Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2021 Jan 28;16(1):e0240202. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240202

Epidemiology of COVID-19 vs. influenza: Differential failure of COVID-19 mitigation among Hispanics, Cook County Health, Illinois

William E Trick 1,2,*, Sheila Badri 3, Kruti Doshi 1, Huiyuan Zhang 1, Katayoun Rezai 3, Michael J Hoffman 3, Robert A Weinstein 2,3
Editor: Muhammad Adrish4
PMCID: PMC7842982  PMID: 33507941

Abstract

Background

During the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S., African-American or Hispanic communities were disproportionately impacted. To better understand the epidemiology and relative effects of COVID-19 among hospitalized Hispanic patients, we compared individual and census-tract level characteristics of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 to those diagnosed with influenza, another viral infection with respiratory transmission. We evaluated temporal changes in epidemiology related to a shelter-in-place mandate.

Methods

We evaluated patients hospitalized at Cook County Health, the safety-net health system for the Chicago metropolitan area. Among self-identified hospitalized Hispanic patients, we compared those with influenza (2019–2020 season) to COVID-19 infection during March 16, 2020-May 11, 2020. We used multivariable analysis to identify differences in individual and census-tract level characteristics between the two groups.

Results

Relative to non-Hispanic blacks and whites, COVID-19 rapidly increased among Hispanics during promotion of social-distancing policies. Whereas non-Hispanic blacks were more likely to be hospitalized for influenza, Hispanic patients predominated among COVID-19 infections (40% relative increase compared to influenza). In the comparative analysis of influenza and COVID-19, Hispanic patients with COVID-19 were more likely to reside in census tracts with higher proportions of residents with the following characteristics: Hispanic; no high school diploma; non-US citizen; limited English speaking ability; employed in manufacturing or construction; and overcrowding. By multivariable analysis, Hispanic patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared to those with influenza were more likely to be male (adjusted OR = 1.8; 95% CI 1.1 to 2.9), obese (aOR = 2.5; 95% CI 1.5 to 4.2), or reside in a census tract with ≥40% of residents without a high-school diploma (aOR = 2.5; 95% CI 1.3 to 4.8).

Conclusions

The rapid and disproportionate increase in COVID-19 hospitalizations among Hispanics after the shelter-in-place mandate indicates that public health strategies were inadequate in protecting this population—in particular, for those residing in neighborhoods with lower levels of educational attainment.

Introduction

As of December 10, 2020 there have been over 1.5 million deaths due to COVID [1]. There have been many noteworthy contributions to the literature on the epidemiology of COVID-19 including comparisons of the burden of cases and mortality by race-ethnicity. During most of 2020, the U.S. emerged as the country with the highest absolute number of cases and deaths [2]. It is now well recognized that the dramatic increase in transmission after the first few months of the pandemic in the U.S. occurred disproportionately among non-Hispanic black and Hispanic communities [3]. Factors highlighted as potential drivers of this early and sustained transmission include overcrowding and limited ability to work remotely, leading to challenges in social distancing; multigenerational families; and a high-prevalence of comorbidities [46].

In the Cook County Health system, which provides care for the most vulnerable populations of the Chicago metropolitan region, predominantly non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics, we noted an early surge in admissions of Hispanic patients. We sought to better understand the epidemiology and effect of COVID-19 in the Hispanic community by comparing patient- and census tract-level factors of patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 to those of patients hospitalized due to influenza infection, another viral infection with respiratory transmission, which historically has impacted non-Hispanic blacks with rates at least as high, if not higher, than Hispanics [79]. We evaluated temporal trends in COVID-19 by race-ethnicity and evaluated temporal changes in the context of social distancing policies and their resultant impact on mobility.

Methods

The study was reviewed and approved by the institutional review board at Cook County Health. Informed consent was waived as this was an analysis of routinely collected data and was deemed to be of minimal risk. We assembled a cohort of patients hospitalized for influenza during the 2019–2020 influenza or for COVID-19 during the early phases of the pandemic, through May 11, 2020. We identified patients from a research data warehouse, which contains clinical data on all health system patients; ecological variables are captured through routine address cleaning and geocoding with linkage to U.S. census data [10]. We restricted the cohort to laboratory-confirmed influenza and COVID-19 cases; inclusion in the COVID-19 cohort was limited to hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 detected by polymerase chain reaction—our first detected case was March 16, 2020. We focused on inpatients because persons hospitalized for respiratory infection during the influenza season routinely are evaluated for influenza; in contrast, laboratory confirmation of influenza in the emergency department is much less common.

