Dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in a Large US population Over a Period of 12 Months.

Due to a combination of asymptomatic or undiagnosed infections, the proportion of the United States population infected with SARS-CoV-2 was unclear from the beginning of the pandemic. We previously established a platform to screen for SARS-CoV-2 positivity across a representative proportion of the US population, from which we reported that almost 17 million Americans were estimated to have had undocumented infections in the Spring of 2020. Since then, vaccine rollout and prevalence of different SARS-CoV-2 variants have further altered seropositivity trends within the United States population. To explore the longitudinal impacts of the pandemic and vaccine responses on seropositivity, we re-enrolled participants from our baseline study in a 6- and 12- month follow-up study to develop a longitudinal antibody profile capable of representing seropositivity within the United States during a critical period just prior to and during the initiation of vaccine rollout. Initial measurements showed that, since July 2020, seropositivity elevated within this population from 4.8% at baseline to 36.2% and 89.3% at 6 and 12 months, respectively. We also evaluated nucleocapsid seropositivity and compared to spike seropositivity to identify trends in infection versus vaccination relative to baseline. These data serve as a window into a critical timeframe within the COVID-19 pandemic response and serve as a resource that could be used in subsequent respiratory illness outbreaks.

Leveraging CTSA hubs for rapid, large-scale, high-impact research: A case study during a global public health emergency.

As the COVID-19 pandemic took hold in the USA in early 2020, it became clear that knowledge of the prevalence of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among asymptomatic individuals could inform public health policy decisions and provide insight into the impact of the infection on vulnerable populations. Two Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Hubs and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) set forth to conduct a national seroprevalence survey to assess the infection's rate of spread. This partnership was able to quickly design and launch the project by leveraging established research capacities, prior experiences in large-scale, multisite studies and a highly skilled workforce of CTSA hubs and unique experimental capabilities at the NIH to conduct a diverse prospective, longitudinal observational cohort of 11,382 participants who provided biospecimens and participant-reported health and behavior data. The study was completed in 16 months and benefitted from transdisciplinary teamwork, information technology innovations, multimodal communication strategies, and scientific partnership for rigor in design and analytic methods. The lessons learned by the rapid implementation and dissemination of this national study is valuable in guiding future multisite projects as well as preparation for other public health emergencies and pandemics.

Undiagnosed SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and delayed implementation of diagnostics have led to poorly defined viral prevalence rates in the United States and elsewhere. To address this, we analyzed seropositivity in 9089 adults in the United States who had not been diagnosed previously with COVID-19. Individuals with characteristics that reflected the U.S. population (n = 27,716) were selected by quota sampling from 462,949 volunteers. Enrolled participants (n = 11,382) provided medical, geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic information and dried blood samples. Survey questions coincident with the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey, a large probability-based national survey, were used to adjust for selection bias. Most blood samples (88.7%) were collected between 10 May and 31 July 2020 and were processed using ELISA to measure seropositivity (IgG and IgM antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and the spike protein receptor binding domain). The overall weighted undiagnosed seropositivity estimate was 4.6% (95% CI, 2.6 to 6.5%), with race, age, sex, ethnicity, and urban/rural subgroup estimates ranging from 1.1% to 14.2%. The highest seropositivity estimates were in African American participants; younger, female, and Hispanic participants; and residents of urban centers. These data indicate that there were 4.8 undiagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infections for every diagnosed case of COVID-19, and an estimated 16.8 million infections were undiagnosed by mid-July 2020 in the United States.

Mapping a Pandemic: SARS-CoV-2 Seropositivity in the United States.

Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and delayed implementation of diagnostics have led to poorly defined viral prevalence rates. To address this, we analyzed seropositivity in US adults who have not previously been diagnosed with COVID-19. Individuals with characteristics that reflect the US population (n = 11,382) and who had not previously been diagnosed with COVID-19 were selected by quota sampling from 241,424 volunteers (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04334954). Enrolled participants provided medical, geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic information and 9,028 blood samples. The majority (88.7%) of samples were collected between May 10th and July 31st, 2020. Samples were analyzed via ELISA for anti-Spike and anti-RBD antibodies. Estimation of seroprevalence was performed by using a weighted analysis to reflect the US population. We detected an undiagnosed seropositivity rate of 4.6% (95% CI: 2.6 - 6.5%). There was distinct regional variability, with heightened seropositivity in locations of early outbreaks. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the highest estimated undiagnosed seropositivity within groups was detected in younger participants (ages 18-45, 5.9%), females (5.5%), Black/African American (14.2%), Hispanic (6.1%), and Urban residents (5.3%), and lower undiagnosed seropositivity in those with chronic diseases. During the first wave of infection over the spring/summer of 2020 an estimate of 4.6% of adults had a prior undiagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection. These data indicate that there were 4.8 (95% CI: 2.8-6.8) undiagnosed cases for every diagnosed case of COVID-19 during this same time period in the United States, and an estimated 16.8 million undiagnosed cases by mid-July 2020.

Community Partnered Research Ethics Training in Practice: A Collaborative Approach to Certification.

This report describes the development and implementation of a tailored research ethics training for academic investigators and community research partners (CRP). The Community Partnered Research Ethics Training (CPRET) and Certification is a free and publicly available model and resource created by a university and community partnership to ensure that traditional and non-traditional research partners may study, define, and apply principles of human subjects' research. To date, seven academic and 34 CRP teams have used this highly interactive, engaging, educational, and relationship building process to learn human subjects' research and be certified by the University of Pittsburgh Institutional Review Board (IRB). This accessible, flexible, and engaging research ethics training process serves as a vehicle to strengthen community and academic partnerships to conduct ethical and culturally sensitive research.

Use of a problem-based learning discussion format to teach anesthesiology residents research fundamentals.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To present a new research problem-based learning discussion (PBLD) conference and to evaluate its effect on residents. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study of resident education before and after implementation of a research PBLD. SETTING: Large U.S. academic anesthesiology department. SUBJECTS: 93 anesthesiology residents with research PBLD exposure in the academic year (AY) 2010 and AY 2011, and 85 residents without research PBLD exposure in AY 2008 and AY 2009. MEASUREMENTS: Since AY 2010, a PBLD format has been used to teach residents clinical research fundamentals. The annual 90-minute PBLD addressed residents' perceived barriers to research and introduced research resources available via the Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI). Data recorded were: 1) number of residents who made CTSI consultation solicitations as a new investigator, and 2) number of new research projects proposed by the residents and designed with CTSI consultation. Each outcome was compared between the prePBLD group (AY 2008 [n=43] and AY 2009 [n=42]) and the postPBLD group (AY 2010 [n=43] and AY 2011 [n=50]). MAIN RESULTS: The number of residents who consulted the CTSI as new investigators increased from 4 of 85 residents (4.7%) in the prePBLD group to 13 of 93 residents (14.0%) in the postPBLD group (P = 0.042). The number of new research projects for which the residents consulted CTSI increased from 10 to 20 (100% increase). CONCLUSION: A PBLD format for research education of anesthesiology residents is effective.