Barbara Rumain1,2, Moshe Schneiderman3, Allan Geliebter4. 1. Department of Pediatrics, New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York, United States of America. 2. Department of Psychology, Touro College & University System, New York, New York, United States of America. 3. SUNY Downstate College of Medicine, Brooklyn, New York, United States of America. 4. Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States of America.
Abstract
PURPOSE: There has been considerable controversy regarding susceptibility of adolescents (10-19 years) and youth (15-24 years) to COVID-19. However, a number of studies have reported that adolescents are significantly less susceptible than older adults. Summer 2020 provided an opportunity to examine data on prevalence since after months of lockdowns, with the easing of restrictions, people were mingling, leading to surges in cases. METHODS: We examined data from Departments of Health websites in six U.S. states experiencing surges in cases to determine prevalence of COVID-19, and two prevalence-related measures, in adolescents and youth as compared to older adults. The two other measures related to prevalence were: (Percentage of cases observed in a given age group) ÷ (percentage of cases expected based on population demographics); and percentage deviation, or [(% observed-% expected)/ % expected] x 100. RESULTS: Prevalence of COVID-19 for adolescents and for youth was significantly greater than for older adults (p < .00001), as was percentage observed ÷ percentage expected (p < .005). The percentage deviation was significantly greater in adolescents/youth than in older adults (p < 0.00001) when there was an excess of observed cases over what was expected, and significantly less when observed cases were fewer than expected (p< 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results are contrary to previous findings that adolescents are less susceptible than older adults. Possible reasons for the findings are suggested, and we note that public health messaging targeting adolescents and youth might be helpful in curbing the pandemic. Also, the findings of the potential for high transmission among adolescents and youth, should be factored into decisions regarding school reopening.
PURPOSE: There has been considerable controversy regarding susceptibility of adolescents (10-19 years) and youth (15-24 years) to COVID-19. However, a number of studies have reported that adolescents are significantly less susceptible than older adults. Summer 2020 provided an opportunity to examine data on prevalence since after months of lockdowns, with the easing of restrictions, people were mingling, leading to surges in cases. METHODS: We examined data from Departments of Health websites in six U.S. states experiencing surges in cases to determine prevalence of COVID-19, and two prevalence-related measures, in adolescents and youth as compared to older adults. The two other measures related to prevalence were: (Percentage of cases observed in a given age group) ÷ (percentage of cases expected based on population demographics); and percentage deviation, or [(% observed-% expected)/ % expected] x 100. RESULTS: Prevalence of COVID-19 for adolescents and for youth was significantly greater than for older adults (p < .00001), as was percentage observed ÷ percentage expected (p < .005). The percentage deviation was significantly greater in adolescents/youth than in older adults (p < 0.00001) when there was an excess of observed cases over what was expected, and significantly less when observed cases were fewer than expected (p< 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results are contrary to previous findings that adolescents are less susceptible than older adults. Possible reasons for the findings are suggested, and we note that public health messaging targeting adolescents and youth might be helpful in curbing the pandemic. Also, the findings of the potential for high transmission among adolescents and youth, should be factored into decisions regarding school reopening.
Authors: Russell M Viner; Oliver T Mytton; Chris Bonell; G J Melendez-Torres; Joseph Ward; Lee Hudson; Claire Waddington; James Thomas; Simon Russell; Fiona van der Klis; Archana Koirala; Shamez Ladhani; Jasmina Panovska-Griffiths; Nicholas G Davies; Robert Booy; Rosalind M Eggo Journal: JAMA Pediatr Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 16.193
Authors: Simon de Lusignan; Jienchi Dorward; Ana Correa; Nicholas Jones; Oluwafunmi Akinyemi; Gayatri Amirthalingam; Nick Andrews; Rachel Byford; Gavin Dabrera; Alex Elliot; Joanna Ellis; Filipa Ferreira; Jamie Lopez Bernal; Cecilia Okusi; Mary Ramsay; Julian Sherlock; Gillian Smith; John Williams; Gary Howsam; Maria Zambon; Mark Joy; F D Richard Hobbs Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2020-05-15 Impact factor: 25.071
Authors: Christine M Szablewski; Karen T Chang; Marie M Brown; Victoria T Chu; Anna R Yousaf; Ndubuisi Anyalechi; Peter A Aryee; Hannah L Kirking; Maranda Lumsden; Erin Mayweather; Clinton J McDaniel; Robert Montierth; Asfia Mohammed; Noah G Schwartz; Jaina A Shah; Jacqueline E Tate; Emilio Dirlikov; Cherie Drenzek; Tatiana M Lanzieri; Rebekah J Stewart Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2020-08-07 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Robert W Frenck; Nicola P Klein; Nicholas Kitchin; Alejandra Gurtman; Judith Absalon; Stephen Lockhart; John L Perez; Emmanuel B Walter; Shelly Senders; Ruth Bailey; Kena A Swanson; Hua Ma; Xia Xu; Kenneth Koury; Warren V Kalina; David Cooper; Timothy Jennings; Donald M Brandon; Stephen J Thomas; Özlem Türeci; Dina B Tresnan; Susan Mather; Philip R Dormitzer; Uğur Şahin; Kathrin U Jansen; William C Gruber Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2021-05-27 Impact factor: 91.245