For patient-level characteristics, we evaluated age, self-identified race-ethnicity; patient co-morbidities captured through ICD-10 diagnosis codes (we evaluated asthma, chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, COPD, diabetes, and HIV or AIDS,); and obesity, dichotomized as body mass index ≥30 kg/m2. Ecological variables were included based on five-year estimates for census tracts published by the U.S. Census Bureau as the American Community Survey [10]. We made a priori selections of the following ecological variables to explore their association with COVID-19 infection: Overcrowding; employment in manufacturing, construction, or service occupations; not in labor force; preference for Spanish language; Hispanic ethnicity; high school diploma; poverty; native born in the U.S.; foreign born, non-citizen; internet access at home; computer at home; and a locally-calculated Social Vulnerability Index [11].

We evaluated the prevalence and associations between patient- and ecological-factors for COVID-19 versus influenza infection using bivariable analyses for all patient and ecological variables. We constructed multivariable logistic regression models to explore the association between COVID-19 and influenza. Because of multicollinearity between ecological variables, we separately entered each ecological variable into the final model to explore the strength of association in relatively parsimonious models. To more intuitively express the quantitative association between census tract variables and COVID-19 infection, we constructed a final model with dichotomous categorization of census tract variables into upper quartile vs the lower three quartiles based on the distribution of values in our dataset. To evaluate temporal trends across racial and ethnic groups, we segmented calendar years into weeks and calculated the proportion of hospitalization for Hispanics, non-Hispanic Blacks, and non-Hispanic whites. We constructed graphs over time using locally smoothed polynomial regression plots with 95% CI bands. All analyses were performed using Stata software, version 14.2.

Results

The proportion of patients admitted to the hospital who were Hispanic was significantly higher for treatment of COVID-19 infection compared to influenza, (59% vs 42%; P<0.001), Fig 1.

Fig 1. Flow diagram depicting the COVID-19 and influenza infection cohorts stratified by race, Cook County Health, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America.

Fig 1

a Hospital inpatients with a positive laboratory test for SARS-CoV-2 during March 16-May 11, 2020. b Hospital inpatients with a positive laboratory test for influenza virus during March 16-May 11, 2020.

The relative increase in COVID-19 infection among Hispanics became apparent by the third week after the initial COVID-19 hospitalization and continued to increase until reaching a plateau of over 50% of all patient admissions during Week 5, Fig 2. Among Hispanics, there were over two-fold more hospitalizations due to COVID-19 infection during our ~two-month study period (n = 278) than for influenza infection during the entire 2019–2020 influenza season (n = 115).

Fig 2. Weekly trend in hospital admissions by race-ethnicity for COVID-19 compared to the mean race-ethnicity values for influenza during the 2019–2020 influenza seasona.

Fig 2

Findings presented in the context of social control policies and their resultant impact on mobility (represented by vertical lines), Cook County Health, Illinois. a There was a 42% relative increase in the proportion of hospitalized patients who were Hispanic compared to influenza infection.

Among hospitalized Hispanic patients, when we evaluated patient-level factors associated with COVID-19 compared to influenza, COVID-19 patients were more likely to be male or obese, and less likely to have a diagnosis of asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or heart failure, Table 1. Regarding patient outcomes, COVID-19 infected patients were more likely than those who acquired influenza to require admission to an ICU, and much more likely to require mechanical ventilation or die, Table 1.

Table 1. Comparison of patient-level characteristics among hospitalized Hispanic patients with COVID-19 versus influenza infectiona, Cook County Health, Chicago, IL.

