SARS-CoV-2 infection parameters: |
| transmission rate of SARS-CoV-2 | 0.46 days–1 | Liu et al., 2020 |
| SARS-CoV-2 recovery rate (mild cases) | 1/7 days–1 | Lauer et al., 2020; Rhee et al., 2020 |
| SARS-CoV-2 incubation rate (latent period from exposed to infectious state) | 1/5 days–1 | Elias et al., 2021 |
| Relative risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission due to lockdown implementation | 0.23 | Salje et al., 2020 |
Pneumococcal colonization and invasion parameters: |
| transmission rate of antibiotic-sensitive strain | 0.056 days–1 0.046 days–1 0.034 days–1 | Davies et al., 2019; Olesen et al., 2020 |
| fitness of antibiotic-resistant strain (assuming there is a fitness cost on transmissibility) | 0.9652 0.949 0.926 | Dagan et al., 2008; Melnyk et al., 2015 |
| transmission rate of antibiotic-resistant strain | | calculated |
| Relative risk of pneumococcal transmission due to lockdown implementation | 1 or 0.75 | assumed |
| rate of natural bacterial clearance (assumed to be the same for antibiotic-sensitive and -resistant strains) | 1/20 days–1 1/30 days–1 1/45 days–1 | Abdullahi et al., 2012; Davies et al., 2019; Ekdahl et al., 1997; Högberg et al., 2021Melegaro et al., 2004 |
| relative infectiousness with each strain for dually colonized | 0.5 | assumedColijn et al., 2010 |
| fraction of dually colonized returning to single-colonized upon reinfection | 0.5 | assumed (Colijn et al., 2010) |
| probability of acquiring secondary bacterial carriage | 0.5 | assumed (Colijn et al., 2010) |
| probability of transmitting antibiotic-sensitive strain | 0.5 | assumed (Colijn et al., 2010) |
| probability of a single infection | 0.5 | assumed (Colijn et al., 2010) |
| pneumococcal invasion rate (summer and winter) | [3x10-6 day–1,9x10-6 day–1] in the elderly and general population, and [1x10-6 day–1, 2.5x10-6 day–1] in <5 years-old | Domenech de Cellès et al., 2019; Opatowski et al., 2013 |
| initial states – initial prevalence of the total pneumococcal carriage (antibiotic-sensitive and -resistant) in different populations | 10% 20% 30% | Cohen et al., 2023; Rose et al., 2021; Rybak et al., 2022; Tinggaard et al., 2023; Wang et al., 2017 |
Antibiotic exposure parameters: |
| rate of antibiotic-induced pneumococcal clearance for sensitive strains(1/time before antibiotic action) | 1/3 days–1 | Kuitunen et al., 2023 |
| rate of return to antibiotic unexposed compartment (1/duration of antibiotic treatment) | 1/7 days–1 | Grant and Saux, 2021; Kuitunen et al., 2023 |
| rate of return to antibiotic unexposed compartment (1/the remainder of how long azithromycin stays in the body) | 1/11.5 days–1 | calculated (Foulds et al., 1990; Girard et al., 2005) |
| baseline rate of antibiotic exposure in the community (France) | 0.0014 average daily ppc (prescriptions per capita) | Bara et al., 2022 |
| A reduction factor for antibiotic exposure in the community resulting from changes in healthcare-seeking behavior in response to the COVID-19 pandemic | [0.51, 0.77, 0.84]to represent annual 13%, 18%, and 39% decrease observed in France | Bara et al., 2022 |
| A proportion of COVID-19 infected individuals in the community receiving azithromycin | [0–0.20]testing between 0% and 20% | Tsay et al., 2022; Wittman et al., 2023 |
Pathogenicity (invasive pneumococcal disease risk): |
| A reduction factor for the risk of developing an invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) due to the absence of influenza-like-illnesses (ILIs) after lockdown implementation | 1 (pre-lockdown) 0.2 (lockdown) 0.4 (post-lockdown) for an average of 0.5 in 2020 | Shaw et al., 2023 |