METADATA last updated: 2026-04-15_180753 file_name: _archive-combined-files_pilot-data_87k.md category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data words: 51104 tokens: 86751 CONTENT # _archive-combined-files_pilot-data_87k (16 files, 86,751 tokens) # 5,429 _context-commentary_pilots-pilot-data.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-26 RT file_name: _context-commentary_pilots-pilot-data.md category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data gfile_url: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B6YJLLIwFuu1lK_xPRisV_pEtoCNAswsE8gvO0kKebU words: 3719 tokens: 5429 CONTENT ## Context ### Pilot Data Overview The FloodLAMP pilot data (`pilots/pilot-data`) was collected across 11 surveillance testing programs in 6 states, drawing from three primary sources: - **FloodLAMP mobile app** (built on the Appivo platform) — Used by participants and administrators for registering participants to barcoded collection tubes and for recording results. Not all sites used the app; usage varied across programs and was accompanied by varying degrees of completeness and data quality. - **Google Forms** — A Run Form for logging run-related data after each testing run, and a weekly stats form for reporting aggregate numbers (samples, positives, etc.). See the Acronyms section below for details on the corresponding spreadsheet types. - **Referral test data** — Information about non-FloodLAMP follow-up tests (typically antigen or PCR), communicated to FloodLAMP via email, text, or verbal reports. The data underwent multiple rounds of cleaning and reconciliation, with all changes tracked in the spreadsheets using standardized codes. The processed data is available in Google Drive as Google-native spreadsheet files and as extracted CSVs. Summary markdown files containing key plots and data are also provided. | Resource | Location | | ----- | ----- | | Google Drive master index | https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1b1uWHNGBL9yatTUNnzrbOTdWOMlD-XYVsn4V6pSYmmk | | Filename listing | `Data PUB - Pilot Data Google Files - PUB Filenames` | | URL listing | `Data PUB - Pilot Data Google Files - PUB URLs` | | Aggregate summary | `aggregate_pilot-data/aggregate_pilot-data_summary` | Video transcripts of data pipeline walkthroughs are included in `_docs_pilot-data`, and the code for generating summary markdown files and plots is in `_code_pilots-data`. ### Acronyms and Terms #### Key Acronyms | Acronym | Meaning | Context | | ----- | ----- | ----- | | **APS** | **Appivo Samples** | Spreadsheet of Appivo app extracted data with tabs by sample (participant) and by tube (reaction/pool, APT) | | **RFR** | **Run Form Response** | Spreadsheet for logging and correcting run-related data from submissions of Google Form "Run Form". | | **RTR** | **Referral Test Report** | Spreadsheet for tracking and documenting referral test cases. | | **RSR** | **Result Stats Report** | Spreadsheet for logging weekly compiled stats using a Google Form | | **STS** | **Stats Table Summary** | Spreadsheet for data previously extracted and compiled for which we no longer have the raw data files (APS, RFR, or RSR) | | **PHI** | **Protected Health Information** | Sensitive personal data that must be de-identified or stored on the "Limited PHI drive." | #### Specialized Terms | Term | Meaning | Context | | ----- | ----- | ----- | | **ARF Tubes** | Tubes present in the Run Form data but absent from Appivo, which are created and assigned ARF Tube IDs to be included in the dataset. | Run reconciliation process; appears in APS Tubes import tab. | | **Note Names** | A field or process step in the APS correction workflow used to associate a tube with the correct participant name, often to resolve missing or inconsistent names. | Glossary, APS Row Delete, Add Note Names process. | | **Person ID / DeID Key** | A unique identifier assigned to each individual participant; the DeID Key is the mapping used for the de-identification process. | Glossary, APS De-Identify process. | | **Reaction Sequence** | All reactions from a **Collection Tube** (initial run and all re-runs) for a single session, which forms the **Session Call**. | RFR Reaction Table Criteria. | | **Session Call** | The final result for a given **Collection Tube** and session (initial run plus re-runs), determined by the complete **Reaction Sequence**. | RFR Reaction Table Criteria. | | **Collection Tube** | A physical tube identified by a **Tube ID** and associated with a sample collection event. | RFR Reaction Table Criteria. | | **Case Cluster** | A group of related cases, such as a family pool that tested positive, where contributors are subsequently deconvoluted and tested individually. The original pool tube serves as the initial case identifier. | RTR referral test tracking. | ### Data Processing Flow The pilot data processing pipeline involved multiple stages of cleaning, reconciliation, and quality tracking across several interconnected spreadsheet types. Changes at each step were tracked using standardized reason codes in dedicated spreadsheet columns. #### APS (Appivo Samples) Processing The starting point for most pilot sites was raw data exported from the Appivo mobile app, which appears in two pink-colored tabs in the APS spreadsheet: "raw APS" (one row per participant-tube combination) and "raw APT" (one row per tube). An early issue was that some tubes appeared in APT but not APS, typically tubes where only free-text "note names" were entered by the collection sponsor rather than a registered participant name. A process was developed to identify and add these APT-only tubes to the dataset. The processing followed these steps: 1. **Pre-Delete PHI tab** — The full participant-level list of all Tube IDs, located in the PHI version of the spreadsheet. Each pooled tube has one row per participant (e.g., a 4-person pool produces 4 rows sharing the same Tube ID). 2. **Tube Deletion** — Tubes were flagged for removal using standardized reason codes. Common reasons included app testing artifacts (tubes scanned or entered during testing of the app itself). All deletion decisions were tracked via codes in the spreadsheet columns. 3. **Post-Delete tab** — The dataset with all flagged tubes removed. 4. **APS Tubes tab** (blue) — A rolled-up view with one row per tube rather than one per participant, including the collection sponsor name but not individual participant names. The Stats and REF Weekly tabs at the beginning of the APS spreadsheet comprise higher level data and were populated after the run reconciliation process described below. #### RFR (Run Form Response) Processing The RFR captures data from the person performing the testing. After completing a run, the tester scanned their paper run form and uploaded it via a Google Form, along with photos of the reaction tubes and answers to questions about tube counts. An optional third image, a "lookup map" listing all Tube IDs in the run, was sometimes included, particularly for positive or inconclusive tubes and for reruns. The primary data tab is "RFR Data - preExcl" (pre-exclude). Very few rows from the raw Google Forms export were excluded; those that were had been clearly noted as submission errors in the response notes, typically followed by a corrected resubmission. A full RFR audit was then conducted: all images of paper run forms and reaction tubes were reviewed, errors were corrected, and inconsistencies identified. All changes were tracked with codes, notes, and comments. Differences in how sites filled out the forms, including systematic errors at some sites, made this audit step essential. #### Run Reconciliation The run reconciliation process matched RFR runs to APS tubes for sites that had both data types. The key task was reconciling tube counts between the two datasets. Common complications included: - Tubes collected the evening before a run being associated with the following day's run; - Unresulted (null-result) tubes in APS, most of which could be determined as negative through run reconciliation and tube count matching; - RFR runs containing tubes absent from the APS/Appivo data, for which ARF Tube IDs were created (a relatively small number overall); - Runs not captured in the RFR data, which received run IDs with an "_APS" suffix, assigned in the rightmost columns of