The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein.

Background In the first weeks of the COVID-19 epidemic in Belgium, a repetitive national serum collection was set up to monitor age-related exposure through emerging SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. First objective was to estimate the baseline seroprevalence and seroincidence using serial survey data that covered the start of a national lock-down period installed soon after the epidemic was recognized. Methods A prospective serial cross-sectional seroprevalence study, stratified by age, sex and region, started with two collections in April 2020. In residual sera taken outside hospitals and collected by diagnostic laboratories, IgG antibodies against S1 proteins of SARS-CoV-2 were measured with a semi-quantitative commercial ELISA. Seropositivity (cumulative, by age category and sex) and seroincidence over a 3 weeks period were estimated for the Belgian population. Findings In the first collection, IgG antibodies were detected in 100 out of 3910 samples, whereas in the second collection 193 out of 3391 samples were IgG positive. The weighted overall seroprevalence increased from 2.9% (95% CI 2.3 to 3.6) to 6.0% (95% CI 5.1 to 7.1), reflected in a seroincidence estimate of 3.1% (95% CI 1.9 to 4.3). Age-specific seroprevalence significantly increased in the age categories 20-30, 80-90 and ≥90. No significant sex effect was observed. Interpretation During the start of epidemic mitigation by lockdown, a small but increasing fraction of the Belgian population showed serologically detectable signs of exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Funding This independent researcher-initiated study acknowledges financial support from the Antwerp University Fund, the Flemish Research Fund, and European Horizon 2020.

In dynamic models of infectious disease transmission, typically various mixing patterns are imposed on the so-called Who-Acquires-Infection-From-Whom matrix (WAIFW). These imposed mixing patterns are based on prior knowledge of agerelated social mixing behavior rather than observations. Alternatively, one can assume that transmission rates for infections transmitted predominantly through non-sexual social contacts, are proportional to rates of conversational contact which can be estimated from a contact survey. In general, however, contacts reported in social contact surveys are proxies of those events by which transmission may occur and there may exist age-specific characteristics related to susceptibility and infectiousness which are not captured by the contact rates. Therefore, in this paper, transmission is modeled as the product of two age-specific variables: the age-specific contact rate and an age-specific proportionality factor, which entails an improvement of fit for the seroprevalence of the varicella-zoster virus (VZV) in Belgium. Furthermore, we address the impact on the estimation of the basic reproduction number, using non-parametric bootstrapping to account for different sources of variability and using multi-model inference to deal with model selection uncertainty. The proposed method makes it possible to obtain important information on transmission dynamics that cannot be inferred from approaches traditionally applied hitherto.

Background:Estimating key infectious disease parameters from the COVID-19 outbreak is quintessential for modelling studies and guiding intervention strategies.Whereas different estimates for the incubation period distribution and the serial interval distribution have been reported, estimates of the generation interval for COVID-19 have not been provided.Methods: We used outbreak data from clusters in Singapore and Tianjin, China to estimate the generation interval from symptom onset data while acknowledging uncertainty about the incubation period distribution and the underlying transmission network. From those estimates we obtained the proportions pre-symptomatic transmission and reproduction numbers.Results: The mean generation interval was 5.20 (95%CI 3.78-6.78) days for Singapore and 3.95 (95%CI 3.01-4.91) days for Tianjin, China when relying on a previously reported incubation period with mean 5.2 and SD 2.8 days. The proportion of pre-symptomatic transmission was 48% (95%CI 32-67%) for Singapore and 62% (95%CI 50-76%) for Tianjin, China. Estimates of the reproduction number based on the generation interval distribution were slightly higher than those based on the serial interval distribution.Conclusions: Estimating generation and serial interval distributions from outbreak 1 . CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license It is made available under a author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.is the (which was not peer-reviewed) The copyright holder for this preprint .

