:10.1086/426869.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  92. [92].
    J. Reina, C. López-Causapé, E. Rojo-Molinero, R. Rubio, Clinicoepidemiological characteristics of acute respiratory infections caused by coronavirus OC43, NL63 and 229E, Rev Clin Esp 214 (9) (2014) 499–504. doi:10.1016/j.rce.2014.05.020.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  93. [93].
    M. R. Hilleman, R. L. Gauld, R. L. Butler, R. A. Stallones, C. L. Hedberg, M. S. Warfield, S. A. Anderson, Appraisal of occurrence of adenoviruscaused respiratory illness in military populations, Am J Hyg 66 (1) (1957) 29–41. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a119882.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  94. [94].
    W. P. Glezen, A. A. Payne, D. N. Snyder, T. D. Downs, Mortality and influenza, Journal of Infectious Diseases 146 (3) (1982) 313–321.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  95. [95].
    C. Cohen, S. Walaza, F. K. Treurnicht, M. McMorrow, S. A. Madhi, J. M. McAnerney, S. Tempia, In- and out-of-hospital mortality associated with seasonal and pandemic influenza and respiratory syncytial virus in South Africa, 2009-2013, Clin Infect Dis 66 (1) (2018) 95–103. doi:10.1093/cid/cix740.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  96. [96].
    W. J. Alonso, C. Viboud, L. Simonsen, E. W. Hirano, L. Z. Daufenbach, M. A. Miller, Seasonality of influenza in Brazil: a traveling wave from the Amazon to the subtropics, Am J Epidemiol 165 (12) (2007) 1434–42. doi:10.1093/aje/kwm012.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  97. [97].
    T. M. Quandelacy, C. Viboud, V. Charu, M. Lipsitch, E. Goldstein, Age- and sex-related risk factors for influenza-associated mortality in the United States between 1997-2007, Am J Epidemiol 179 (2) (2014) 156–67. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwt235.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  98. [98].
    N. I. Mendez-Dominguez, L. O. Bobadilla-Rosado, L. S. Fajardo-Ruiz, A. Camara-Salazar, S. Gomez-Carro, Influenza in Yucatan in 2018: Chronology, characteristics and outcomes of ambulatory and hospitalized patients, Braz J Infect Dis 23 (5) (2019) 358–362. doi:10.1016/j.bjid.2019.08.009.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  99. [99].
    R. C. Welliver, Sr, P. A. Checchia, J. H. Bauman, A. W. Fernandes, P. J. Mahadevia, C. B. Hall, Fatality rates in published reports of RSV hospitalizations among high-risk and otherwise healthy children, Curr Med Res Opin 26 (9) (2010) 2175–81. doi:10.1185/03007995.2010.505126.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  100. [100].
    M. N. Tsolia, D. Kafetzis, K. Danelatou, H. Astral, K. Kallergi, P. Spyridis, T. E. Karpathios, Epidemiology of respiratory syncytial virus bronchiolitis in hospitalized infants in Greece, Eur J Epidemiol 18 (1) (2003) 55–61. doi:10.1023/a:1022556215190.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  101. [101].
    N. Lee, S. T. Qureshi, Other viral pneumonias: coronavirus, respiratory syncytial virus, adenovirus, hantavirus, Crit Care Clin 29 (4) (2013) 1045– 68. doi:10.1016/j.ccc.2013.07.003.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  102. [102].
    A. Fica, J. Dabanch, W. Andrade, P. Bustos, I. Carvajal, C. Ceroni, V. Triantafilo, M. Castro, R. Fasce, Clinical relevance of rhinovirus infections among adult hospitalized patients, Braz J Infect Dis 19 (2) (2015) 118–24. doi:10.1016/j.bjid.2014.10.003.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  103. [103].
    A. R. Falsey, E. E. Walsh, F. G. Hayden, Rhinovirus and coronavirus infection-associated hospitalizations among older adults, J Infect Dis 185 (9) (2002) 1338–41. doi:10.1086/339881.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  104. [104].
    N. Ramadan, H. Shaib, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV): A review, Germs 9 (1) (2019) 35–42. doi:10.18683/germs.2019.1155.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  105. [105].
    H.-J. Chang, Estimation of basic reproduction number of the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) during the outbreak in South Korea, 2015, Biomed Eng Online 16 (1) (2017) 79. doi:10.1186/s12938-017-0370-7.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  106. [106].
    A. G. Wesley, M. Pather, D. Tait, Nosocomial adenovirus infection in a paediatric respiratory unit, J Hosp Infect 25 (3) (1993) 183–90. doi: 10.1016/0195-6701(93)90036-y.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  107. [107].