the APS Tubes import tab. #### RFR Output and Cross-Checking After reconciliation, the RFR spreadsheet's purple "All Tube Results" tab contains the final Tube ID-to-run ID mapping, along with run date, collection date, final result, and pool level. The "Runs Compare" tab provides side-by-side views of run data organized by run ID and by APS collection date, serving as a cross-check on counts of positives, negatives, and inconclusives across pipeline stages. #### Final Rollup Data was rolled up into Stats and Weekly tabs. The Stats tab typically resides in the APS file and the Weekly tab in the RFR. The APS file also includes a "REF Weekly" tab that references the weekly data, and a "POS and INCL" tab containing data for positive and inconclusive tubes only. #### RTR (Referral Test Report) Processing The RTR collected follow-up testing data, typically antigen or PCR tests, and sometimes other rapid LAMP tests. The "Referral Test Data" tab has one row per referral test. The "Referral Test by Person" tab rolls this up to one row per person, with columns for up to three sequential referral tests (type and result each). A "case cluster" groups related cases — for example, a family pool that tested positive where contributors were subsequently deconvoluted and tested individually. The original pool Tube ID serves as the initial case identifier for the cluster. While column structure and lookup logic were applied to the referral test data, a fair amount of ad hoc manual processing was still required to extract the standardized metrics presented in the Stats tab. #### RSR (Run Stats Report) and STS (Stats Table Summary) For programs that did not use the Run Form (Coral Springs, ROSA, Davie, Kent, and FTFC), Run Form Responses could not be created. For the three earlier programs — Coral Springs, Davie, and ROSA, which began in fall 2021 — a Run Stats Report (RSR) Google Form was used for weekly reporting of test counts and results by program testers or administrators, who were otherwise tracking results in their own spreadsheets. The STS files contain aggregated data from an earlier tracking system that predated the APS/RFR pipeline. For Kent (Camp Kenmont), data was reconstructed from an extracted Appivo dataset; Appivo had been used but the raw APS file was not created. For FTFC, the Appivo data was kept separate from Google Drive for privacy reasons and was subsequently lost. Aggregated numbers were preserved, however, and there were no positives during the brief testing period. ### Data Summaries by Program Programs are ordered according to initiation date. #### Aggregate of All Pilot Programs Start Run Date: 2020-12-11 End Run Date: 2023-06-02 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 16,209 Number of Participant Results: 37,706 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 884 Number of Unique Individuals Tested: 2,752 #### FLMP - FloodLAMP (includes CRLN and FLSP) Start Run Date: 2020-12-11 End Run Date: 2023-01-02 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 1,540 Number of Participant Results: 3,399 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 57 Number of Unique Individuals Tested: 212 Test Operator: FloodLAMP Test Processing Site: Various Population Tested: Staff, Students, Families, Community Configuration: Various Collection Type: Pooled Household, Individual Self or HCW Collected: Self App Used?: Yes Bring-up Type: In Person Program Name: FloodLAMP Site: Various Site Type: Various Location: Portola Valley, CA #### FLSP - FloodLAMP Staff Plus Other Community Start Run Date: 2020-12-11 End Run Date: 2023-01-02 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 524 Number of Participant Results: 1,059 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 25 Number of Unique Individuals Tested: 70 Test Operator: FloodLAMP Test Processing Site: Biolab, Garage, Office Population Tested: Staff, Community Configuration: Various Collection Type: Pooled Household, Individual Self or HCW Collected: Self App Used?: Yes Bring-up Type: In Person Program Name: FloodLAMP Staff Plus Site: MBC Biolabs and Home Garage Site Type: Company Location: San Carlos, CA #### CRLN - Carillon Pre-School in Portola Valley, CA Start Run Date: 2021-12-24 End Run Date: 2022-05-31 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 1,016 Number of Participant Results: 2,340 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 32 Number of Unique Individuals Tested: 142 Test Operator: FloodLAMP Test Processing Site: Garage Dedicated Room Population Tested: Students, Staff, Families Configuration: Standard Collection Type: Pooled Household, Individual Self or HCW Collected: Self App Used?: Yes Bring-up Type: In Person Program Name: Carillon Site: Preschool Site Type: Preschool Location: Portola Valley, CA #### FTFC - Eagles/EMS Leadership Conference in Ft. Lauderdale, FL Start Run Date: 2021-06-14 End Run Date: 2021-06-18 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 61 Number of Participant Results: 195 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 0 Number of Unique Individuals Tested: 195 Test Operator: FloodLAMP Test Processing Site: Hotel Storage Room Population Tested: EMS, Conference Attendees Configuration: Standard Collection Type: Pooled & Individual Self or HCW Collected: Self App Used?: Yes Bring-up Type: In Person Program Name: FTFC Site: Hard Rock Hotel Site Type: Conference Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL #### KENT - Camp Kenmont Youth Camp in Kent, CT Start Run Date: 2021-06-28 End Run Date: 2021-07-29 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 190 Number of Participant Results: 696 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 2 Number of Unique Individuals Tested: 342 Test Operator: Volunteers, Camp Staff Test Processing Site: On Site Room Population Tested: Young Adult Campers, Staff Configuration: Standard Collection Type: Pooled Self or HCW Collected: HCW App Used?: Yes Bring-up Type: Remote (NSVD) Program Name: Kent Site: Camp Kenmont Site Type: Youth Camp Location: Kent, CT #### COSP - Coral Springs City Municipal/EMS in Coral Springs, FL Start Run Date: 2021-08-31 End Run Date: 2022-03-07 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 7,146 Number of Participant Results: 22,643 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 347 Number of Unique Individuals Tested: 1,074 Test Operator: City of Coral Springs Test Processing Site: Office Space Population Tested: EMS, First Responders, City Staff Configuration: Double Standard Collection Type: Pooled Self or HCW Collected: Self App Used?: Yes Bring-up Type: In Person Program Name: Coral Springs Site: Municipal Building Site Type: City / EMS Location: Coral Springs, FL #### DAVI - Town of Davie Fire/EMS in Davie, FL Start Run Date: 2021-09-01 End Run Date: 2022-03-18 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 2,279 Number of Participant Results: 4,409 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 384 Test Operator: Davie Fire and Rescue Test Processing Site: Fire Station Office Population Tested: EMS, First Responders, City Staff Configuration: Standard Collection Type: Pooled Self or HCW Collected: Self App Used?: No Bring-up Type: In Person Program Name: Davie Site: Fire Station Site Type: City / EMS Location: Davie, FL #### ROSA - ROSA TV Production in Davie, FL Start Run Date: 2021-09-28 End Run Date: 2021-12-17 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 781 Number of Participant Results: 781 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 1 Number of Unique Individuals Tested: 156 Test Operator: Davie Fire and Rescue Test Processing Site: Office Population Tested: TV Production Staff Configuration: Standard Collection Type: Individual Self or HCW Collected: HCW App Used?: Yes Bring-up Type: In Person Program Name: Rosa Site: Production Set / Fire Station Site Type: Production Organization Location: Davie, FL #### BEND - Bend Fire and Rescue/EMS in Bend, OR Start Run Date: 2021-12-10 End Run Date: 2022-05-11 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 772 Number of Participant Results: 767 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 71 Number of Unique Individuals Tested: 187 Test Operator: Bend Fire and Rescue Test Processing Site: Office Space Population Tested: First Responders, Staff