Bomb radiocarbon evidence for strong global carbon uptake and turnover in terrestrial vegetation

Vegetation and soils are taking up approximately 30% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions because of small imbalances in large gross carbon exchanges from productivity and turnover that are poorly constrained. We combine a new budget of radiocarbon (14C) produced by nuclear bomb testing in the 1960s with model simulations to evaluate carbon cycling in terrestrial vegetation. We find that most state-of-the-art vegetation models used in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project underestimate the 14C accumulation in vegetation biomass. Our findings, combined with constraints on vegetation carbon stocks and productivity trends, imply that net primary productivity is likely at least 80 PgC/yr presently, compared to 43-76 PgC/yr predicted by current models. Storage of anthropogenic carbon in terrestrial vegetation is likely more short-lived and vulnerable than previously predicted

Call detail record aggregation methodology impacts infectious disease models informed by human mobility

This paper demonstrates how two different methods used to calculate population-level mobility from Call Detail Records (CDR) produce varying predictions of the spread of epidemics informed by these data. Our findings are based on one CDR dataset describing inter-district movement in Ghana in 2021, produced using two different aggregation methodologies. One methodology, "all pairs," is designed to retain long distance network connections while the other, "sequential" methodology is designed to accurately reflect the volume of travel between locations. We show how the choice of methodology feeds through models of human mobility to the predictions of a metapopulation SEIR model of disease transmission. We also show that this impact varies depending on the location of pathogen introduction and the transmissibility of infections. For central locations or highly transmissible diseases, we do not observe significant differences between aggregation methodologies on the predicted spread of disease. For less transmissible diseases or those introduced into remote locations, we find that the choice of aggregation methodology influences the speed of spatial spread as well as the size of the peak number of infections in individual districts. Our findings can help researchers and users of epidemiological models to understand how methodological choices at the level of model inputs may influence the results of models of infectious disease transmission, as well as the circumstances in which these choices do not alter model predictions

covidregionaldata: Subnational data for COVID-19 epidemiology

covidregionaldatais an R (R Core Team, 2020) package that provides an interface tosubnational and national level COVID-19 data. The package provides cleaned and verifiedCOVID-19 test-positive case counts and, where available, counts of deaths, recoveries, andhospitalisations in a consistent and fully transparent framework. The package automatescommon processing steps while allowing researchers to easily and transparently trace theorigin of the underlying data sources. It has been designed to allow users to easily extend thepackage’s capabilities and contribute to shared data handling. All package code is archivedon Zenodo andGitHub

Population disruption: observational study of changes in the population distribution of the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Mobility data have demonstrated major changes in human movement patterns in response to COVID-19 and associated interventions in many countries. This involves sub-national redistribution, short-term relocations, and international migration. Aggregated mobile phone location data combined with small-area census population data allow changes in the population distribution of the UK to be quantified with high spatial and temporal granularity. METHODS: In this paper, we combine detailed data from Facebook, measuring the location of approximately 6 million daily active Facebook users in 5km2 tiles in the UK with census-derived population estimates to measure population mobility and redistribution. We provide time-varying population estimates and assess spatial population changes with respect to population density and four key reference dates in 2020 (first UK lockdown, end of term, beginning of term, Christmas). RESULTS: We show how population estimates derived from Facebook data vary compared to mid-2020 small area population estimates by UK national statistics agencies. We also estimate that between March 2020 and March 2021, the total population of the UK declined and we identify important spatial variations in this population change, showing that low-density areas have experienced lower population decreases than urban areas. We estimate that, for the top 10% highest population tiles, the population has decreased by 6.6%. Finally, we provide evidence that geographic redistributions of population within the UK coincide with dates of non-pharmaceutical interventions including lockdowns and movement restrictions, as well as seasonal patterns of migration around holiday dates. CONCLUSIONS: The methods used in this study reveal significant changes in population distribution at high spatial and temporal resolutions that have not previously been quantified by available demographic surveys in the UK. We found early indicators of potential longer-term changes in the population distribution of the UK although it is not clear if these changes will persist after the COVID-19 pandemic

How many are at increased risk of severe COVID-19 disease? Rapid global, regional and national estimates for 2020

