Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) testing is a critical component of public health surveillance and pandemic control, especially among the unvaccinated, as the nation resumes in-person activities. This study examined the relationships between COVID-19 testing rates, testing positivity rates, and vaccination coverage across US counties.
Methods: Data from the Health and Human Services' Community Profile Report and 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates were used. A total of 3114 US counties were analyzed from January through September 2021. Associations among the testing metrics and vaccination coverage were estimated using multiple linear regression models with fixed effects for states and adjusted for county demographics. COVID-19 testing rates (polymerase chain reaction [PCR] testing per 1000), testing positivity (percentage of all PCR tests that were positive), and vaccination coverage (percentage of county population that was fully vaccinated) were determined.
Results: Nationally, median daily COVID-19 testing rates were highest in January and September (35.5 and 34.6 tests per capita, respectively) and lowest in July (13.2 tests per capita). Monthly testing positivity was between 0.03 and 0.12 percentage points lower for each percentage points of vaccination coverage, and monthly testing rates were between 0.08 and 0.22 tests per capita higher for each percentage point of vaccination coverage.
Conclusions: The quantity of COVID-19 testing was associated with vaccination coverage, implying counties having populations with relatively lower protection against the virus are conducting less testing than counties with relatively more protection. Monitoring testing practices in relation to vaccination coverage may be used to monitor the sufficiency of COVID-19 testing based on population susceptibility to the virus.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9278188 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciac419 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Reflections on COVID-19: A Literature Review of SARS-CoV-2 Testing.
Vaccines (Basel)
December 2024
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Changi General Hospital, 2 Simei Street 3, Singapore 529889, Singapore.
Although the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has ended, there are still many important lessons we can learn, as the pandemic profoundly affected every area of laboratory practice. During the pandemic, extensive changes to laboratory staffing had to be implemented, as many healthcare institutions required regular screening of all healthcare staff. Several studies examined the effectiveness of different screening regimens and concluded that repeated testing, even with lower sensitivity tests, could rival the performance of gold-standard RT-PCR testing in the detection of new cases.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFA Comprehensive Machine Learning Approach for COVID-19 Target Discovery in the Small-Molecule Metabolome.
Metabolites
January 2025
Department of Electrical Engineering, Qatar University, Doha P.O. Box 2713, Qatar.
Respiratory viruses, including Influenza, RSV, and COVID-19, cause various respiratory infections. Distinguishing these viruses relies on diagnostic methods such as PCR testing. Challenges stem from overlapping symptoms and the emergence of new strains.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFStress Monitoring in Pandemic Screening: Insights from GSR Sensor and Machine Learning Analysis.
Biosensors (Basel)
January 2025
Laboratory of Electronic Sensors, National Technical University of Athens, 15772 Athens, Greece.
This study investigates the impact of patient stress on COVID-19 screening. An attempt was made to measure the level of anxiety of individuals undertaking rapid tests for SARS-CoV-2. To this end, a galvanic skin response (GSR) sensor that was connected to a microcontroller was used to record the individual stress levels.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPublic Health Travel Restrictions Implemented for Persons at Risk of Transmitting SARS-CoV-2 Infection-United States, January 1, 2020-April 6, 2022.
J Public Health Manag Pract
January 2025
Author Affiliations: Division of Global Migration Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Ms Surpris, Ms Jungerman, Dr Preston, Dr Gertz, Ms Duong, Dr Roy, Ms Morales, Mr Olmstead, Ms Delea, Dr Alvarado-Ramy, Dr Brown, and Dr Chen); Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologist (CSTE) Fellow, Atlanta, Georgia (Mr Olmstead); and University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida (Ms Surpris).
Context: Federal public health travel restrictions (FPHTR) in the United States are implemented for persons who meet specific criteria to prevent spread of communicable diseases of public health concern. FPHTR can mitigate the risk of disease transmission during air travel and mitigating disease translocation between geographic areas.
Objective: To characterize and determine the extent of FPHTR implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic.
While telegenetic counseling has increased substantially since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, previous studies reported concerns around building rapport, nonverbal communication, and the patient-counselor relationship. This qualitative evaluation elicited feedback from genetic counselors, referring clinicians, and patients from a single healthcare organization to understand the user-driven reasons for overall satisfaction and experience. We conducted 22 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with participants from all 3 groups between February 2022 and February 2023.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!