Search

I propose novel partial identification bounds on infection prevalence from information on test rate and test yield. The approach utilizes user-specified bounds on (i) test accuracy and (ii) the extent to which tests are targeted, formalized as restriction on the effect of true infection status on the odds ratio of getting tested and thereby embeddable in logit specifications. The motivating application is to the COVID-19 pandemic but the strategy may also be useful elsewhere. Evaluated on data from the pandemic's early stage, even the weakest of the novel bounds are reasonably informative. Notably, and in contrast to speculations that were widely reported at the time, they place the infection fatality rate for Italy well above the one of influenza by mid-April. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We employ a new macroeconomic–epidemiological agent-based model to evaluate the "lives vs livelihoods" trade-off brought to the fore by coronavirus disease (Covid-19). An infectious disease spreads across the network of agents' social and economic contacts and feeds back on the economic dimension of the model through various channels such as employment and consumption demand. Under a lockdown (LD) scenario, the model is able to closely reproduce the epidemiological dynamics of the first wave of the Covid-19 epidemic in the Lombardy region of Italy. We find that, in the presence of non-pharmaceutical interventions, there is no trade-off between lives and macroeconomic losses as a stricter LD eventually leads to superior outcomes along both dimensions. We also evaluate the efficacy of various macroeconomic stabilization policies designed to counteract the downturn generated by the epidemic and LD measures. In an agent-based setting we gain additional insights on the way in which such policies impact not only on gross domestic product but also, for instance, on firms' defaults and relative prices. Liquidity support for firms, a short-time working scheme with compensation for workers, and direct transfer to households stand out as the most effective policy tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of social media offered a possible way to address the difficulties of social relationships for people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), as well as a way to ease the problems of their caregivers. To gather information on the feasibility of this solution, we conducted an online questionnaire about the first lockdown period in Italy (March–May 2020) with 29 caregivers of ASD individuals. The questionnaire investigated their living conditions, the way time was spent during isolation, the availability of technological equipment, the perceived level of anxiety and the perceived utility of social media. The results showed that the difficulties of using social media had not been overcome, even at this time of greatest need. However, caregivers who take care of ASD people with high levels of anxiety perceived social media as more useful. This result invites further reflection on how to implement social media effectively for people with ASD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) contagion at work is well studied for healthcare workers, however it is not enough assessed in other working settings. Very little is known, indeed, about the risk of COVID-19 transmission through occupational exposure in non-health working places. This study aims to describe a COVID-19 cluster among workers in an office in Italy. Methods This was a retrospective observational study on a cluster of COVID-19 that occurred from 20 November through 3 December 2020 in a group of six colleagues (A–F) working in the same office full time 5 days a week, 8 h a day. The workers used the following prevention measures: social distancing (desks were >1 m, 1.76–5.01 m range), plexiglas panels, hands disinfection, and use of face mask. However, they did not wear face mask when in static position sitting at their desk and they did not aerate the place frequently. Results The disease spread from one worker (subject A) to four (80%) of the five colleagues (subjects B–F). Only subject D was negative to COVID-19 on 14 days after last contact with subject A (20 November 2020) as confirmed by nasopharyngeal swab testing. Subject D, in particular, did not contact subject A in the 48 h before symptoms onset. COVID-19 positivity of subject A was promptly communicated to the colleagues, who started self-isolation from their relatives and none of their households were infected. COVID-19 transmission was observed only in households of subject A. Conclusions The rapid communication of COVID-19 positivity to the colleagues and the prompt isolation of index case's close contacts allowed to eliminate the secondary transmission to their households. The contagion of index case's colleagues occurred from second day before symptoms onset. Distancing of >1 m, use of plexiglass panels, sanitizing hand gel, and inconstant use of face mask may not be enough for infection prevention in closed places with poor ventilation and high occupancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]