BackgroundThe risk of severe COVID-19 disease is known to be higher in older individuals and those with underlying health conditions. Understanding the number of individuals at increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness, and how this varies between countries may inform the design of possible strategies to shield those at highest risk.MethodsWe estimated the number of individuals at increased risk of severe COVID-19 disease by age (5-year age groups), sex and country (n=188) based on prevalence data from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study for 2017 and United Nations population estimates for 2020. We also calculated the number of individuals without an underlying condition that could be considered at-risk because of their age, using thresholds from 50-70 years. The list of underlying conditions relevant to COVID-19 disease was determined by mapping conditions listed in GBD to the guidelines published by WHO and public health agencies in the UK and US. We analysed data from two large multimorbidity studies to determine appropriate adjustment factors for clustering and multimorbidity.ResultsWe estimate that 1.7 (1.0 - 2.4) billion individuals (22% [15-28%] of the global population) are at increased risk of severe COVID-19 disease. The share of the population at increased risk ranges from 16% in Africa to 31% in Europe. Chronic kidney disease (CKD), cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes and chronic respiratory disease (CRD) were the most prevalent conditions in males and females aged 50+ years. African countries with a high prevalence of HIV/AIDS and Island countries with a high prevalence of diabetes, also had a high share of the population at increased risk. The prevalence of multimorbidity (&gt;1 underlying conditions) was three times higher in Europe than in Africa (10% vs 3%).ConclusionBased on current guidelines and prevalence data from GBD, we estimate that one in five individuals worldwide has a condition that is on the list of those at increased risk of severe COVID-19 disease. However, for many of these individuals the underlying condition will be undiagnosed or not severe enough to be captured in health systems, and in some cases the increase in risk may be quite modest. There is an urgent need for robust analyses of the risks associated with different underlying conditions so that countries can identify the highest risk groups and develop targeted shielding policies to mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.Research in contextEvidence before this studyAs the COVID-19 pandemic evolves, countries are considering policies of ‘shielding’ the most vulnerable, but there is currently very limited evidence on the number of individuals that might need to be shielded. Guidelines on who is currently believed to be at increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness have been published online by the WHO and public health agencies in the UK and US. We searched PubMed (“Risk factors” AND “COVID-19”) without language restrictions, from database inception until April 5, 2020, and identified 62 studies published between Feb 15, 2020 and March 20, 2020. Evidence from China, Italy and the USA indicates that older individuals, males and those with underlying conditions, such as CVD, diabetes and CRD, are at greater risk of severe COVID-19 illness and death.Added value of this studyThis study combines evidence from large international databases and new analysis of large multimorbidity studies to inform policymakers about the number of individuals that may be at increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness in different countries. We developed a tool for rapid assessments of the number and percentage of country populations that would need to be targeted under different shielding policies.Implications of all the available evidenceQuantifying how many and who is at increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness is critical to help countries design more effective interventions to protect vulnerable individuals and reduce pressure on health systems. This information can also inform a broader assessment of the health, social and economic implications of shielding various groups.</jats:sec

