Importation models for travel-related SARS-CoV-2 cases reported in Newfoundland and Labrador during the COVID-19 pandemic

A.1 Pre-pandemic

International Air Transport Association (IATA) data reported the number of passengers traveling in all classes for flights to and from Newfoundland and Labrador from January 2019 through March 2020 (International Air Transport Association, 2020). We focus on the origin and destination that were reported for each trip (not layovers). We classify the data into three categories: inbound, outbound, and within province. In this work, we use inbound air travel volume.

A.2 During the pandemic

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Newfoundland and Labrador, several travel measures were implemented at the federal or provincial levels. At the federal level, on March 16, 2020, entry into Canada by air was allowed only to Canadians and permanent residents of Canada, and citizens of the United States of America. Air crews, travelers arriving in Canada in transit to a third country, diplomats, or immediate family members of Canadian citizens were also exempt (Trudeau, 2020). At the provincial level, on March 20, 2020, 14-day self-isolation was ordered for all individuals entering Newfoundland and Labrador from outside the province (Exemption Order, 2020). This order included some exemptions, e.g. workers in transportation, essential workers, and rotational workers (Exemption Order 2, 2020). Further provincial travel measures were implemented on April 23, 2020 (Amendment No. 6, 2020). These measures required that all individuals arriving in Newfoundland and Labrador from outside the province must complete a Travel Declaration Form (TDF) and have a self-isolation plan to submit to a government representative upon entry. Also, all individuals arriving in the Labrador part of the province by motor vehicle from the province of Québec must immediately stop at their point of entry indicated by a representative of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, to submit their declaration form and their self-isolation plan (Amendment No. 8, 2020).

Effective May 4, 2020, all individuals were prohibited from entering Newfoundland and Labrador except residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, asymptomatic workers, and individuals who received a travel exemption (Amendment No.11, 2020; Travel Exemption Order, 2020). There were limited numbers of exempted individuals who were not required to complete the TDF and submit the self-isolation plan. These were travelers who stayed in the province less than 24 hours, arrived daily or several times a day via the Labrador-Québec border, entered the province via the Labrador-Québec border for school reasons, or arrived weekly or several times a week in the province (Declaration Exemption Order, 2020; Self-Isolation Exemption Order, 2020). Submitting a TDF at the Labrador-Québec border relaxed further on June 25, 2020, especially for the residents of Labrador City, Wabush, Fermont, the Labrador Straits area, Blanc Sablon, and greater Québec Lower North Shore area (Labrador-Quebec Border Amendments, 2020). Completing a TDF was required even when the Atlantic Bubble was enacted (Atlantic Travel Amendments, 2020). All these travel orders were in place until the first phase of reopening. Effective on July 1, 2021, an approved reason to travel to the province, and completion of a TDF, was no longer required (Re-Opening - Travel, 2021). We use the TDF information maintained by Newfoundland and Labrador Health Services, Digital Health, to estimate arrival volume in the province during the pandemic.

A.3 All time

The Frontier Counts (FC) provide counts of entries into Canada by international travelers at Canadian ports of entry. Total travel volume includes all international travelers that were categorized as: Canadian residents returning to Canada, United States of America residents entering Canada, residents of countries other than the United States of America entering Canada and ‘other’ travelers which consist of foreign and resident crew members, diplomats, military personnel, immigrants and former residents (Statistics Canada, 2020-2021). For this study, we focus on Newfoundland and Labrador ports of entry.

Data reported by Frontier Counts are extracted from different data sources provided by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), i.e., Primary Inspection Kiosks (electronic systems at major airports), E311 Declaration Cards (forms completed at Canadian international airports without electronic system), and Telephone Reporting Centre-CANPASS (an electronic system for private plane or private boat or who report a land crossing by phone) (Statistics Canada, 2020-2021).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Fig. A1.

A. Travel volume of non-exempt travelers arriving in NL as reported by the TDF. Travel volume is a variable included in several of our models and may affect the number of travel-related cases reported in NL B. Travel-related cases reported in the Newfoundland and Labrador Health Services (NLHS) COVID-19 database (September 2020 to May 2021; Canada - yellow; international - grey). Both daily values (dots) and monthly averages (lines) are shown.

A.4 Estimating travel volumes not reported in the data sources

A.5 Percentage of travelers arriving from different origins

The TDF data (during the pandemic) was used to estimate the monthly percentage of travelers originating from each country (international travel volume) arriving to Newfoundland and Labrador during the pandemic (Table A3). These values show that the United States comprises most arrivals from international origins, implying that our assumption that infection prevalence for international arrivals is equal to infection prevalence in the United States is reasonable.