    S. I. Gerber, D. D. Erdman, S. L. Pur, P. S. Diaz, J. Segreti, A. E. Kajon, R. P. Belkengren, R. C. Jones, Outbreak of adenovirus genome type 7d2 infection in a pediatric chronic-care facility and tertiary-care hospital, Clin Infect Dis 32 (5) (2001) 694–700. doi:10.1086/319210.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  108. [108].
    C. Larrañaga, J. Martínez H, A. Palomino M, M. Peña C, F. Carrión A, L. F. Avendaño C, Molecular characterization of hospital-acquired aden-ovirus infantile respiratory infection in Chile using species-specific PCR assays, J Clin Virol 39 (3) (2007) 175–81. doi:10.1016/j.jcv.2007.04.016.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  109. [109].
    J.-H. Ko, H.-T. Woo, H. S. Oh, S. M. Moon, J. Y. Choi, J. U. Lim, D. Kim, J. Byun, S.-H. Kwon, D. Kang, J. Y. Heo, K. R. Peck, Ongoing outbreak of human adenovirus-associated acute respiratory illness in the Republic of Korea military, 2013 to 2018, Korean J Intern Meddoi:10.3904/kjim.2019.092.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  110. [110].
    J. Wallinga, M. Lipsitch, How generation intervals shape the relationship between growth rates and reproductive numbers, Proc Biol Sci 274 (1609) (2007) 599–604. doi:10.1098/rspb.2006.3754.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  111. [111].
    B. F. d. Blasio, B. G. Iversen, G. S. Tomba, Effect of vaccines and antivirals during the major 2009 A(H1N1) pandemic wave in Norway– and the influence of vaccination timing, PLoS One 7 (1) (2012) e30018. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0030018.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  112. [112].
    C. Sonthichai, S. Iamsirithaworn, D. Cummings, P. Shokekird, A. Niramitsantipong, S. Khumket, M. Chittaganpitch, J. Lessler, Effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions in controlling an influenza A outbreak in a school, Thailand, November 2007, Outbreak Surveill Investig Rep 4 (2) (2011) 611.
    OpenUrl
  113. [113].
    G. Chowell, M. A. Miller, C. Viboud, Seasonal influenza in the United States, France, and Australia: transmission and prospects for control, Epidemiol Infect 136 (6) (2008) 852–64. doi:10.1017/S0950268807009144.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  114. [114].
    G. Chowell, C. Viboud, L. Simonsen, M. Miller, W. J. Alonso, The reproduction number of seasonal influenza epidemics in Brazil, 1996-2006, Proc Biol Sci 277 (1689) (2010) 1857–66. doi:10.1098/rspb.2009.1897.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  115. [115].
    M. Biggerstaff, S. Cauchemez, C. Reed, M. Gambhir, L. Finelli, Estimates of the reproduction number for seasonal, pandemic, and zoonotic influenza: a systematic review of the literature, BMC Infect Dis 14 (2014) 480. doi:10.1186/1471-2334-14-480.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  116. [116].
    J. Reis, J. Shaman, Retrospective parameter estimation and forecast of respiratory syncytial virus in the United States, PLoS Comput Biol 12 (10) (2016) e1005133. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005133.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  117. [117].
    J. X. Velasco-Hernández, M. Núñez-López, A. Comas-García, D. E. N. Cherpitel, M. C. Ocampo, Superinfection between influenza and RSV alternating patterns in San Luis Potosí State, México, PLoS One 10 (3) (2015) e0115674. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115674.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  118. [118].
    V. R. Duvvuri, A. Granados, P. Rosenfeld, J. Bahl, A. Eshaghi, J. B. Gubbay, Genetic diversity and evolutionary insights of respiratory syncytial virus a ON1 genotype: global and local transmission dynamics, Sci Rep 5 (2015) 14268. doi:10.1038/srep14268.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  119. [119].
    V. E. Pitzer, C. Viboud, W. J. Alonso, T. Wilcox, C. J. Metcalf, C. A. Steiner, A. K. Haynes, B. T. Grenfell, Environmental drivers of the spatiotemporal dynamics of respiratory syncytial virus in the United States, PLoS Pathog 11 (1) (2015) e1004591. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1004591.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  120. [120].
    J. Reis, J. Shaman, Simulation of four respiratory viruses and inference of epidemiological parameters, Infect Dis Model 3 (2018) 23–34. doi: 10.1016/j.idm.2018.03.006.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  121. [121].
    N. Levy, M. Iv, E. Yom-Tov, Modeling influenza-like illnesses through composite compartmental models, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 494 (2018) 288–293.
    OpenUrl
  122. [122].