Global, regional, and national estimates of the population at increased risk of severe COVID-19 due to underlying health conditions in 2020: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: The risk of severe COVID-19 if an individual becomes infected is known to be higher in older individuals and those with underlying health conditions. Understanding the number of individuals at increased risk of severe COVID-19 and how this varies between countries should inform the design of possible strategies to shield or vaccinate those at highest risk. METHODS: We estimated the number of individuals at increased risk of severe disease (defined as those with at least one condition listed as "at increased risk of severe COVID-19" in current guidelines) by age (5-year age groups), sex, and country for 188 countries using prevalence data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017 and UN population estimates for 2020. The list of underlying conditions relevant to COVID-19 was determined by mapping the conditions listed in GBD 2017 to those listed in guidelines published by WHO and public health agencies in the UK and the USA. We analysed data from two large multimorbidity studies to determine appropriate adjustment factors for clustering and multimorbidity. To help interpretation of the degree of risk among those at increased risk, we also estimated the number of individuals at high risk (defined as those that would require hospital admission if infected) using age-specific infection-hospitalisation ratios for COVID-19 estimated for mainland China and making adjustments to reflect country-specific differences in the prevalence of underlying conditions and frailty. We assumed males were twice at likely as females to be at high risk. We also calculated the number of individuals without an underlying condition that could be considered at increased risk because of their age, using minimum ages from 50 to 70 years. We generated uncertainty intervals (UIs) for our estimates by running low and high scenarios using the lower and upper 95% confidence limits for country population size, disease prevalences, multimorbidity fractions, and infection-hospitalisation ratios, and plausible low and high estimates for the degree of clustering, informed by multimorbidity studies. FINDINGS: We estimated that 1·7 billion (UI 1·0-2·4) people, comprising 22% (UI 15-28) of the global population, have at least one underlying condition that puts them at increased risk of severe COVID-19 if infected (ranging from 66% of those aged 70 years or older). We estimated that 349 million (186-787) people (4% [3-9] of the global population) are at high risk of severe COVID-19 and would require hospital admission if infected (ranging from <1% of those younger than 20 years to approximately 20% of those aged 70 years or older). We estimated 6% (3-12) of males to be at high risk compared with 3% (2-7) of females. The share of the population at increased risk was highest in countries with older populations, African countries with high HIV/AIDS prevalence, and small island nations with high diabetes prevalence. Estimates of the number of individuals at increased risk were most sensitive to the prevalence of chronic kidney disease, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and chronic respiratory disease. INTERPRETATION: About one in five individuals worldwide could be at increased risk of severe COVID-19, should they become infected, due to underlying health conditions, but this risk varies considerably by age. Our estimates are uncertain, and focus on underlying conditions rather than other risk factors such as ethnicity, socioeconomic deprivation, and obesity, but provide a starting point for considering the number of individuals that might need to be shielded or vaccinated as the global pandemic unfolds. FUNDING: UK Department for International Development, Wellcome Trust, Health Data Research UK, Medical Research Council, and National Institute for Health Research

Changing travel patterns in China during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Understanding changes in human mobility in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic is crucial for assessing the impacts of travel restrictions designed to reduce disease spread. Here, relying on data from mainland China, we investigate the spatio-temporal characteristics of human mobility between 1st January and 1st March 2020, and discuss their public health implications. An outbound travel surge from Wuhan before travel restrictions were implemented was also observed across China due to the Lunar New Year, indicating that holiday travel may have played a larger role in mobility changes compared to impending travel restrictions. Holiday travel also shifted healthcare pressure related to COVID-19 towards locations with lower healthcare capacity. Network analyses showed no sign of major changes in the transportation network after Lunar New Year. Changes observed were temporary and did not lead to structural reorganisation of the transportation network during the study period

Detecting behavioural changes in human movement to inform the spatial scale of interventions against COVID-19.

On March 23 2020, the UK enacted an intensive, nationwide lockdown to mitigate transmission of COVID-19. As restrictions began to ease, more localized interventions were used to target resurgences in transmission. Understanding the spatial scale of networks of human interaction, and how these networks change over time, is critical to targeting interventions at the most at-risk areas without unnecessarily restricting areas at low risk of resurgence. We use detailed human mobility data aggregated from Facebook users to determine how the spatially-explicit network of movements changed before and during the lockdown period, in response to the easing of restrictions, and to the introduction of locally-targeted interventions. We also apply community detection techniques to the weighted, directed network of movements to identify geographically-explicit movement communities and measure the evolution of these community structures through time. We found that the mobility network became more sparse and the number of mobility communities decreased under the national lockdown, a change that disproportionately affected long distance connections central to the mobility network. We also found that the community structure of areas in which locally-targeted interventions were implemented following epidemic resurgence did not show reorganization of community structure but did show small decreases in indicators of travel outside of local areas. We propose that communities detected using Facebook or other mobility data be used to assess the impact of spatially-targeted restrictions and may inform policymakers about the spatial extent of human movement patterns in the UK. These data are available in near real-time, allowing quantification of changes in the distribution of the population across the UK, as well as changes in travel patterns to inform our understanding of the impact of geographically-targeted interventions