The percentage of travel volume for each province or the territories from the IATA (before the pandemic) and TDF (during the pandemic) data was used to estimate the percentage of regular travelers arriving from each of these origins (Table A4).

The percentage of NL residents that are interprovincial employees working in each Canadian province or the territories is reported by Hewitt et al 2018. In this report, the largest number of NL residents that are interprovincial employees work in Alberta (57%), followed by Ontario (15%) and Nova Scotia (8%). These values are used to estimate the within-Canada origin of rotational workers (Table A4).

A.6 Estimating total travel volume

We estimated the total travel volume (see Section 2.2.1 of the main text for a definition) arriving in NL by considering three data sources: International Air Travel Association (s = 1), Travel Declaration Forms (s = 2), and Frontier Counts (s = 3) each with limitations, and each reported for different time periods (Table 1). We estimate the total travel volume considering all travel modes, travelers and crew, from the origin i at time t by introducing indicator variables that correct for exclusions in the data sources, where Z_i,s(t) is the number of travelers arriving from origin i per day (s = 2), or per month (s = 1, 3) reported from a data source, s. Possible origins are international (i = INT) or Canada (i = CA), but in subsequent calculations below we will further partition i = CA into each Canadian province and the territories (where all three Canadian territories are combined).

The indicator variable 𝟙_MODES applies to data that does not report arrivals by all modes, and applies to the IATA data (s = 1) because this travel volume reports only arrivals by air. The correction factor, α_i,s(t), multiplies the reported travel volume by air. The indicator variable 𝟙_EXCL applies when some individuals are excluded from the reported travel volume, and the correction is additive. This correction applies to the IATA data, λ_i,1(t), for crew members that are not reported, and to the TDF data, λ_i,2(t), because arriving crew members on flights, ships, commercial freighters, NL residents, and other exempt travelers are not reported in this data.

The travel volume, V_i,s(t), corrected for reporting omissions, can be calculated for all data sources s; however, in practice the calculated values do not have a lot of overlap because the IATA data only corresponds to pre-pandemic time periods, the TDF data only corresponds to during the pandemic, and the FC data only reports travelers of international origin.

In Equation (A1), i refers to the Canadian or international origin of travel, but both the IATA and TDF data report the Canadian province or territory of origin. Therefore, we estimate travel volume from different Canadian provinces and the territories as, where is the fraction of all Canadian travelers originating from each of the different non-NL provinces or the territories i ∈ {BC, AB, SK, MB, ON, QC, NB, NS, PE, TR }on a given date t, where Yukon, Northwest territories, and Nunavut are combined and denoted as TR, s = 1 corresponds to the IATA data when we are considering times before the pandemic, and s = 2 corresponds to the TDF data when we are considering times during the pandemic.

During the public health emergency in NL, different travel restrictions were applied to rotational workers. Rotational workers are NL residents who work in other provinces. The number of rotational workers entering NL is difficult to estimate, but Martignoni et al (2022) estimates that 6,000 NL residents are rotational workers. If we assume a rotational worker has a set schedule of two weeks of work and home (alternating), then approximately 200 rotational workers will enter NL each day. The fraction of rotational workers that work in any given province or the Canadian territories, i ∈ {BC, AB, SK, MB, ON, QC, NB, NS, PE, TR}, is , which is estimated from Hewitt et al (2018) (see table A4). Therefore, the number of rotational workers arriving in NL during the pandemic from each of the different provinces and territories is,

The number of regular travelers (defined as all individuals that are not rotational workers) arriving from a Canadian origin, i, during the pandemic is, where the travel volume is estimated from the TDF data (s = 2) because this data source corresponds to during the pandemic. The quantity does not change with time, but does, so the dependence on time is written so that the compacted notation can be used. We define as the volume of regular travelers arriving from international origins during the pandemic, such that is the volume of travelers arriving during the pandemic at time, t, that are rotational workers (k = rw, i = CA), regular travelers arriving from a Canadian origin (k = r, i = CA), or from an international origin (k = r, i = INT).

