Abstract
Screening plans for prevention and containment of SARS-CoV-2 infection should take into account the epidemic context, the fact that undetected infected individuals may transmit the disease, and that the infection spreads through outbreaks, creating clusters in the population. In this paper, we compare the performance of six screening plans based on poorly sensitive individual tests, in detecting infection outbreaks at the level of single classes in a school context. The performance evaluation is done by simulating different epidemic dynamics within the class during the five weeks following the day of the first infection. The plans have different costs in terms of number of individual tests required for the screening and are based on recurrent evaluations on all students or subgroups of students in rotation. Especially in scenarios where the rate of contagion is high, at an equal cost, testing half of the class in rotation every week appears to be better in terms of sensitivity than testing all students every two weeks. Similarly, testing one-fourth of the students every week is comparable with testing all students every two weeks, despite the first one is a much cheaper strategy. In the presence of natural clusters in the population, testing subgroups of individuals belonging to the same cluster in rotation may have a better performance than testing all the individuals less frequently. The proposed simulations approach can be extended to evaluate more complex screening plans than those presented in the paper.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The paper is based on simulations, no ethics commitee approval is needed.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I 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).
Yes
I 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.
Yes
Data Availability
The paper is based on simulations.