Detecting behavioural changes in human movement to inform the spatial scale of interventions against COVID-19

BackgroundIn 2020, the UK enacted an intensive, nationwide lockdown on March 23 to mitigate transmission of COVID-19. As restrictions began to ease, resurgences in transmission were targeted by geographically-limited interventions of various stringencies. Understanding the spatial scale of networks of human interaction, and how these networks change over time, is critical to inform interventions targeted at the most at-risk areas without unnecessarily restricting areas at low risk of resurgence.MethodsWe use detailed human mobility data aggregated from Facebook users to determine how the spatially-explicit network of movements changed before and during the lockdown period, in response to the easing of restrictions, and to the introduction of locally-targeted interventions. We also apply community detection techniques to the weighted, directed network of movements to identify geographically-explicit movement communities and measure the evolution of these community structures through time.FindingsWe found that the mobility network became more sparse and the number of mobility communities decreased under the national lockdown, a change that disproportionately affected long distance journeys central to the mobility network. We also found that the community structure of areas in which locally-targeted interventions were implemented following epidemic resurgence did not show reorganization of community structure but did show small decreases in indicators of travel outside of local areas.InterpretationWe propose that communities detected using Facebook or other mobility data be used to assess the impact of spatially-targeted restrictions and may inform policymakers about the spatial extent of human movement patterns in the UK. These data are available in near real-time, allowing quantification of changes in the distribution of the population across the UK, as well as changes in travel patterns to inform our understanding of the impact of geographically-targeted interventions.Putting Research Into ContextEvidence before this studyLarge-scale intensive interventions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic have been implemented globally, significantly affecting human movement patterns. Mobility data show spatially-explicit network structure, but it is not clear how that structure changed in response to national or locally-targeted interventions.Added value of this studyWe used daily mobility data aggregated from Facebook users to quantify changes in the travel network in the UK during the national lockdown, and in response to local interventions. We identified changes in human behaviour in response to interventions and identified the community structure inherent in these networks. This approach to understanding changes in the travel network can help quantify the extent of strongly connected communities of interaction and their relationship to the extent of spatially-explicit interventions.Implications of all the available evidenceWe show that spatial mobility data available in near real-time can give information on connectivity that can be used to understand the impact of geographically-targeted interventions and in the future, to inform spatially-targeted intervention strategies.Data SharingData used in this study are available from the Facebook Data for Good Partner Program by application. Code and supplementary information for this paper are available online (https://github.com/hamishgibbs/facebook_mobility_uk), alongside publication.</jats:sec

The effect of travel restrictions on the geographical spread of COVID-19 between large cities in China: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: To contain the spread of COVID-19, a cordon sanitaire was put in place in Wuhan prior to the Lunar New Year, on 23 January 2020. We assess the efficacy of the cordon sanitaire to delay the introduction and onset of local transmission of COVID-19 in other major cities in mainland China. METHODS: We estimated the number of infected travellers from Wuhan to other major cities in mainland China from November 2019 to February 2020 using previously estimated COVID-19 prevalence in Wuhan and publicly available mobility data. We focused on Beijing, Chongqing, Hangzhou, and Shenzhen as four representative major cities to identify the potential independent contribution of the cordon sanitaire and holiday travel. To do this, we simulated outbreaks generated by infected arrivals in these destination cities using stochastic branching processes. We also modelled the effect of the cordon sanitaire in combination with reduced transmissibility scenarios to simulate the effect of local non-pharmaceutical interventions. RESULTS: We find that in the four cities, given the potentially high prevalence of COVID-19 in Wuhan between December 2019 and early January 2020, local transmission may have been seeded as early as 1-8 January 2020. By the time the cordon sanitaire was imposed, infections were likely in the thousands. The cordon sanitaire alone did not substantially affect the epidemic progression in these cities, although it may have had some effect in smaller cities. Reduced transmissibility resulted in a notable decrease in the incidence of infection in the four studied cities. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that sustained transmission was likely occurring several weeks prior to the implementation of the cordon sanitaire in four major cities of mainland China and that the observed decrease in incidence was likely attributable to other non-pharmaceutical, transmission-reducing interventions