B.1 Infection prevalence at origin

B.1.2 Estimating prevalence from incidence data

The travel volume from an origin is combined with the point prevalence at the traveler’s origin in our epidemiological model. To estimate point prevalence at the origin, we first estimate the incidence proportion (number of new cases divided by the population size) at a traveler’s origin, f_i(t), on a day t, as where c_i(t) is the number of new cases reported on day t at the origin i, t_d = 11 days is the delay between exposure and reporting (we note that Hendy et al 2021 reports this delay can be over 2 weeks), N_i, is the population size for each origin, i ∈ {INT, BC, AB, SK, MB, ON, QC, NB, NS, PE, TR} (based on 2021 values estimated from Statistics Canada 2021 and The United States government 2021), and u_i is an origin-specific correction factor to account for under-reporting.

We convert from incidence proportion to prevalence proportion (the proportion of the population that have infections at time t) because we assume that the probability a traveler has an active infection at departure is equal to infection prevalence proportion at their origin. We assume that individuals have active infections for 14 days, and approximate point prevalence as 14f_i(t). This calculation is not exact. Indeed, suppose prevalence is increasing until time t. Then at time t, more new infections than recoveries are occurring, so that point prevalence is actually more than 14f_i(t); the situation is reversed for for decreasing incidence.

B.1.3 Infection status of departing travelers

In addition to the probability that a traveler is infected, we also need to know the probability that the traveler was exposed a days ago. We assume that the distribution of days since exposure of infected travelers at departure is uniformly distributed between 13 and 0 days ago, i.e., where a is the number of days since exposure or the ‘age of infection’. Again, this is an approximation because if incidence is increasing at time t, there will be more individuals with recent exposures, so that the distribution of age of infection is right-skewed (i.e., the tail is to the right as there relatively fewer individuals exposed many days ago). An approximation is used because estimating the distribution of the ages of infection at any time from reported data is difficult. Indeed, whether a case is reported depends on the age of the infection: tests are requested once symptoms develop, test results can be false negatives, and both of these processes depend on the age of infection. Due to the development of symptoms and pre-arrival testing, not all infected travelers end up traveling. If a pre-arrival test was required, the rate of infected travelers arriving from origin i that were exposed a days ago is where is the travel volume from origin i of rotational workers (k = rw) or regular travelers (k = r) who departed on date t (see Eqs. (A3), (A4), and (A5)), 1 − t_sens(a − 2) is the probability of a false negative test for individuals exposed a days ago, where the test is assumed to occur 2 days before departure, when the infection prevalence at i is n_i(t, a). The complete details of how we parameterized the probability of true PCR test, t_sens(a), are provided in Appendix B.

It is assumed that individuals with symptoms who receive a false negative test result on a pre-departure test still travel. When no pre-departure test is required, some travelers do not travel due to symptoms. The rate at which infected travelers that were exposed a days ago arrive from origin i when no pre-departure test is required is where travelers develop symptoms with probability ρ, travel irrespective of symptoms with probability ψ, and first develop symptoms before departure (when their infection age is a at departure) with probability Λ(a), where and,

This parameterization is from Lauer et al (2020), and corresponds to the first symptoms occurring a mean of 5.5 days after exposure with a standard deviation of 2.3 days (Hart et al, 2021). The probability density is discretized with Δa = 1 day because other data for our model occurs only at 1 day intervals. The cumulative mass function Eq. (B10) is used because travelers with infection age a that decided not to depart on date t may have first developed symptoms at any time 0 to a days after exposure.

In Canada, a pre-arrival test policy for international travelers was enacted on January 7, 2021. Having a negative COVID-19 test result (72 hours prior to departure) was required for travelers departing from international ports (Government of Canada, 2020) and from May 15, 2021, it was necessary for all travelers (Traveler COVID-19 Testing 2021, see Table C7). The rate that infected travelers arrived in NL with an infection of age a is where is an indicator variable that is equal to 1 if a pre-departure test is required for travelers of type k, departing from origin i at time t, and 0 otherwise.

c.1 Testing of rotational workers

The final component of the epidemiological model is post-arrival testing, in order to compare our predictions with the reported number of travel-related cases in NL. From the early stages of the pandemic, there were specific post-arrival testing measures that applied to rotational workers (see Table C7). We define the number of rotational workers that test positive on their first post-arrival test occurring j₁ days after arrival from origin i, and that are reported as travel-related cases on day t = t_t + j₁ + t_rep, as where t_t is the date of departure (assumed to be the same day as arrival in NL). To explain Eq. (C13), by the time the post-arrival test is completed, the days since exposure a for the infected traveler at time t has advanced by j₁ days from the time of departure t_t; furthermore, test results are not reported for another t_rep = 1 days, which is the assumed delay between taking the test and having the result reported. The exposure date amongst travel-related cases is not reported, so we sum across all ages of infection between 0 and 13 days prior to departure. It is conventional to write all the time shifts on the right hand side of the equation, however, our presentation of Eq. C13 is to make it easier to understand the ‘age of infection’ shift whereby testing occurs j₁ days after arrival.