Covariates COVID-19 (N = 278) Influenza (N = 115) Point Estimates 95% CI P-value
Patient level Continuous Mean SD Mean SD Difference
    Age, years mean (SD) 52.9 12.7 54.6 15.6 -1.7 -4.7 to 1.3 0.26
Dichotomous n % n % Prevalence Ratio
    Obeseb 132 55.7 35 34.3 1.6 1.2 to 2.2 <0.001
    Male sex, n (%) 182 65.5 63 54.8 1.2 1.0 to 1.4 0.05
    Diabetes mellitus 141 50.7 59 51.3 1.0 0.8 to 1.2 0.92
    Asthma 19 6.8 20 17.4 0.4 0.2 to 0.7 0.001
    Heart failure 20 7.2 22 19.1 0.4 0.2 to 0.7 <0.001
    COPD 8 2.9 12 10.4 0.3 0.1 to 0.7 0.002
Outcomes
    ICU admission 78 28.1 21 18.3 1.5 1.0 to 2.4 0.04
    Ventilator use 39 14.0 4 3.4 4.0 1.5 to 11 0.002
    In-hospital mortality 37 13.3 0 0 Undefined <0.001

Abbreviations: COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; SVI, social vulnerability index.

a Time periods: Influenza, 10/1/2019-5/11/2020; COVID-19, 3/16/2020-5/11/2020.

b Obese defined as Body Mass Index ≥30 kg/m2.

Among hospitalized Hispanic patients, ecological factors significantly associated with COVID-19 compared to influenza infection were a higher proportion of the census tract population exhibiting the following: Hispanic ethnicity; Spanish language preference; not U.S. citizens; no high-school diploma; working in manufacturing or construction; and, overcrowding, Table 2.

Table 2. Comparison of neighborhood characteristics of hospitalized Hispanic patients with COVID-19 versus influenza infection, Cook County Health, Chicago, IL.

COVID-19 (N = 278) Influenzaa (N = 115) Point Estimates 95% CI P-value
Covariatesa Mean % SD Mean % SD Difference 95% CI P-Value
Spanish preferred over English language 64.1 26.7 57.0 27.5 7.1 1.2 to 13 0.02
Hispanic 71.3 28.6 64.4 27.3 7.0 0.9 to 13 0.02
Non-citizen 65.6 13.0 58.6 15.0 7.0 4.1 to 10 <0.001
No high school diploma 33.0 13.7 28.2 12.1 4.8 1.9 to 7.6 0.001
Occupation
    Manufacturing 12.5 7.0 10.7 6.5 1.8 0.9 to 2.7 <0.001
    Construction 5.8 4.2 4.8 4.0 1.0 0.4 to 1.5 <0.001
Overcrowded 8.5 5.6 7.3 4.4 1.2 0.4 to 2.3 0.04
SVI 77.4 16.6 74.6 17.3 2.8 -0.8 to 6.8 0.13

Abbreviations: SVI, Social Vulnerability Index.

a We used five-year census-tract estimates from the US Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.

By multivariable analysis, COVID-19 patients were more likely to be obese, male, or reside in a census tract where ≥40% of residents (upper quartile) reported no high-school diploma; and, less likely to have asthma or heart failure, Table 3.

Table 3. Evaluation of ecologicial- and patient-level characteristics by multivariable analysis, COVID-19 versus influenza infectiona.

Hispanic patients hospitalized at Cook County Health, Chicago, IL.

Variable aOR 95% CI P-value
Obese 2.5 1.5 to 4.2 <0.001
Census tract, ≥40% without HS diplomab 2.5 1.3 to 4.8 0.007
Male 1.8 1.1 to 2.9 0.03
Asthma 0.4 0.2 to 0.9 0.02
Heart failure 0.3 0.2 to 0.7 0.001

Abbreviations: HS, High School

a Time periods: Influenza, 10/1/2019-5/11/2020; COVID-19, 3/16/2020-5/11/2020.

b Upper quartile for all census tracts represented by the study population.

Variable selection during multivariable model development was complicated by multi-collinearity among the ecological variables from census data, e.g., we found moderate to strong correlations between preference for Spanish-language and having no high-school diploma (correlation coefficient [rho] = 0.81), being a non-citizen (rho = 0.60), and employment in manufacturing (rho = 0.73) or construction (rho = 0.51).

Discussion

By comparing rates of infection with COVID-19 to influenza, another epidemic respiratory disease, we confirmed previous reports that Hispanic patients experienced a disproportionate burden of COVID-19 [12]. During the early phases of the pandemic, as social controls were promoted in the Chicago region through the local and state departments of public health, we observed a dramatic and sustained increase in the proportion of COVID-19 infections among Hispanics. The dramatic increase was temporally associated with Illinois’ stay-at-home guidance and the closure of non-essential businesses enacted March 21, 2020. Associated with these policies was a resultant decrease in overall population mobility—a nadir of 56% reduced mobility was attained by March 29, 2020 [13].

