PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Societal segregation of unvaccinated people from public spaces has been a novel and controversial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-era public health practice in many countries. Models exploring potential consequences of vaccination-status-based segregation have not considered how segregation influences the contact frequencies in the segregated groups. We systematically investigate implementing effects of segregation on population-specific contact frequencies and show this critically determines the predicted epidemiological outcomes, focusing on the attack rates in the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations and the share of infections among vaccinated people that were due to contacts with infectious unvaccinated people.
METHODS: We describe a susceptible-infectious-recovered (SIR) two-population model for vaccinated and unvaccinated groups of individuals that transmit an infectious disease by person-to-person contact. The degree of segregation of the two groups, ranging from zero to complete segregation, is implemented using the like-to-like mixing approach developed for sexually transmitted diseases, adapted for presumed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) transmission. We allow the contact frequencies for individuals in the two groups to be different and depend, with variable strength, on the degree of segregation.
RESULTS: Segregation can either increase or decrease the attack rate among the vaccinated, depending on the type of segregation (isolating or compounding), and the contagiousness of the disease. For diseases with low contagiousness, segregation can cause an attack rate in the vaccinated, which does not occur without segregation.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no predicted blanket epidemiological advantage to segregation, either for the vaccinated or the unvaccinated. Negative epidemiological consequences can occur for both groups.
METHODS: We describe a susceptible-infectious-recovered (SIR) two-population model for vaccinated and unvaccinated groups of individuals that transmit an infectious disease by person-to-person contact. The degree of segregation of the two groups, ranging from zero to complete segregation, is implemented using the like-to-like mixing approach developed for sexually transmitted diseases, adapted for presumed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) transmission. We allow the contact frequencies for individuals in the two groups to be different and depend, with variable strength, on the degree of segregation.
RESULTS: Segregation can either increase or decrease the attack rate among the vaccinated, depending on the type of segregation (isolating or compounding), and the contagiousness of the disease. For diseases with low contagiousness, segregation can cause an attack rate in the vaccinated, which does not occur without segregation.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no predicted blanket epidemiological advantage to segregation, either for the vaccinated or the unvaccinated. Negative epidemiological consequences can occur for both groups.
摘要：
背景：在许多国家，未接种疫苗的人与公共场所的社会隔离一直是一种新颖且有争议的2019年冠状病毒病（COVID-19）时代的公共卫生实践。探索基于疫苗接种状态的隔离的潜在后果的模型尚未考虑隔离如何影响隔离组中的接触频率。我们系统地调查了隔离对特定人群接触频率的实施影响，并表明这关键地决定了预测的流行病学结果。重点关注接种疫苗和未接种疫苗人群的发病率，以及接种疫苗人群中由于与未接种疫苗的传染性人群接触而感染的比例。
方法：我们描述了一种易感感染恢复（SIR）双种群模型，用于通过人与人之间的接触传播传染病的个体的接种和未接种组。两组的隔离程度,从零到完全隔离，使用针对性传播疾病开发的类似混合方法实施，适用于假定的严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)传播。我们允许两个群体中的个体的接触频率是不同的并且取决于,随着可变的力量，隔离的程度。
结果：隔离可以增加或减少接种疫苗的发病率，根据偏析的类型(隔离或复合)，和疾病的传染性。对于低传染性疾病，隔离会导致接种疫苗的攻击率，没有隔离就不会发生。
结论：没有预测的全面流行病学优势，无论是接种疫苗还是未接种疫苗。两组都可能出现负面的流行病学后果。
方法：我们描述了一种易感感染恢复（SIR）双种群模型，用于通过人与人之间的接触传播传染病的个体的接种和未接种组。两组的隔离程度,从零到完全隔离，使用针对性传播疾病开发的类似混合方法实施，适用于假定的严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)传播。我们允许两个群体中的个体的接触频率是不同的并且取决于,随着可变的力量，隔离的程度。
结果：隔离可以增加或减少接种疫苗的发病率，根据偏析的类型(隔离或复合)，和疾病的传染性。对于低传染性疾病，隔离会导致接种疫苗的攻击率，没有隔离就不会发生。
结论：没有预测的全面流行病学优势，无论是接种疫苗还是未接种疫苗。两组都可能出现负面的流行病学后果。