For positive results on the second and third post-arrival tests, occurring j₂ and j₃ days after arrival, but not any post-arrival tests prior (i.e., for the third post-arrival test, not testing positive on either the first or second post-arrival test) is, where a positive result for the second and third post-arrival tests is reported at times t = t_t + j₂ + t_rep and t = t_t + j₃ + t_rep, respectively.

The number of positive tests for rotational workers is calculated by summing results from all tests that were required, i.e.,

We do not consider tests for rotational workers based on developing symptoms when at least one post-arrival test was mandatory for rotational workers.

C.2 Travelers that develop symptoms after arrival

During the public health emergency, regular travelers arriving in NL were required to self-isolate. Regular travelers may have been reported as a travel-related case if they developed symptoms and requested a test. We assume that this test occurred t_r days after symptom onset, and if positive, was reported t_rep = 1 day later. Thus, the number of regular traveler that are tested because they have symptoms is given by where is the rate that regular travelers arrive from i on day t_t with an infection of age a, ρ is the probability that infected travelers have symptomatic infections, and P^S is the probability that travelers with symptoms request a test. The mean time to develop symptoms for arriving travelers is ā days after arrival, and the probability of a true positive test result t_r days later is t_sens(a + ā+ t_r). The mean time to developing symptoms after arrival is calculated as, where the probability that an arriving traveler has age of infection a_t is,

Since we only predict cases each day, and t_sens(a) is a discrete function defined each day, āfrom Eq. (C18) is rounded to the nearest integer before being used in Eq. (C17).

The probability of infections of age a_t amongst arriving travelers is calculated assuming that exposure times for travelers are uniformly distributed as 0 to 13 days before departure, and that 1 −ψ travelers that develop symptoms before departure do not travel. The average timing of first symptoms after arrival is calculated assuming no predeparture test. As some travelers do not travel due to symptoms, the distribution of ages of infection in arriving travelers is skewed right (i.e., the tail is to the right) because more arriving travelers were exposed shortly before to departure.

The use of ā in Eq. (C17) is an approximation because, more exactly, a traveler arriving on day t_t with infection age a might first show symptoms on any of the days post-arrival (14 possible days). For our model, there are 273 possible arrival days (September 1, 2020 to May 31, 2021) and 14 possible ages of infection at arrival, which means that it is necessary to calculate 3,822 values corresponding to each arrival date and age of infection. If we consider that travelers might first develop symptoms on any of the 14 days they are in self-isolation after arrival, then the number of calculations necessary increases to 53,508. To reduce the number of calculations needed, we assume that all arriving travelers first experience symptoms ā days after arrival, where the value of ā has some epidemiological basis (see Eq. (C18)), but is assumed equal for all travelers irrespective of when they were exposed.

c.3 Asymptomatic regular travelers

Arriving regular travelers with asymptomatic infections could also be detected as travel-related cases because NL public health, at times, issued exposure notifications and asked all travelers arriving on particular flights to arrange for PCR testing (see Table C8 in Appendix C). As a consequence, such notifications mostly help detect individuals infected on the flight rather than prior to departure (i.e., infection age a = 0 at time t_t). Therefore, the number of arriving regular travelers detected due to exposure notifications is, where is the volume of regular travelers arriving on day t_t from origin i, and is the probability that travelers are infected during a flight and comply with the request to complete testing, where it is assumed that exposure notifications are issued t_e days after arrival and travelers are tested t_r days after requesting a test, such that the probability of a positive test result if infected is t_sens(t_r + t_e). In NL, close contacts of travelers that were required to undergo asymptomatic testing were reported as such, and were not included in the number of cases reported as travel-related. We consider only regular travelers in the travel volume, as for much of the public health emergency in NL, rotational workers were required to complete post-arrival tests (Table C7). Eq. (C20) assumes that regular travelers who were exposed on flights were not infected prior to departure. While this is an approximation with few exposure notifications it is unlikely that our equations will result in substantial double counting of infected individuals because we counted these individuals both as infected during a flight, and infected pre-departure.