The impact of social-distancing interventions would be expected to be effective primarily for individuals with capacity to “shelter-in-place”, while transmission likely would continue unabated—possibly even accelerating—for individuals who were unable to “shelter-in-place” due to on-site employment or reduced job mobility due to legal status, occupation, and reduced opportunities associated with lower levels of educational attainment [14, 15]. Certain occupations have been associated with increased risk of COVID-19 infection and although we didn’t collect individual patient occupation, our ecological analysis identified that among hospitalized Hispanic patients, COVID-19 was more likely than influenza infection to occur among residents of census tracts with a higher reported proportion of employment in construction and manufacturing. Additionally, the sociospatial characteristics, such as intense social ties, and multi-generational households that were described as protective for Hispanic communities during Chicago’s 1995 heat wave, may have played a role in transmission of COVID-19 among social contacts in Hispanic communities outside of work [16].

Compared to influenza and not surprising, COVID-19 patients were more likely to have severe infection as manifested by a higher likelihood of ventilator use and mortality. The dramatic mortality difference is consistent with estimates of increased mortality risk from COVID-19 [17] and consistent with rates observed in other inpatient evaluations [18]. Although mortality could have been influenced by a considerable increase in the stress on the health system, the Chicago region, including Cook County Health, never experienced shortages of ICU beds or ventilators.

The increased risk of infection for males and for obesity has been described for both influenza and COVID-19 [19, 20]; however, these two characteristics were more common among COVID-19 compared to influenza patients. Our finding a lower prevalence of asthma or heart failure among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection should not be interpreted as an indicator that individuals with these chronic conditions are not at increased risk for COVID-19 compared to the general population. Rather, this finding may be explained by the higher virulence of COVID-19 compared to influenza; i.e., COVID-19 is more likely to result in illness severe enough to require hospitalization independent from pre-existing pulmonary or cardiac conditions.

In summary, in a health system that cares for patients who come from the most socially vulnerable communities, COVID-19 disproportionately affected Hispanic individuals and communities, a tragic situation that was foretold [21]. This suggests a differential and importantly disparate impact of mitigation measures across communities, especially among Hispanic patients. Additional studies are needed to better understand individual-level behaviors among Hispanics during the COVID-19 pandemic. For the current and future pandemics we need anticipatory plans that transcend community and individual risks, without which, disparities will result despite well-intentioned public health policies and interventions.

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge Vanessa Sarda for her guidance on data analysis and presentation, and drafting of the manuscript.

