Coughs, colds and "freshers' flu" survey in the University of Cambridge, 2007-2008.

Universities provide many opportunities for the spread of infectious respiratory illnesses. Students are brought together into close proximity from all across the world and interact with one another in their accommodation, through lectures and small group teaching and in social settings. The COVID-19 global pandemic has highlighted the need for sufficient data to help determine which of these factors are important for infectious disease transmission in universities and hence control university morbidity as well as community spillover. We describe the data from a previously unpublished self-reported university survey of coughs, colds and influenza-like symptoms collected in Cambridge, UK, during winter 2007-2008. The online survey collected information on symptoms and socio-demographic, academic and lifestyle factors. There were 1076 responses, 97% from University of Cambridge students (5.7% of the total university student population), 3% from staff and <1% from other participants, reporting onset of symptoms between September 2007 and March 2008. Undergraduates are seen to report symptoms earlier in the term than postgraduates; differences in reported date of symptoms are also seen between subjects and accommodation types, although these descriptive results could be confounded by survey biases. Despite the historical and exploratory nature of the study, this is one of few recent detailed datasets of influenza-like infection in a university context and is especially valuable to share now to improve understanding of potential transmission dynamics in universities during the current COVID-19 pandemic.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in UK university students: lessons from September-December 2020 and modelling insights for future student return.

In this paper, we present work on SARS-CoV-2 transmission in UK higher education settings using multiple approaches to assess the extent of university outbreaks, how much those outbreaks may have led to spillover in the community, and the expected effects of control measures. Firstly, we found that the distribution of outbreaks in universities in late 2020 was consistent with the expected importation of infection from arriving students. Considering outbreaks at one university, larger halls of residence posed higher risks for transmission. The dynamics of transmission from university outbreaks to wider communities is complex, and while sometimes spillover does occur, occasionally even large outbreaks do not give any detectable signal of spillover to the local population. Secondly, we explored proposed control measures for reopening and keeping open universities. We found the proposal of staggering the return of students to university residence is of limited value in terms of reducing transmission. We show that student adherence to testing and self-isolation is likely to be much more important for reducing transmission during term time. Finally, we explored strategies for testing students in the context of a more transmissible variant and found that frequent testing would be necessary to prevent a major outbreak.

Effectiveness of isolation, testing, contact tracing, and physical distancing on reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in different settings: a mathematical modelling study.

BACKGROUND: The isolation of symptomatic cases and tracing of contacts has been used as an early COVID-19 containment measure in many countries, with additional physical distancing measures also introduced as outbreaks have grown. To maintain control of infection while also reducing disruption to populations, there is a need to understand what combination of measures-including novel digital tracing approaches and less intensive physical distancing-might be required to reduce transmission. We aimed to estimate the reduction in transmission under different control measures across settings and how many contacts would be quarantined per day in different strategies for a given level of symptomatic case incidence. METHODS: For this mathematical modelling study, we used a model of individual-level transmission stratified by setting (household, work, school, or other) based on BBC Pandemic data from 40 162 UK participants. We simulated the effect of a range of different testing, isolation, tracing, and physical distancing scenarios. Under optimistic but plausible assumptions, we estimated reduction in the effective reproduction number and the number of contacts that would be newly quarantined each day under different strategies. RESULTS: We estimated that combined isolation and tracing strategies would reduce transmission more than mass testing or self-isolation alone: mean transmission reduction of 2% for mass random testing of 5% of the population each week, 29% for self-isolation alone of symptomatic cases within the household, 35% for self-isolation alone outside the household, 37% for self-isolation plus household quarantine, 64% for self-isolation and household quarantine with the addition of manual contact tracing of all contacts, 57% with the addition of manual tracing of acquaintances only, and 47% with the addition of app-based tracing only. If limits were placed on gatherings outside of home, school, or work, then manual contact tracing of acquaintances alone could have an effect on transmission reduction similar to that of detailed contact tracing. In a scenario where 1000 new symptomatic cases that met the definition to trigger contact tracing occurred per day, we estimated that, in most contact tracing strategies, 15 000-41 000 contacts would be newly quarantined each day. INTERPRETATION: Consistent with previous modelling studies and country-specific COVID-19 responses to date, our analysis estimated that a high proportion of cases would need to self-isolate and a high proportion of their contacts to be successfully traced to ensure an effective reproduction number lower than 1 in the absence of other measures. If combined with moderate physical distancing measures, self-isolation and contact tracing would be more likely to achieve control of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, European Commission, Royal Society, Medical Research Council.