Monitoring and responding to emerging infectious diseases in a university setting: A case study using COVID-19

Emerging infection diseases (EIDs) are an increasing threat to global public health, especially when the disease is newly emerging. Institutions of higher education (IHEs) are particularly vulnerable to EIDs because student populations frequently share high-density residences and strongly mix with local and distant populations. In fall 2020, IHEs responded to a novel EID, COVID-19. Here, we describe Quinnipiac University’s response to SARS-CoV-2 and evaluate its effectiveness through empirical data and model results. Using an agent-based model to approximate disease dynamics in the student body, the University established a policy of dedensification, universal masking, surveillance testing via a targeted sampling design, and app-based symptom monitoring. After an extended period of low incidence, the infection rate grew through October, likely due to growing incidence rates in the surrounding community. A super-spreader event at the end of October caused a spike in cases in November. Student violations of the University’s policies contributed to this event, but lax adherence to state health laws in the community may have also contributed. The model results further suggest that the infection rate was sensitive to the rate of imported infections and was disproportionately impacted by non-residential students, a result supported by the observed data. Collectively, this suggests that campus-community interactions play a major role in campus disease dynamics. Further model results suggest that app-based symptom monitoring may have been an important regulator of the University’s incidence, likely because it quarantined infectious students without necessitating test results. Targeted sampling had no substantial advantages over simple random sampling when the model incorporated contact tracing and app-based symptom monitoring but reduced the upper boundary on 90% prediction intervals for cumulative infections when either was removed. Thus, targeted sampling designs for surveillance testing may mitigate worst-case outcomes when other interventions are less effective. The results’ implications for future EIDs are discussed. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Funding Statement KJS and XC received Grant-in-Aid funding from the Quinnipiac University College of Arts and Sciences (), which covered publication fees. This internal funding does not receive a grant number. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: The study used only fully anonymized case incidence data that was formally posted to the Quinnipiac University COVID-19 Resources website (). Each week new data replaced the previous week's data, and the University has since removed the data. The time series of weekly case incidences are provided in the S1 Appendix. All remaining data was simulated, and the Institutional Review Board of Quinnipiac University determined that the surveillance sampling design detailed fell under the category of public health surveillance and not research. I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable. Yes The version of the Covasim model described and used in this paper is available at in the F20ModelAndTesting branch. All other relevant data and code are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.