Data Availability

All relevant data are available from https://dataverse.harvard.edu/api/access/datafile/4209394.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Research Center. https://coronavirusjhuedu/data/mortality, Accessed September 18, 2020.
  • 2.Hunter SB, Harvey M, Briscombe B, Cefalu M. Evaluation of Housing for Health Permanent Supportive Housing Program. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation; Available at https://www.rand.org/pubs/researchreports/RR1694.html. 2017. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Tai DBG, Shah A, Doubeni CA, Sia IG, Wieland ML. The disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on racial and ethnic minorities in the United States. Clin Infect Dis. 2020. 10.1093/cid/ciaa815 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Clark E, Fredricks K, Woc-Colburn L, Bottazzi ME, Weatherhead J. Disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on immigrant communities in the United States. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2020;14(7):e0008484 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008484 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Cholera R, Falusi OO, Linton JM. Sheltering in place in a xenophobic climate: COVID-19 and children in immigrant families. Pediatrics. 2020;146(1). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Yancy CW. COVID-19 and African Americans. Jama. 2020. 10.1001/jama.2020.6548 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Teunis PF, Brienen N, Kretzschmar ME. High infectivity and pathogenicity of influenza A virus via aerosol and droplet transmission. Epidemics. 2010;2(4):215–22. 10.1016/j.epidem.2010.10.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Quinn SC, Kumar S, Freimuth VS, Musa D, Casteneda-Angarita N, Kidwell K. Racial disparities in exposure, susceptibility, and access to health care in the US H1N1 influenza pandemic. Am J Pub Health. 2011;101(2):285–93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Ritger K, Jones R, Weaver K, Ramirez E, Smith S, Morita J, et al. 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus infections-Chicago, Illinois, April-July 2009. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009;58(33):913–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Fazel S, Geddes JR, Kushel M. The health of homeless people in high-income countries: descriptive epidemiology, health consequences, and clinical and policy recommendations. The Lancet. 2014;384(9953):1529–40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Agency for Toxic Substances and Diseae Registry/Geospatial Research, Analysis, and Services Program. Social Vulnerability Index 2018 Database Illinois. Accessed May 2020. 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Macias Gil R, Marcelin JR, Zuniga-Blanco B, Marquez C, Mathew T, Piggott DA. COVID-19 Pandemic: Disparate Health Impact on the Hispanic/Latinx Population in the United States. J Infect Dis. 2020;222(10):1592–1595. 10.1093/infdis/jiaa474 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. Social distancing, Illinois: Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation; [May 19, 2020]. Available from: https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/illinois. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kossoudji SA, Cobb-Clark DA. Coming out of the shadows: Learning about legal status and wages from the legalized population. J Labor Econ. 2002;20(3):598–628. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Walter N, Bourgois P, Loinaz HM, Schillinger D. Social context of work injury among undocumented day laborers in San Francisco. J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17(3):221–9. 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.10501.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Klinenberg E. Denaturalizing disaster: A social autopsy of the 1995 Chicago heat wave. Theory and society. 1999;28(2):239–95. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Faust JS, del Rio C. Assessment of Deaths From COVID-19 and From Seasonal Influenza. JAMA Intern Med. 2020. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.2306 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Di Castelnuovo A, Bonaccio M, Costanzo S, Gialluisi A, Antinori A, Berselli N, et al. Common cardiovascular risk factors and in-hospital mortality in 3,894 patients with COVID-19: survival analysis and machine learning-based findings from the multicentre Italian CORIST Study. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2020;30(11):1899–913. 10.1016/j.numecd.2020.07.031 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Guo W, Li M, Dong Y, Zhou H, Zhang Z, Tian C, et al. Diabetes is a risk factor for the progression and prognosis of COVID‐19. Diabetes-Metab Res. 2020:e3319 10.1002/dmrr.3319 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Allard R, Leclerc P, Tremblay C, Tannenbaum T-N. Diabetes and the severity of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) infection. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(7):1491–3. 10.2337/dc09-2215 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Blumenshine P, Reingold A, Egerter S, Mockenhaupt R, Braveman P, Marks J. Pandemic influenza planning in the United States from a health disparities perspective. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008;14(5):709–15. 10.3201/eid1405.071301 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Muhammad Adrish

30 Nov 2020

PONE-D-20-30228

Epidemiology of COVID-19 vs. Influenza: Differential Failure of COVID-19 Mitigation among Hispanics

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Trick,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by 12-27-2020. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Muhammad Adrish

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please consider modifying your title to ensure that it is specific, descriptive, concise, and comprehensible to readers outside the field (for example by and including the name of the centre/location where you carried out the study)

3. In your Methods section, please provide additional information about the analysis performed, for example by reporting all the variables included in the analysis, and specifying how they were extracted and categorised.

4.We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

 I have received the comments of the reviewers on your manuscript. The specific comments of the reviewers are included below. Please provide point by point response in your revised manuscript.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Dear Authors. I read with great interest your paper. I appreciate a lot the idea reaserch and the quality of manuscript. Only some minor suggestions:

1. Introduction: add dat on global burden of covid and deaths at the day of resubmission

2.Methods and results: well presented

3. Discussion: compare better your data with other data in literature (see and cite Common cardiovascular risk factors and in-hospital mortality in 3,894 patients with COVID-19: survival analysis and machine learning-based findings from the multicentre Italian CORIST Study. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2020 Oct 30;30(11):1899-1913. doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2020.07.031.) and how covid impact not only for influenza but also for other fever diseases as malaria (see and cite Malaria and COVID-19: Common and Different Findings. Trop Med Infect Dis. 2020 Sep 6;5(3):141. doi: 10.3390/tropicalmed5030141.)

