SMART2: Age-specific social mixing of school-aged children in a US setting using proximity detecting sensors and contact surveys

To increase the evidence base supporting specific methods to measure social interaction, we compared data from self-reported contact surveys and wearable proximity sensors from a cohort of schoolchildren in the Pittsburgh metropolitan area. Enrollment in the Social Mixing and Respiratory Transmission (SMART) study operated on an opt-out basis, and all students registered in a participating school before the start of the study were eligible to participate. Students in kindergarten (typically aged 5 years) to 12th grade (typically aged 18 years) from two elementary (K to 4th grade, K to 5th grade), two middle (5th to 6th grade, 7th to 8th grade), two elementary-middle (K to 8th grade), and two high (both 9th to 12th grade) schools were eligible to participate in SMART. Participation rates were high in all schools (82 to 99%). Each school provided aggregate demographic information about the school population, and individual grade and sex of participating students. Proximity sensor deployments The details of proximity sensor deployments have been described in detail elsewhere (60). In brief, participating students were given proximity sensors in plastic pouches and instructed to wear the pouch around their neck for the duration of the school day without removing or otherwise tampering with the sensor. In six of the eight schools, all participating students were given a sensor; in two schools, the large student population limited the deployment to randomly selected classrooms in each grade. Deployments typically lasted from the first class period (08:00 – 09:00) to the last class period (14:00 – 15:00). Deployment days in each school were chosen to be representative of a typical school day, without any special schoolwide or grade-specific activities that could modify normal contact patterns. We used TelosB wireless sensors (61) programmed in the NesC language to send beacons every 20 seconds (beacon frequency 3 per minute). The receiving sensor recorded the contacting sensor’s identity, an internal time stamp, and a radio strength signal indicator (RSSI). Signal strength provided an estimate of physical proximity, but was highly dependent on the orientation of the two sensors and any obstructions between them and therefore could not be used to define an exact distance between contacts. Based on pilot studies and previous work on effective distances of respiratory virus transmission (29, 62), we chose a signal threshold (-80 dBm) that should correspond to contacts of relevance to respiratory disease transmission. The number of unique proximity sensor contacts recorded for a participant was defined as the total number of other participants with whom their proximity sensor recorded at least one interaction during each deployment. To explore patterns of contacts of varying length, we considered several values of the contact threshold, or the minimum number of recorded interactions between two proximity sensors required to be considered a unique contact. The number of interactions between any given pair of sensors was taken to be the maximum number of interactions recorded by either sensor, to account for battery failure, measurement error, or other malfunctions. Contact survey design Contact surveys were completed by participants in school under the supervision of project staff and teachers. Each sheet of the paper version allowed for information on up to 30 contacts to be recorded; additional sheets could be requested. Two versions were designed: one for middle- and high-school students, and a simplified version for elementary school students (although some elementary school children completed the middle- and high-school version, upon consultation with school administrators and teachers). Classrooms were randomly selected to participate from each grade, and students of several classrooms completed more than one contact survey over the course of the study period. Participants were asked to report information about any individual they talked with, played with, or touched the previous day, including the contact’s age and sex, whether they attended the same school as the participant, the context in which the contact was made, whether the contact involved direct or indirect (through a shared object) touch, and approximate duration of the contact. Students reported the total number of contacts made in the previous day, without detailed information, and additional demographic information about themselves and their household. The surveys were completed either on paper or by computer, depending on resources available in each school. We defined total survey contacts as the total number of individuals a student reported having interacted with on the day before the survey was completed. Detailed contacts were the subset of total contacts for which the student reported contact age, sex, duration, and context. We considered further subsets of detailed survey contacts, including those occurring within school, those reported to have lasted more than 10 minutes over the course of the day, and those occurring on the same day as a sensor deployment