PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Matthews, Lynn T
AU  - Long, Dustin M
AU  - Pratt, Madeline C
AU  - Yuan, Ya
AU  - Heath, Sonya L
AU  - Levitan, Emily B
AU  - Grooms, Sydney
AU  - Creger, Thomas
AU  - Rana, Aadia
AU  - Mugavero, Michael J
AU  - Judd, Suzanne E
AU - the COVID COMET RADXUP Team
TI  - Using publicly available data to identify priority communities for a SARS-CoV-2 testing intervention in a southern U.S. state
AID  - 10.1101/2023.01.31.23285248
DP  - 2023 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2023.01.31.23285248
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/02/01/2023.01.31.23285248.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/02/01/2023.01.31.23285248.full
AB  - Background The U.S. Southeast has a high burden of SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19 disease. We used public data sources and community engagement to prioritize county selections for a precision population health intervention to promote a SARS-CoV-2 testing intervention in rural Alabama during October 2020 and March 2021.Methods We modeled factors associated with county-level SARS-CoV-2 percent positivity using covariates thought to associate with SARS-CoV-2 acquisition risk, disease severity, and risk mitigation practices. Descriptive epidemiologic data were presented to scientific and community advisory boards to prioritize counties for a testing intervention.Results In October 2020, SARS-CoV-2 percent positivity was not associated with any modeled factors. In March 2021, premature death rate (aRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.07, 1.25), percent Black residents (aRR 1.00, 95% CI 1.00, 1.01), preventable hospitalizations (aRR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00, 1.06), and proportion of smokers (aRR 0.231, 95% CI 0.10, 0.55) were associated with average SARS-CoV-2 percent positivity. We then ranked counties based on percent positivity, case fatality, case rates, and number of testing sites using individual variables and factor scores. Top ranking counties identified through factor analysis and univariate associations were provided to community partners who considered ongoing efforts and strength of community partnerships to promote testing to inform intervention.Conclusions The dynamic nature of SARS-CoV-2 proved challenging for a modelling approach to inform a precision population health intervention at the county level. Epidemiological data allowed for engagement of community stakeholders implementing testing. As data sources and analytic capacities expand, engaging communities in data interpretation is vital to address diseases locally.Competing Interest StatementLT Matthews, Operational support from Gilead Sciences for unrelated projects. E. Levitan. Research funding from Amgen, Inc. unrelated to this work. Personal fees for a research project funded by Novartis, for work unrelated to this publication. MJ Mugavero, grant support to UAB from Merck Foundation for unrelated project. This is work supported by NIH: the funders had no role in the interpretation, analysis, or communication of the findings.Funding StatementNIH RADx-Up initiative, UAB Center for AIDS Research, COVID COMET AL, Project #P30AI027767-32S1 (PI Michael Saag) The funder provided support in the form of salaries for authors [LTM, DML, YY, SH, EBL, TC, MJM, and SEJ], but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the author contributions sectionAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Data were downloaded periodically (approximately quarterly) from publicly available websites that collated and created visual representations of data reported by the Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH). For the October 2020 county testing selections, data were downloaded from bamatracker.com, a website that collated and displayed data from ADPH through May 2021. In the March 2021 round of selections, data were downloaded from bamatracker.com as well as the New York Times website.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesData were downloaded periodically (approximately quarterly) from publicly available websites that collated and created visual representations of data reported by the Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH). For the October 2020 county testing selections, data were downloaded from bamatracker.com, a website that collated and displayed data from ADPH through May 2021. In the March 2021 round of selections, data were downloaded from bamatracker.com as well as the New York Times website.