Reviewer #2: Trick et al, have written a clear and concise summary of what has been observed in Cook County. These data are well presented and would be interesting to compare to another county in a similar geolocation. The statistics capture what they summarise in their results. The second sentence of the results section is a little confusing, as it is unclear at first what the comparator groups are. I would recommend restructuring it to make clear whether you are looking at just hispanic populations with flu or the general number of cases of flu in line 2. In the methods section, you may want to capture what the total sample size was from which you derived the proportions of cases for the ethnicity sub study in a consort diagram or similar flow chart t show the work flow of your selection of patients to include, which led to Figure 1.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: One B. Dintwe

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Jan 28;16(1):e0240202. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240202.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


17 Dec 2020

Muhammad Adrish, Academic Editor, PLOS ONE December 8, 2020

Re: PONE-D-20-30228, Epidemiology of COVID-19 vs. Influenza: Differential Failure of COVID-19 Mitigation among Hispanics

Dear Dr. Adrish,

We appreciate the opportunity to revise and re-submit our manuscript “Epidemiology of COVID-19 vs. Influenza: Differential Failure of COVID-19 Mitigation for Hispanics” for consideration as a Research Article. Please see below for our replies, which are marked in bold font:

…please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We have uploaded our dataset and a metadata file to Harvard Dataverse, the url is as follows:

https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/X1WNGL.

We have binned the fields in our dataset to de-identify personal data in accord with privacy laws in consultation with our corporate compliance office. The url for the dataset is:

Review Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: Dear Authors. I read with great interest your paper. I appreciate a lot the idea reaserch and the quality of manuscript. Only some minor suggestions:

1. Introduction: add dat on global burden of covid and deaths at the day of resubmission

We have updated the numbers, which have changed dramatically.

2.Methods and results: well presented

3. Discussion: compare better your data with other data in literature (see and cite Common cardiovascular risk factors and in-hospital mortality in 3,894 patients with COVID-19: survival analysis and machine learning-based findings from the multicentre Italian CORIST Study. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2020 Oct 30;30(11):1899-1913. doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2020.07.031.) and how covid impact not only for influenza but also for other fever diseases as malaria (see and cite Malaria and COVID-19: Common and Different Findings. Trop Med Infect Dis. 2020 Sep 6;5(3):141. doi: 10.3390/tropicalmed5030141.)

Thank you for pointing out this literature. I have included mortality estimates from the CORIST study, which was directly relevant to our manuscript. Although the paper on malaria was interesting to read, it was difficult to find the appropriate location in the manuscript to include this additional citation.

Reviewer #2: Trick et al, have written a clear and concise summary of what has been observed in Cook County. These data are well presented and would be interesting to compare to another county in a similar geolocation. The statistics capture what they summarise in their results. The second sentence of the results section is a little confusing, as it is unclear at first what the comparator groups are. I would recommend restructuring it to make clear whether you are looking at just hispanic populations with flu or the general number of cases of flu in line 2.

We have modified the section to improve the clarity of the writing.

In the methods section, you may want to capture what the total sample size was from which you derived the proportions of cases for the ethnicity sub study in a consort diagram or similar flow chart t show the work flow of your selection of patients to include, which led to Figure 1.

Thank you for the suggestion, we have included a second figure, which is now Fig 1.

Sincerely,

William E. Trick, MD

Director, Health Research & Solutions, Cook County Health

Co-Director, Center for Health Equity and Innovation

Professor, Rush University Medical Center

1950 W. Polk St., Suite 5807

Chicago, IL 60612

Phone: 312-864-3631 Email: wtrick@cookcountyhhs.org

Decision Letter 1

Muhammad Adrish

2 Jan 2021

Epidemiology of COVID-19 vs. influenza: Differential failure of COVID-19 mitigation among Hispanics, Cook County Health, Illinois

PONE-D-20-30228R1

Dear Dr. Trick,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Muhammad Adrish

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Thank you for making the recommended revisions to your manuscript.

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: authors improved they paper that now can be accepted. I appreciate a lot the manuscript and idea research that can improve the knowledge on COVID

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: One B. Dintwe

Acceptance letter

Muhammad Adrish

19 Jan 2021

PONE-D-20-30228R1

Epidemiology of COVID-19 vs. influenza: Differential failure of COVID-19 mitigation among Hispanics, Cook County Health, Illinois

Dear Dr. Trick:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Muhammad Adrish

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE


Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

RESOURCES