    E. J. Scully, S. Basnet, R. W. Wrangham, M. N. Muller, E. Otali, D. Hyeroba, K. A. Grindle, T. E. Pappas, M. E. Thompson, Z. Machanda, K. E. Watters, A. C. Palmenberg, J. E. Gern, T. L. Goldberg, Lethal respiratory disease associated with human rhinovirus C in wild chimpanzees, Uganda, 2013, Emerg Infect Dis 24 (2) (2018) 267–274. doi: 10.3201/eid2402.170778.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  123. [123].
    M. S. Majumder, C. Rivers, E. Lofgren, D. Fisman, Estimation of MERS-Coronavirus reproductive number and case fatality rate for the spring 2014 Saudi Arabia outbreak: Insights from publicly available data, PLoS Curr 6. doi:10.1371/currents.outbreaks.98d2f8f3382d84f390736cd5f5fe133c.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  124. [124].
    G. M. Leung, P.-H. Chung, T. Tsang, W. Lim, S. K. K. Chan, P. Chau, C. A. Donnelly, A. C. Ghani, C. Fraser, S. Riley, N. M. Ferguson, R. M. Anderson, Y.-l. Law, T. Mok, T. Ng, A. Fu, P.-Y. Leung, J. S. M. Peiris, T.-H. Lam, A. J. Hedley, SARS-CoV antibody prevalence in all Hong Kong patient contacts, Emerg Infect Dis 10 (9) (2004) 1653–6. doi: 10.3201/eid1009.040155.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  125. [125].
    Y. Kim, S. Lee, C. Chu, S. Choe, S. Hong, Y. Shin, The characteristics of Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus transmission dynamics in South Korea, Osong Public Health Res Perspect 7 (1) (2016) 49–55. doi:10.1016/j.phrp.2016.01.001.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  126. [126].
    M. Lipsitch, T. Cohen, B. Cooper, J. M. Robins, S. Ma, L. James, G. Gopalakrishna, S. K. Chew, C. C. Tan, M. H. Samore, D. Fisman, M. Murray, Transmission dynamics and control of severe acute respiratory syndrome, Science 300 (5627) (2003) 1966–70. doi:10.1126/science.1086616.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  127. [127].
    C. T. Bauch, J. O. Lloyd-Smith, M. P. Coffee, A. P. Galvani, Dynamically modeling SARS and other newly emerging respiratory illnesses: past, present, and future, Epidemiology 16 (6) (2005) 791–801. doi: 10.1097/01.ede.0000181633.80269.4c.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  128. [128].
    S. Riley, C. Fraser, C. A. Donnelly, A. C. Ghani, L. J. Abu-Raddad, A. J. Hedley, G. M. Leung, L.-M. Ho, T.-H. Lam, T. Q. Thach, P. Chau, K.-P. Chan, S.-V. Lo, P.-Y. Leung, T. Tsang, W. Ho, K.-H. Lee, E. M. C. Lau, N. M. Ferguson, R. M. Anderson, Transmission dynamics of the etiological agent of SARS in Hong Kong: impact of public health interventions, Science 300 (5627) (2003) 1961–6. doi:10.1126/science.1086478.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  129. [129].
    C. M. Hendrickson, M. A. Matthay, Viral pathogens and acute lung injury: investigations inspired by the sars epidemic and the 2009 h1n1 influenza pandemic, in: Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine, Vol. 34, Thieme Medical Publishers, 2013, pp. 475–486.
  130. [130].
    W. Zhen, R. Manji, E. Smith, G. J. Berry, Comparison of four molecular in vitro diagnostic assays for the detection of sars-cov-2 in nasopharyngeal specimens, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.
  131. [131].↵
    F. M. Hamelin, L. J. Allen, V. A. Bokil, L. J. Gross, F. M. Hilker, M. J. Jeger, C. A. Manore, A. G. Power, M. A. Ruá, N. J. Cunniffe, Coinfections by noninteracting pathogens are not independent and require new tests of interaction, PLoS biology 17 (12) (2019) e3000551.
    OpenUrl
  132. [132].↵
    A. Wu, V. T. Mihaylova, M. L. Landry, E. F. Foxman, Interference between rhinovirus and influenza a virus: a clinical data analysis and experimental infection study, The Lancet Microbe 1 (6) (2020) e254–e262.
    OpenUrl
  133. [133].↵
    P. Van den Driessche, J. Watmough, Reproduction numbers and subthreshold endemic equilibria for compartmental models of disease transmission, Math Biosci 180 (2002) 29–48. doi:10.1016/s0025-5564(02)00108-6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
Back to top
Posted April 23, 2021.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email
Distinguishing Viruses Responsible for Influenza-Like Illness
Julie A. Spencer, Deborah P. Shutt, Sarah K. Moser, Hannah Clegg, Helen J. Wearing, Harshini Mukundan, Carrie A. Manore
medRxiv 2020.02.04.20020404; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.04.20020404
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools

Subject Area