Benchmarking results showed that ViQuaS outperformed three other previously published methods named ShoRAH, QuRe and PredictHaplo, with improvements of at least 3.1-53.9% in recall, 0-12.1% in precision and 0-38.2% in F-score in terms of strain sequence assembly and improvements of at least 0.006-0.143 in KL-divergence and 0.001-0.035 in root mean-squared error in terms of strain frequency estimation, over the next-best algorithm under various simulation settings. We also applied ViQuaS on a real read set derived from an in vitro human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 population, two independent datasets of foot-and-mouth-disease virus derived from the same biological sample and a real HIV-1 dataset and demonstrated better results than other methods available.

Background: COVID-19 results in persisting symptoms but there is little systematically collected data estimating recovery time following infection. Methods:We followed 94% of all COVID-19 cases diagnosed in the Australian state of New South Wales between January and May 2020 using 3-4 weekly telephone interviews and linkage to hospitalisation and death data to determine if they had recovered from COVID-19 based on symptom resolution. Proportional hazards models with competing risks were used to estimate time to recovery adjusted for age and gender.Findings: In analyses 2904 cases were followed for recovery (median follow-up time 16 days, range 1-122, IQR 11-24).There were 2572 (88.6%) who reported resolution of symptoms (262/2572 were also hospitalised), 224 (7.8%) had not recovered at last contact (28/224 were also hospitalised), 51 (1.8%) died of COVID-19, and 57 (2.0%) were hospitalised without a documented recovery date. Of those followed, 20% recovered by 10 days, 60% at 20, 80% at 30, 91% at 60, 93% at 90 and 96% at 120 days. Compared to those aged 30-49 years, those 0-29 years were more likely to recover (aHR 1.22, 95%CI 1.10-1.34) while those aged 50-69 and 70 + years were less likely to recover (aHR respectively 0.74, 95%CI 0.67-0.81 and 0.63, 95%CI 0.56-0.71). Men were faster to recover than women (aHR 1.20, 95%CI 1.11-1.29) and those with pre-existing co-morbidities took longer to recover than those without (aHR 0.90, 95%CI 0.83-0.98).Interpretation: In a setting where most cases of COVID-19 were ascertained and followed, 80% of those with COVID-19 recover within a month, but about 5% will continue to experience symptoms 3 months later.

Aim: To estimate the length of stay distributions of hospitalised COVID-19 cases during a mixed Omicron-Delta epidemic in New South Wales, Australia (16 Dec 2021 -- 7 Feb 2022), and compare these to estimates produced over a Delta-only epidemic in the same population (1 Jul 2021 -- 15 Dec 2022). Background: The distribution of the duration that clinical cases of COVID-19 occupy hospital beds (the `length of stay') is a key factor in determining how incident caseloads translate into health system burden as measured through ward and ICU occupancy. Results: Using data on the hospital stays of 19,574 individuals, we performed a competing-risk survival analysis of COVID-19 clinical progression. During the mixed Omicron-Delta epidemic, we found that the mean length of stay for individuals who were discharged directly from ward without an ICU stay was, for age groups 0-39, 40-69 and 70+ respectively, 2.16 (95\% CI: 2.12--2.21), 3.93 (95\% CI: 3.78--4.07) and 7.61 days (95\% CI: 7.31--8.01), compared to 3.60 (95\% CI: 3.48--3.81), 5.78 (95\% CI: 5.59--5.99) and 12.31 days (95\% CI: 11.75--12.95) across the preceding Delta epidemic (15 Jul 2021 -- 15 Dec 2021). We also considered data on the stays of individuals within the Hunter New England Local Health District, where it was reported that Omicron was the only circulating variant, and found mean ward-to-discharge length of stays of 2.05 (95\% CI: 1.80--2.30), 2.92 (95\% CI: 2.50--3.67) and 6.02 days (95\% CI: 4.91--7.01) for the same age groups.