Social contact data are increasingly being used to inform models for infectious disease spread with the aim of guiding effective policies on disease prevention and control. In this paper, we undertake a systematic review of the study design, statistical analyses and outcomes of the many social contact surveys that have been published. Our primary focus is to identify the designs that have worked best and the most important determinants and to highlight the most robust findings. Two publicly accessible online databases were systematically searched for articles regarding social contact surveys. PRISMA guidelines were followed as closely as possible. In total, 64 social contact surveys were identified. These surveys were conducted in 24 countries, and more than 80% of the surveys were conducted in high-income countries. Study settings included general population (58%), schools/universities (37%) and health care/conference/research institutes (5%). The majority of studies did not focus on a specific age group (38%), whereas others focused on adults (32%) or children (19%). Retrospective and prospective designs were used mostly (45% and 41% of the surveys, respectively) with 6% using both for comparison purposes. The definition of a contact varied among surveys, e.g. a non-physical contact may require conversation, 1. CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license It is made available under a (which was not peer-reviewed) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity.The copyright holder for this preprint . http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/292235 doi: bioRxiv preprint first posted online Mar. 31, 2018; close proximity or both. Age, time schedule (e.g., weekday/weekend) and household size were identified as relevant determinants for contact pattern across a large number of studies. The surveys present a wide range of study designs. Throughout, we found that the overall contact patterns were remarkably robust for the study details. By considering the most common approach in each aspect of design (e.g., sampling schemes, data collection, definition of contact), we could identify a common practice approach that can be used to facilitate comparison between studies and for benchmarking future studies.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has shown how a newly emergent communicable disease can lay considerable burden on public health. To avoid system collapse, governments have resorted to several social distancing measures. In Belgium, this included a lockdown and a following period of phased re-opening. Methods: A representative sample of Belgian adults was asked about their contact behaviour from mid-April to mid-July, during different stages of the intervention measures in Belgium. Use of personal protection equipment (face masks) and compliance to hygienic measures was also reported. We estimated the expected reproduction number computing the ratio of R0 with respect to pre-pandemic data. Results: During the first two waves (the first month) of the survey, the reduction in the average number of contacts was around 80% and was quite consistent across all age-classes. The average number of contacts increased over time, particularly for the younger age classes, still remaining significantly lower than pre-pandemic values. Since the end of May, the estimated reproduction number has a median value larger than one, although with a wide dispersion. Conclusions: We have shown how a rapidly deployed survey can measure compliance to social distancing and assess its impact on COVID-19 spread. Monitoring the effectiveness of social distancing recommendations is of paramount importance to avoid further waves of COVID-19.

Background. The rising COVID-19 pandemic caused many governments to impose policies restricting social interactions. These policies have slowed down the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus to the extent that restric- tions can be gradually lifted. Models can be useful to assess the consequences of deconfinement strategies with respect to business, school and leisure activities. Methods. We adapted the individual-based model "STRIDE" to simulate interactions between the 11 million inhabitants of Belgium at the levels of households, workplaces, schools and communities. We calibrated our model to observed hospital incidence and seroprevalence data. STRIDE can explore contact tracing options and account for repetitive leisure contacts in extended household settings (so called "household bubbles") with varying levels of connectivity. Findings. Household bubbles have the potential to reduce the number of COVID-19 hospital admissions by up to 90%. The effectiveness of contact tracing depends on its timing, as it becomes futile more than 4 days after the index case developed symptoms. Assuming that children have a lower level of susceptibility and lower probability to experience symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, (partial) school closure options have relatively little impact on COVID-19 burden. Interpretation. Not only the absolute number and intensity of physical contacts drive the transmission dynamics and COVID-19 burden, also their repetitiveness is influential. Contact tracing seems essential for a controlled and persistent release of lockdown measures, but requires timely compliance to testing, reporting and self-isolation. Rapid tracing and testing, and communication ensuring continued involvement of the population are therefore essential.

Objective. Scrutiny of COVID-19 mortality in Belgium over the period 8 March-9 May 2020 (Weeks 11-19), using number of deaths per million, infection fatality rates, and the relation between COVID-19 mortality and excess death rates. Data. Publicly available COVID-19 mortality (2020); overall mortality (2009-2020) data in Belgium and demographic data on the Belgian population; data on the nursing home population; results of repeated sero-prevalence surveys in March-April 2020. Statistical methods. Reweighing, missing-data handling, rate estimation, visualization. Results. Belgium has virtually no discrepancy between COVID-19 reported mortality (confirmed and possible cases) and excess mortality. There is a sharp excess death peak over the study period; the total number of excess deaths makes April 2020 the deadliest month of April since WWII, with excess deaths far larger than in early 2017 or 2018, even though influenza-induced January 1951 and February 1960 number of excess deaths were similar in magnitude. Using various sero-prevalence estimates, infection fatality rates (IFRs; fraction of deaths among infected cases) are estimated at 0.38-0.73% for males and 0.20-0.39% for females in the non-nursing home population (non-NHP), and at 0.79-1.52% for males and 0.88-1.31% for females in the entire population. Estimates for the NHP range from 38 to 73% for males and over 22 to 37% for females. The IFRs rise from nearly 0% under 45 years, to 4.3% and 13.2% for males in the non-NHP and the general population, respectively, and to 1.5% and 11.1% for females in the non-NHP and general population, respectively. The IFR and number of deaths per million is strongly influenced by extensive reporting and the fact that 66.0% of the deaths concerned NH residents. At 764 (our re-estimation of the figure 735, presented by "Our World in Data"), the number of COVID-19 deaths per million led the international ranking on May 9, 2020, but drops to 262 in the non-NHP. The NHP is very specific: age-related increased risk; highly prevalent comorbidities that, while non-fatal in themselves, exacerbate COVID-19; larger collective households that share inadvertent vectors such as caregivers and favor clustered outbreaks; initial lack of protective equipment, etc. High-quality health care countries have a relatively older but also more frail population [1], which is likely to contribute to this result.