Nebraska

We think that the cases and recoveries numbers for 3/7 may have been switched, since the recoveries numbers are consistent with our history of case data, and are larger than what is currently shown as the case numbers. Can we get confirmation/clarification over whether this is the case so that we can backfill today's data as appropriate? And also, if possible, could they give us the case values for 3/7 directly since the dashboard is not showing all the categories that are usually reported?

Got a bit of engagement, and some data, back from NE on recoveries and hospitalizations - It seems like it may have been an anomaly on the dashboard that was fixed in their back-end data. Tell me if this addresses your query and I can follow up with them either way

NE got back to me but says they’re not sure what we’re asking about….can you share a screenshot or the particular numbers you’re curious about?

The horizontal bars for cases, hospitalization, and fatalities by race and ethnicity category have been removed. When do you expect those to return to the dashboard?

Our informatics team is working on getting that fixed. Should be fixed shortly!

Will it update again by 12/2?

I checked with our data team. Our Race/Ethnicity data comes from case investigations. There were issues last week with the data updating, but it should be updating nightly again as of 11/28. We have been posting case counts in total daily.

From a previous outreach, we learned that you report “Total Tested” as individuals tested. Do you have plans to release the total number of tests conducted? If so, will you be able to provide historical data consistently under a machine readable format?

That information is now on our dashboard in the graph titled “Tests by date results were received” in the lower left.

Can you clarify how Nebraska performs the necessary deduplication to reach the total individuals tested figure—i.e. instances swabbed, day, week, or recording only one positive test per person, but multiple negative tests for the same person? If the same person gets different test results on different days, would you report the raw results as part of the daily positives or do you apply any kind of logic such as reporting only the first negative or positive result per individual?

Person centric information on our dashboard. This data a deduplicated, each person is counted as a case only once at the time of their first positive test. Negative tests are also only counted once at the time we get their first negative test. Once a person has a positive test they are no longer counted. • Total positive cases • People tested: not detected • People tested • New positive cases by date results were received • Cumulative total positives by date results were received

Lab centric information on our dashboard. This information is not deduplicated, each individual test is counted so a person can be counted more than once if they get tested more than one time • Total tests Tests by date results were received • Cumulative tests by date results were received • % Positive by specimen collection date

We’re also interested in testing data in units of “testing encounters”, which can be defined as “the number of people who have been tested per day.” Under this metric, if a person is being tested once today and once again the following week, that counts as two tests, however, if the same person has two samples collected at a testing center visit, then that only counts as one testing encounter.

I believe the information you are seeking is in the graph referenced in the first answer. I am unclear about what you are asking when you say machine readable?

The last update on LTC data in Nebraska from more than two months ago: What is the most recent LTC data available? When will you post this publicly? Could we get this from you more regularly so that we can make this information publicly available?

I can share latest LTCF data. We do not currently have a separate panel of our dashboard for LTCF data but we have updated numbers available upon request.

Do LTC deaths include both staff and residents?

Deaths include residents. We have not had any LTCF staff deaths at this time.

NE HHS used the phrase “covid-related deaths” in a press release on 5/22/20 which differs from other references to your definition of the death count. Can NE confirm if the published death count in the daily dashboard is only lab-confirmed deaths? If not, what else does it encompass?

The death count on the dashboard reflects confirmed COVID-19 deaths which include a positive lab result.

Does "total tested" refer to people tested or specimens tested?

Individual people

Are you conducting antigen testing? Are these testing results reported on the state site? How many tests have been conducted?

With regards to antigen testing: We are getting COVID antigen tests reported. Labs with automated ELR report both (+) and (-). Labs that report manually report (+) only. See discussion below: we are party to CSTE and following established protocol and case definitions form CSTE. In the past 30 days we had 74 (+) Antigen tests reported through manual on line data entry We had automated ELR reports with 41/1291 (+) reports.

Is Nebraska using pooled testing?

• They pool tested about 5500 specimens in pools of 5 from ~Mar 25 to ~Apr 25, with a positivity rate of around 8-9%.
• Those results were not marked in any special way and ARE incorporated into the state’s data more broadly
• They used the CDC’s assay with permission from the FDA (Dr. Iwen called it a “bridge authorization” to use the assay in their own lab)
• They stopped pooled testing once the positivity rate hit ~10% because it wouldn’t save enough re-agent at that rate to be worth it.
• They are now considering resuming pool testing as soon as 1) the positive rate approaches 5% OR 2) they decide they can get enough data to effectively use a predictor variable to get a better idea of which specimens are likely to be negative and thus suitable for pooling (e.g. a university decides to pool test its entire staff before they come back on campus)
• From his conversations with other state lab directors, many other states are considering doing the same (predictor variable)