Configuration: Double Mini Collection Type: Individual Self or HCW Collected: HCW App Used?: Yes Bring-up Type: Remote (NSVD Volunteer) Program Name: Bend Site: Fire Station Site Type: Fire Dept / EMS Location: Bend, OR #### COMB - Combate TV Show Production in Miami, FL Start Run Date: 2022-03-20 End Run Date: 2022-08-15 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 1,981 Number of Participant Results: 1,672 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 14 Number of Unique Individuals Tested: 369 Test Operator: FloodLAMP Test Processing Site: Hotel room Population Tested: Martial artists, Production Staff Configuration: Standard Collection Type: Individual Self or HCW Collected: HCW App Used?: Yes Bring-up Type: In Person Program Name: Combate Site: Embassy Hotel Site Type: Production Organization Location: Miami, FL #### NDHM - Needham Beth Shalom School in Needham, MA Start Run Date: 2022-05-02 End Run Date: 2022-10-03 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 80 Number of Participant Results: 190 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 0 Number of Unique Individuals Tested: 130 Test Operator: Needham Beth Shalom School Test Processing Site: Office Space Population Tested: Students, Staff, Families Configuration: Standard Collection Type: Pooled Household Self or HCW Collected: Self App Used?: Yes Bring-up Type: In Person & Remote Program Name: Needham Site: Needham Beth Shalom School Site Type: K-12 School Location: Needham, MA #### ABRM - Abrome K-12 School in Austin, TX Start Run Date: 2022-09-05 End Run Date: 2023-06-02 Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs): 1,379 Number of Participant Results: 2,954 Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive: 8 Number of Unique Individuals Tested: 87 Test Operator: Abrome School Test Processing Site: Office Population Tested: Students, Staff, Families Configuration: Mini w water bath Collection Type: Pooled Household Self or HCW Collected: Self App Used?: Yes Bring-up Type: In Person Program Name: Abrome Site: Abrome School Site Type: K-12 School Location: Austin, TX ## Commentary The FloodLAMP pilot data was a mess. Wrangling it to its current state was a substantial undertaking, requiring far more rounds of cleaning and reconciliation than initially anticipated. In retrospect, spreadsheets were not the right tool for this level of complexity. All of this work would be a lot easier now with AI. A key reason why the data work was so challenging was the core tension between flexibility and standardization. FloodLAMP provided program testers and administrators with flexible data entry options, such as the ability to add participant "note names" for individuals not yet registered in Appivo, and did not require programs to use our tools (including the app). While practical in the field, this flexibility introduced significant downstream reconciliation work to match entries to existing participant records. In hindsight, that reconciliation effort might have been limited to positive and inconclusive cases only. Run reconciliation was further complicated by tubes collected the evening before a testing run, combined with days that included multiple initial runs and reruns — distinctions that were not captured in the original data collection design, either in Appivo or the Google Forms. For anyone interested in pooled self-collection testing, the challenges documented in this data may offer useful insights. However, the entire data collection and processing infrastructure would look fundamentally different if built today. AI capabilities — from AI-assisted software development to natural language processing, transcription, and automated data auditing — provide the leverage that was missing during FloodLAMP's operations. The primary gap was not conceptual but practical: the staffing, funding, software experience, methods, and tooling needed for continuous data quality monitoring. Those tools are now far more accessible, making dealing with even data as ugly as ours far less painful. ### Program Specific Data Notes #### ABRM - Abrome K-12 School in Austin, TX Abrome has one of the most complete datasets, including all three key file types: APS, RFR, and RTR. #### BEND - Bend Fire and Rescue/EMS in Bend, OR Bend is missing the RTR because referral testing was communicated by correspondence and was relatively straightforward: all FloodLAMP positives were confirmed by same-day lab PCR. Of the two inconclusive results, one was confirmed positive by PCR and one negative by PCR, as verified in a recent follow-up email to the program administrator. #### COMB - Combate TV Show Production in Miami, FL The referral data came in a separate spreadsheet from the program administrator and was processed into the standard RTR format. #### COSP - Coral Springs City Municipal/EMS in Coral Springs, FL This is the largest dataset. It has APS data but no RFR data because they did not use the Run Form. One of the challenges with this dataset was that a large number of participants were entered via note names, often with inconsistent spellings. Reconciling these was a laborious process. A lesson learned is that automating this with fuzzy name matching against a running participant list would be a valuable improvement. #### CRLN - Carillon Pre-School in Portola Valley, CA Data collected in the same Appivo tenant (application instance) with the FloodLAMP staff testing program - see FLMP. #### DAVI - Town of Davie Fire/EMS in Davie, FL Davie did not use Appivo, but the tester took extensive data, likely kept in private spreadsheets. The tester reported what appears to be very reliable data in the Run Stats Report on a weekly basis. They also provided a detailed antigen comparison dataset via spreadsheet. #### FLMP - FloodLAMP (includes CRLN and FLSP) This was the most challenging program to sort out and reconcile. Not only were Carillon and FloodLAMP Staff Plus intermingled for a period, but the data included complexity due to the pooled testing, positive follow-ups, deconvolution, and reruns. Advantages were the overall completeness of the data and the fact that it was collected by the FloodLAMP staff. The fact that this was FloodLAMP's own program using its own system reveals our operational challenges, but it's also the case that the data is inherently complex. It would have helped immensely to have internal software engineering, to improve our tooling and systems for this type of self-pooled testing program. #### FLSP - FloodLAMP Staff Plus Other Community Data collected in the same Appivo tenant (application instance) with the Carillon testing program - see FLMP. #### FTFC - Eagles/EMS Leadership Conference in Ft. Lauderdale, FL This data is straightforward, covering just a few days of testing with no positives. As noted above, none of the APS, RFR, or RTR data were available; the data came from previously compiled stats that originally derived from Appivo data that was subsequently lost. #### KENT - Camp Kenmont Youth Camp in Kent, CT There is a separate App Data import file that was found during the archive process. This file is not included in the archive but is the source from which the data is derived. #### NDHM - Needham Beth Shalom School in Needham, MA Needham has APS and RFR but no RTR because there were no positives, and therefore no follow-up testing. #### ROSA - ROSA TV Production in Davie, FL There is APS data for ROSA but no RFR or RTR. FloodLAMP had very little contact with the program administrator, though an email was sent during the archive process to inquire about referral testing for the single positive, which was confirmed positive by a same-day antigen test. # 9,325 aggregate_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: aggregate_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2026-03-23 title: Aggregate Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: aggregate tags: source_file_type: csv license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ notes: Aggregated statistics across all FloodLAMP pilot sites. summary_short: Aggregate FloodLAMP pilot data summary across all sites. Total tubes run: 16715; Total positive tubes: 889; Total participants: 37200; Date range: 2020-12-07 to 2023-06-04. words: 4897 tokens: 9325 CONTENT ## Files ### Aggregate CSVs - Aggregate CSV folder: `aggregate_pilot-data/` - Stats key-values CSV: [aggregate_pilot-data_stats_key-values.csv](aggregate_pilot-data_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: [aggregate_pilot-data_weekly-summary.csv](aggregate_pilot-data_weekly-summary.csv) - Referral agreement CSV: [aggregate_pilot-data_stats_referral-agreement.csv](aggregate_pilot-data_stats_referral-agreement.csv) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | value_status | value_formula | sites_included_n | sites_missing_n | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 16,209 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 16,484 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | 795 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | 8,727 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 17,096 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 37,706 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 386 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 38,092 | ok | participant_results + arf_tubes | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 2.4 | ok | participant_results / (tubes_tested_initial - arf_tubes) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | 275 | partial | sum(site values) | 6 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | 705 | partial | sum(site values) | 6 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | 1.7% | partial | rerun_tubes / tubes_tested_initial | 6 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | 148 | partial | sum(site values) | 6 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | 18.6% | partial | initial_runs_with_reruns / initial_runs | 6 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 884 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | 5.5% | ok | positive_tubes_final / tubes_tested_initial | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | 87 | partial | sum(site values) | 8 | 2 | AGGREGATE | | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | 337 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | 134 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 14 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | 3 | partial | sum(site values) | 6 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 17 | partial | inconclusive_tubes_final + inconclusive_not_in_aps | 10 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | 0.1% | partial | total_inconclusive_tubes / tubes_tested_initial | 10 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | 4 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | 23.5% | partial | inconclusive_resolved_pos / total_inconclusive_tubes | 9 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | 3 | partial | sum(site values) | 8 | 2 | AGGREGATE | | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | 9 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | 68 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 159 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 1.0% | ok | inconclusive_run_calls / tube_tests_run_total | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 127 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 121 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 4 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 98.4% | ok | (agree_positives + incl_ref_pos) / cases_with_referral | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | 2 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | 12 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | 68 | partial | sum(site values) | 6 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | 62 | partial | sum(site values) | 6 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | 15 | partial | sum(site values) | 6 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | 24.2% | partial | positive_same_day_antigen_neg / positive_same_day_antigen | 6 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 1 | partial | sum(site values) | 6 | 4 | AGGREGATE | | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | | not_available | positive_antigen_other_neg / positive_antigen_other | 0 | 10 | AGGREGATE | | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | 0 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | 0 | ok | sum(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | 2,752 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | 481 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | 444 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | 16.1% | partial | unique_positive / unique_individuals | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | 475 | partial | sum(site values) | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | 17.3% | partial | unique_positive_incl_pool / unique_individuals | 9 | 1 | AGGREGATE | | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2020-12-11 | ok | min(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | | Dates | End Run Date | 2023-06-02 | ok | max(site values) | 10 | 0 | AGGREGATE | | ### Weekly summary | week_start_date | week_end_date | participants_n | tubes_n | positive_tubes_n | inconclusive_tubes_n | pct_positive | pct_positive_status | pct_positive_formula | sites_included_n | sites_total_n | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2020-12-07 | 2020-12-13 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2020-12-14 | 2020-12-20 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2020-12-21 | 2020-12-27 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2020-12-28 | 2021-01-03 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-01-04 | 2021-01-10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-01-11 | 2021-01-17 | 36 | 15 | 3 | 0 | 20.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-01-18 | 2021-01-24 | 49 | 24 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-01-25 | 2021-01-31 | 45 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-02-01 | 2021-02-07 | 31 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-02-08 | 2021-02-14 | 40 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-02-15 | 2021-02-21 | 14 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-02-22 | 2021-02-28 | 24 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-03-01 | 2021-03-07 | 35 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-03-08 | 2021-03-14 | 30 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-03-15 | 2021-03-21 | 16 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-03-22 | 2021-03-28 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-03-29 | 2021-04-04 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-04-05 | 2021-04-11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-04-12 | 2021-04-18 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-04-19 | 2021-04-25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-04-26 | 2021-05-02 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-05-03 | 2021-05-09 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-05-10 | 2021-05-16 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-05-17 | 2021-05-23 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-05-24 | 2021-05-30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-05-31 | 2021-06-06 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-06-07 | 2021-06-13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-06-14 | 2021-06-20 | 197 | 63 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2021-06-21 | 2021-06-27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-06-28 | 2021-07-04 | 105 | 374 | 2 | 0 | 0.5% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2021-07-05 | 2021-07-11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2021-07-12 | 2021-07-18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2021-07-19 | 2021-07-25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2021-07-26 | 2021-08-01 | 85 | 322 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2021-08-02 | 2021-08-08 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-08-09 | 2021-08-15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-08-16 | 2021-08-22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-08-23 | 2021-08-29 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2021-08-30 | 2021-09-05 | 172 | 55 | 2 | 0 | 3.6% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2021-09-06 | 2021-09-12 | 192 | 63 | 3 | 1 | 4.8% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2021-09-13 | 2021-09-19 | 194 | 65 | 4 | 0 | 6.2% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2021-09-20 | 2021-09-26 | 235 | 75 | 4 | 0 | 5.3% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2021-09-27 | 2021-10-03 | 240 | 108 | 1 | 0 | 0.9% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2021-10-04 | 2021-10-10 | 322 | 171 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2021-10-11 | 2021-10-17 | 281 | 154 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2021-10-18 | 2021-10-24 | 251 | 138 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2021-10-25 | 2021-10-31 | 219 | 108 | 1 | 0 | 0.9% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2021-11-01 | 2021-11-07 | 227 | 126 | 3 | 0 | 2.4% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2021-11-08 | 2021-11-14 | 220 | 120 | 16 | 0 | 13.3% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2021-11-15 | 2021-11-21 | 271 | 141 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2021-11-22 | 2021-11-28 | 157 | 74 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2021-11-29 | 2021-12-05 | 275 | 152 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2021-12-06 | 2021-12-12 | 319 | 183 | 2 | 0 | 1.1% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 5 | 10 | | 2021-12-13 | 2021-12-19 | 396 | 246 | 9 | 2 | 3.7% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 5 | 10 | | 2021-12-20 | 2021-12-26 | 535 | 260 | 31 | 0 | 11.9% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2021-12-27 | 2022-01-02 | 1368 | 488 | 66 | 0 | 13.5% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-01-03 | 2022-01-09 | 3400 | 1502 | 327 | 1 | 21.8% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-01-10 | 2022-01-16 | 3188 | 1251 | 167 | 1 | 13.3% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-01-17 | 2022-01-23 | 2766 | 1013 | 102 | 0 | 10.1% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-01-24 | 2022-01-30 | 3041 | 1053 | 48 | 0 | 4.6% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-01-31 | 2022-02-06 | 2897 | 966 | 27 | 0 | 2.8% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-02-07 | 2022-02-13 | 2878 | 933 | 23 | 0 | 2.5% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-02-14 | 2022-02-20 | 2876 | 977 | 5 | 2 | 0.5% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-02-21 | 2022-02-27 | 2216 | 783 | 4 | 0 | 0.5% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-02-28 | 2022-03-06 | 732 | 316 | 3 | 0 | 0.9% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-03-07 | 2022-03-13 | 271 | 165 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-03-14 | 2022-03-20 | 180 | 93 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-03-21 | 2022-03-27 | 212 | 147 | 1 | 0 | 0.7% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-03-28 | 2022-04-03 | 27 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-04-04 | 2022-04-10 | 246 | 189 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-04-11 | 2022-04-17 | 225 | 164 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-04-18 | 2022-04-24 | 250 | 187 | 1 | 0 | 0.5% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-04-25 | 2022-05-01 | 221 | 156 | 2 | 0 | 1.3% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-05-02 | 2022-05-08 | 148 | 70 | 2 | 0 | 2.9% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-15 | 260 | 197 | 4 | 2 | 2.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 4 | 10 | | 2022-05-16 | 2022-05-22 | 227 | 160 | 1 | 0 | 0.6% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-05-23 | 2022-05-29 | 243 | 189 | 1 | 0 | 0.5% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-05-30 | 2022-06-05 | 191 | 149 | 1 | 0 | 0.7% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-06-06 | 2022-06-12 | 87 | 145 | 3 | 0 | 2.1% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-06-13 | 2022-06-19 | 19 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-06-20 | 2022-06-26 | 13 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-06-27 | 2022-07-03 | 97 | 129 | 4 | 3 | 3.1% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-07-04 | 2022-07-10 | 131 | 132 | 1 | 0 | 0.8% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-07-11 | 2022-07-17 | 124 | 124 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-07-18 | 2022-07-24 | 105 | 204 | 4 | 0 | 2.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-07-25 | 2022-07-31 | 14 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-08-01 | 2022-08-07 | 63 | 90 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-08-08 | 2022-08-14 | 62 | 62 | 1 | 0 | 1.6% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-08-15 | 2022-08-21 | 0 | 37 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-08-22 | 2022-08-28 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-08-29 | 2022-09-04 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-09-05 | 2022-09-11 | 121 | 64 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-09-12 | 2022-09-18 | 145 | 57 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-09-19 | 2022-09-25 | 118 | 52 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-09-26 | 2022-10-02 | 151 | 63 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-10-03 | 2022-10-09 | 154 | 65 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 3 | 10 | | 2022-10-10 | 2022-10-16 | 120 | 51 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-10-17 | 2022-10-23 | 111 | 50 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-10-24 | 2022-10-30 | 118 | 56 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-10-31 | 2022-11-06 | 84 | 39 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-11-07 | 2022-11-13 | 102 | 46 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-11-14 | 2022-11-20 | 89 | 46 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-11-21 | 2022-11-27 | 49 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-11-28 | 2022-12-04 | 114 | 48 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-12-05 | 2022-12-11 | 98 | 40 | 1 | 0 | 2.5% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-12-12 | 2022-12-18 | 42 | 24 | 1 | 0 | 4.2% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-12-19 | 2022-12-25 | 64 | 32 | 2 | 0 | 6.2% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2022-12-26 | 2023-01-01 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2023-01-02 | 2023-01-08 | 100 | 41 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 2 | 10 | | 2023-01-09 | 2023-01-15 | 80 | 39 | 0 | 2 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-01-16 | 2023-01-22 | 86 | 40 | 0 | 1 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-01-23 | 2023-01-29 | 65 | 29 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-01-30 | 2023-02-05 | 13 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-02-06 | 2023-02-12 | 70 | 33 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-02-13 | 2023-02-19 | 87 | 39 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-02-20 | 2023-02-26 | 89 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-02-27 | 2023-03-05 | 81 | 37 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-03-06 | 2023-03-12 | 112 | 47 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-03-13 | 2023-03-19 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-03-20 | 2023-03-26 | 84 | 37 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-03-27 | 2023-04-02 | 90 | 40 | 1 | 0 | 2.5% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-04-03 | 2023-04-09 | 54 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-04-10 | 2023-04-16 | 81 | 39 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-04-17 | 2023-04-23 | 67 | 39 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-04-24 | 2023-04-30 | 55 | 33 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-05-01 | 2023-05-07 | 43 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-05-08 | 2023-05-14 | 67 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-05-15 | 2023-05-21 | 54 | 31 | 1 | 0 | 3.2% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-05-22 | 2023-05-28 | 49 | 26 | 4 | 0 | 15.4% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | | 2023-05-29 | 2023-06-04 | 43 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | positive_tubes_n / tubes_n | 1 | 10 | ### Referral agreement | fl_result_category | tubes_n | cases_n | with_ref_or_corresp_n | agree_n | agree_pct | agree_pct_status | disagree_n | disagree_pct | disagree_pct_status | ref_cor_pos_n | incl_gt_pos_pct | incl_gt_pos_pct_status | ref_cor_neg_n | incl_gt_neg_pct | incl_gt_neg_pct_status | source_sheet | source_anchor | agree_pct_formula | disagree_pct_formula | incl_gt_pos_pct_formula | incl_gt_neg_pct_formula | sites_included_n | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Positive | 884 | 87 | 120 | 119 | 99.2% | ok | 1 | 0.8% | ok | | | | | | | AGGREGATE | | agree_n / with_ref_or_corresp_n | disagree_n / with_ref_or_corresp_n | | | 8 | | Inconclusive | 17 | 16 | 7 | | | | | | | 4 | 57.1% | ok | 2 | 28.6% | ok | AGGREGATE | | | | ref_cor_pos_n / with_ref_or_corresp_n | ref_cor_neg_n / with_ref_or_corresp_n | 8 | # 4,823 ABRM_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: ABRM_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2023-006-02 title: ABRM Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: NA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 2836 tokens: 4823 notes: summary_short: The "ABRM_pilot-data_summary" covers the FloodLAMP pilot program for Abrome which was a small K-12 school in Austin, TX that used FloodLAMP for pooled household self-collection testing, with on-site test processing by school staff using a mini water bath configuration. The program tested students, staff, and their families over 9 months (2022-09-05 to 2023-06-02), often multiple times per week, running 1,379 tubes with 2,954 participant results and 8 positive tubes detected. CONTENT ## Plots ### Composite ![ABRM Weekly Composite](_plots/ABRM_weekly_composite.png) ### Percent Positive Tubes ![ABRM Weekly Percent Positives](_plots/ABRM_weekly_percent_positives.png) ### Volume ![ABRM Weekly Volume](_plots/ABRM_weekly_volume.png) ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [ABRM_APS_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/140IAw1sI2nPQztTAXY9-XJxd4lPpOhpeXb-IXXnWUZk) - [ABRM_RFR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zddUuVUJJRU2gSW45EBK2qlD8uYIW8B5jm-kziiklHU) - [ABRM_RTR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1g_chl4UPvP70E16V_OTjW4KxlFPRvJ7uKc1vB1X15gQ) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `ABRM_curated_csvs/` - Stats key-values CSV: [ABRM_APS_stats_key-values.csv](ABRM_curated_csvs/ABRM_APS_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: [ABRM_APS_weekly-summary.csv](ABRM_curated_csvs/ABRM_APS_weekly-summary.csv) - Referral tests by person CSV: [ABRM_RTR_referral-tests-by-person.csv](ABRM_curated_csvs/ABRM_RTR_referral-tests-by-person.csv) ### XLSX downloads: - [ABRM_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx](ABRM_xlsx_downloads/ABRM_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [ABRM_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx](ABRM_xlsx_downloads/ABRM_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [ABRM_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx](ABRM_xlsx_downloads/ABRM_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | value_status | details | comments | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Files | RFR File | ABRM_RFR_deID_PUB | ok | | | Stats | 1 | | Files | RTR File | ABRM_RTR_deID_PUB | ok | | | Stats | 2 | | Files | RSR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 3 | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 1,379 | ok | initial run tubes only so excludes re-runs | | Stats | 5 | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 1,519 | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 6 | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | 184 | ok | | | Stats | 7 | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | 100 | ok | | | Stats | 8 | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 1,730 | ok | includes technical replicates (the same tube sample in multiple reactions in the same run) | | Stats | 9 | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 2,954 | ok | counts individual samples in pools and excludes re-runs | | Stats | 11 | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 22 | ok | tubes run and present in RFR but not in Appivo - created tube IDs that start with ARF | | Stats | 12 | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 2,976 | ok | Will be equal to the number of tubes tested if no pooling. | | Stats | 13 | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 2.2 | ok | | | Stats | 14 | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | 140 | ok | from RFR Audit Num Run Tubes | | Stats | 17 | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | 331 | ok | from RFR Audit Num rxns (excl ctrls) | | Stats | 18 | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | 10.2% | ok | re-run / initial | | Stats | 19 | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | 78 | ok | | | Stats | 20 | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | 42.4% | ok | | | Stats | 21 | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 8 | ok | | | Stats | 24 | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | 0.6% | ok | | | Stats | 25 | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | 3 | ok | Subtract off Re-tests | | Stats | 26 | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | 2 | ok | Previous tested (including by FloodLAMP test) or reported positive | | Stats | 27 | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 28 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 3 | ok | | | Stats | 31 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 32 | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 3 | ok | | | Stats | 33 | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | 0.2% | ok | | | Stats | 34 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 35 | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 36 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 37 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | 3 | ok | | Likely Negative - otherwise admin would have reported a positive referral test result. Perhaps they were not follow up referral tested at all, which may have been the case for 1 of these 3 which was resulted as Neg in the app. | Stats | 38 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | 4 | ok | Count Result Correction Code=2.5 in preDel col AJ, or from RFR preExcl if not resulted as Incl in App | | Stats | 39 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 48 | ok | includes re-runs - from RFR Audit only and excludes any APS only resulted inconclusives | | Stats | 40 | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 3.2% | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 41 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 1 | ok | Indiv or Pool, Cases used instead of Person to account for people being contracting COVID multiple times, and instead of Results to exclude re-tests | Only Case Cluster 1 has Referral data shared with FloodLAMP | Stats | 44 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 1 | ok | Sometimes also termed Agree Positives - Include initial Inconclusive with Referral or Correspondence Positive | All were FL pos and confirmed with referral tests | Stats | 45 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 46 | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 100.0% | ok | | | Stats | 47 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 48 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | 3 | ok | | | Stats | 49 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 52 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 53 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | 0 | ok | Agree with Referral Test Positive (usually PCR or later Antigen) but Initial Antigen Negative | | Stats | 54 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | | denom_zero | | denom zero | Stats | 55 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 56 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | | denom_zero | | denom zero | Stats | 57 | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | 0 | ok | From reviewing APS/Pos and Incl tab Unconfirmed FL Positives | | Stats | 60 | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | 0 | ok | From reviewing Referral Tests by Person and correspondence with Program Admin | | Stats | 61 | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | 87 | ok | Includes UnknownPerson additions but not ARF tubes | | Stats | 64 | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | 17 | ok | People who collect using the app | | Stats | 65 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | 5 | ok | includes Inconclusive FloodLAMP result confirmed Positive by follow-up or Referral | | Stats | 68 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | 5.7% | ok | | | Stats | 69 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | 10 | ok | | | Stats | 70 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | 11.5% | ok | | | Stats | 71 | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2022-09-05 | ok | | | Stats | 74 | | Dates | End Run Date | 2023-06-02 | ok | | | Stats | 75 | | Info | Test Operator | Abrome School | ok | Who ran the actual testing (running LAMP reactions) | | Stats | 78 | | Info | Test Processing Site | Office | ok | Where the test processing (running LAMP reactions) was done | | Stats | 79 | | Info | Population Tested | Students, Staff, Families | ok | Description of the participants | | Stats | 80 | | Info | Configuration | Mini w water bath | ok | Equipment set used for test processing (relates to throughput and type of test tube used) | | Stats | 81 | | Info | Collection Type | Pooled Household | ok | Pooled, Individual, or Both | | Stats | 82 | | Info | Self or HCW Collected | Self | ok | HCW is Health Care Worker | | Stats | 83 | | Info | App Used? | Yes | ok | Was the FloodLAMP Mobile App and Admin Portal utilized in the program | | Stats | 84 | | Info | Bring-up Type | In Person | ok | How the initial setup and validation of the testing site was done | | Stats | 85 | | Info | Program Name | Abrome | ok | Shorthand name used internally at FloodLAMP and in other documents for this program | | Stats | 86 | | Info | Site | Abrome School | ok | Broader physical space where the testing was done and/or where participants congregated | | Stats | 87 | | Info | Site Type | K-12 School | ok | Type of entity or organization receiving the testing program | | Stats | 88 | | Info | Location | Austin, TX | ok | Geographical location of where the FloodLAMP testing program occurred | | Stats | 89 | ### Weekly summary | week_start_date | week_end_date | participants_n | tubes_n | positive_tubes_n | inconclusive_tubes_n | pct_positive | pct_positive_status | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2022-09-05 | 2022-09-11 | 113 | 61 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-09-12 | 2022-09-18 | 130 | 52 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-09-19 | 2022-09-25 | 108 | 48 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-09-26 | 2022-10-02 | 139 | 59 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-03 | 2022-10-09 | 138 | 59 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-10 | 2022-10-16 | 106 | 46 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-17 | 2022-10-23 | 99 | 46 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-24 | 2022-10-30 | 106 | 48 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-31 | 2022-11-06 | 73 | 34 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-11-07 | 2022-11-13 | 90 | 41 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-11-14 | 2022-11-20 | 81 | 41 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-11-21 | 2022-11-27 | 44 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-11-28 | 2022-12-04 | 101 | 43 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-12-05 | 2022-12-11 | 90 | 37 | 1 | 0 | 2.7% | ok | | 2022-12-12 | 2022-12-18 | 19 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-12-19 | 2022-12-25 | 54 | 26 | 2 | 0 | 7.7% | ok | | 2022-12-26 | 2023-01-01 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2023-01-02 | 2023-01-08 | 93 | 38 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-01-09 | 2023-01-15 | 80 | 39 | 0 | 2 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-01-16 | 2023-01-22 | 86 | 40 | 0 | 1 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-01-23 | 2023-01-29 | 65 | 29 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-01-30 | 2023-02-05 | 13 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-02-06 | 2023-02-12 | 70 | 33 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-02-13 | 2023-02-19 | 87 | 39 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-02-20 | 2023-02-26 | 89 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-02-27 | 2023-03-05 | 81 | 37 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-03-06 | 2023-03-12 | 112 | 47 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-03-13 | 2023-03-19 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2023-03-20 | 2023-03-26 | 84 | 37 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-03-27 | 2023-04-02 | 90 | 40 | 1 | 0 | 2.5% | ok | | 2023-04-03 | 2023-04-09 | 54 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-04-10 | 2023-04-16 | 81 | 39 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-04-17 | 2023-04-23 | 67 | 39 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-04-24 | 2023-04-30 | 55 | 33 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-05-01 | 2023-05-07 | 43 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-05-08 | 2023-05-14 | 67 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-05-15 | 2023-05-21 | 54 | 31 | 1 | 0 | 3.2% | ok | | 2023-05-22 | 2023-05-28 | 49 | 26 | 4 | 0 | 15.4% | ok | | 2023-05-29 | 2023-06-04 | 43 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | ### Referral tests by person | participant_id | num_sequential_referral_tests | num_floodlamp_results_pos_or_incl | floodlamp_tube_id | floodlamp_test_result | floodlamp_test_date | first_referral_test_date | referral_overall_result | first_referral_test_type | first_referral_test_result | second_referral_test_type | second_referral_test_result | third_referral_test_type | third_referral_test_result | antigen_neg_with_other_positive_flag | referral_eval | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | ABRM582390 | 2 | 2 | AG173 | Positive | 2022-12-08 | 2022-12-08 | Positive | LAMP Device | Negative | LAMP Device | Positive | | | 0 | Not same day positive but other person in pool was - became referral test positive in following days (no indiv FL deconv) | | ABRM771013 | 4 | 1 | AG173 | Positive | 2022-12-08 | 2022-12-08 | Positive | Rapid PCR | Negative | Antigen | Negative | Antigen | Positive | 1 | Person in Referral Test Data Antigen Pos on 12-11 did FL test with Neg result on 12-6, 12-7, and 12-8 but they nested neg by Rapid PCR (Mesa) on 12-8, and Antigen Neg on 12-9 and 12-10 before becoming Antigen pos on 12-11 | | ABRM805764 | 1 | 2 | AG173 | Positive | 2022-12-08 | 2022-12-08 | Positive | Rapid PCR | Positive | | | | | 0 | Only same day positive from pool but other people in pool became pos in next few days | # 3,668 BEND_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: BEND_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2022-05-11 title: BEND Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: NA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 2292 tokens: 3668 notes: summary_short: The "BEND_pilot-data_summary" covers the FloodLAMP pilot program for a fire department/EMS group in Bend, OR that used FloodLAMP for individual (non-pooled) testing of first responders and staff, with HCW-collected samples processed on-site using a double mini configuration. The program ran over 5 months (2021-12-10 to 2022-05-11), testing 772 tubes with 71 positive tubes detected — a 9.2% positivity rate that captured the Omicron wave. CONTENT ## Plots ### Composite ![BEND Weekly Composite](_plots/BEND_weekly_composite.png) ### Percent Positive Tubes ![BEND Weekly Percent Positives](_plots/BEND_weekly_percent_positives.png) ### Volume ![BEND Weekly Volume](_plots/BEND_weekly_volume.png) ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [BEND_APS_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ff9LyHzhq3Mka_W5dEm7cyYWW7cZmOZxW9bUFWjuqIQ) - [BEND_RFR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lkoZ0Og6KAdMPD6eBgW3tcs8v4dg6l9-Hjnp8Do__Rg) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `BEND_curated_csvs/` - Stats key-values CSV: [BEND_APS_stats_key-values.csv](BEND_curated_csvs/BEND_APS_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: [BEND_APS_weekly-summary.csv](BEND_curated_csvs/BEND_APS_weekly-summary.csv) - Referral tests by person CSV: _not available_ ### XLSX downloads: - [BEND_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx](BEND_xlsx_downloads/BEND_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [BEND_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx](BEND_xlsx_downloads/BEND_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | value_status | details | comments | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Files | RFR File | BEND_RFR_deID_PUB | ok | | | Stats | 1 | | Files | RTR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 2 | | Files | RSR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 3 | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 772 | ok | initial run tubes only so excludes re-runs | | Stats | 5 | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 792 | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 6 | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | 44 | ok | | | Stats | 7 | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | 11 | ok | | | Stats | 8 | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 822 | ok | includes technical replicates (the same tube sample in multiple reactions in the same run) | | Stats | 9 | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 767 | ok | counts individual samples in pools and excludes re-runs | | Stats | 11 | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 5 | ok | tubes run and present in RFR but not in Appivo - created tube IDs that start with ARF | | Stats | 12 | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 772 | ok | Will be equal to the number of tubes tested if no pooling. | | Stats | 13 | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 1.0 | ok | | | Stats | 14 | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | 20 | ok | from RFR Audit Num Run Tubes | | Stats | 17 | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | 27 | ok | from RFR Audit Num rxns (excl ctrls) | | Stats | 18 | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | 2.6% | ok | re-run / initial | | Stats | 19 | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | 10 | ok | | | Stats | 20 | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | 22.7% | ok | | | Stats | 21 | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 71 | ok | | | Stats | 24 | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | 9.2% | ok | | | Stats | 25 | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | 51 | ok | Subtract off Re-tests | | Stats | 26 | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | 0 | ok | Previous tested (including by FloodLAMP test) or reported positive | | Stats | 27 | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | 51 | ok | | | Stats | 28 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 2 | ok | | | Stats | 31 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | 3 | ok | | | Stats | 32 | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 5 | ok | | | Stats | 33 | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | 0.6% | ok | | | Stats | 34 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 35 | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | 20.0% | ok | | | Stats | 36 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | 2 | ok | | | Stats | 37 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | 2 | ok | | | Stats | 38 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | 7 | ok | Count Result Correction Code=2.5 in preDel col AJ, or from RFR preExcl if not resulted as Incl in App | 1/26, 1/28, 2/15, 2/25, 3/5 2, 3/7 | Stats | 39 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 12 | ok | includes re-runs - from RFR Audit only and excludes any APS only resulted inconclusives | | Stats | 40 | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 1.5% | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 41 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 53 | ok | Indiv or Pool, Cases used instead of Person to account for people being contracting COVID multiple times, and instead of Results to exclude re-tests | | Stats | 44 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 51 | ok | Sometimes also termed Agree Positives - Include initial Inconclusive with Referral or Correspondence Positive | | Stats | 45 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 46 | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 98.1% | ok | | | Stats | 47 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 48 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | 3 | ok | | | Stats | 49 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | | not_available | | Not Available - Only PCR Referral Testing | Stats | 52 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | | not_available | | Not Available - Only PCR Referral Testing | Stats | 53 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | | not_available | Agree with Referral Test Positive (usually PCR or later Antigen) but Initial Antigen Negative | Not Available - Only PCR Referral Testing | Stats | 54 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | | not_available | | Not Available - Only PCR Referral Testing | Stats | 55 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | | not_available | | Not Available - Only PCR Referral Testing | Stats | 56 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | | not_available | | Not Available - Only PCR Referral Testing | Stats | 57 | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | 0 | ok | From reviewing APS/Pos and Incl tab Unconfirmed FL Positives | | Stats | 60 | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | 0 | ok | From reviewing Referral Tests by Person and correspondence with Program Admin | | Stats | 61 | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | 187 | ok | Includes UnknownPerson additions but not ARF tubes | | Stats | 64 | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | 103 | ok | People who collect using the app | | Stats | 65 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | 50 | ok | includes Inconclusive FloodLAMP result confirmed Positive by follow-up or Referral | | Stats | 68 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | 26.7% | ok | | | Stats | 69 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | 50 | ok | | | Stats | 70 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | 26.7% | ok | | | Stats | 71 | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2021-12-10 | ok | | | Stats | 74 | | Dates | End Run Date | 2022-05-11 | ok | | | Stats | 75 | | Info | Test Operator | Bend Fire and Rescue | ok | Who ran the actual testing (running LAMP reactions) | | Stats | 78 | | Info | Test Processing Site | Office Space | ok | Where the test processing (running LAMP reactions) was done | | Stats | 79 | | Info | Population Tested | First Responders, Staff | ok | Description of the participants | | Stats | 80 | | Info | Configuration | Double Mini | ok | Equipment set used for test processing (relates to throughput and type of test tube used) | | Stats | 81 | | Info | Collection Type | Individual | ok | Pooled, Individual, or Both | | Stats | 82 | | Info | Self or HCW Collected | HCW | ok | HCW is Health Care Worker | | Stats | 83 | | Info | App Used? | Yes | ok | Was the FloodLAMP Mobile App and Admin Portal utilized in the program | | Stats | 84 | | Info | Bring-up Type | Remote (NSVD Volunteer) | ok | How the initial setup and validation of the testing site was done | | Stats | 85 | | Info | Program Name | Bend | ok | Shorthand name used internally at FloodLAMP and in other documents for this program | | Stats | 86 | | Info | Site | Fire Station | ok | Broader physical space where the testing was done and/or where participants congregated | | Stats | 87 | | Info | Site Type | Fire Dept / EMS | ok | Type of entity or organization receiving the testing program | | Stats | 88 | | Info | Location | Bend, OR | ok | Geographical location of where the FloodLAMP testing program occurred | | Stats | 89 | ### Weekly summary | week_start_date | week_end_date | participants_n | tubes_n | positive_tubes_n | inconclusive_tubes_n | pct_positive | pct_positive_status | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2021-12-06 | 2021-12-12 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-12-13 | 2021-12-19 | 13 | 13 | 1 | 0 | 7.7% | ok | | 2021-12-20 | 2021-12-26 | 12 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-12-27 | 2022-01-02 | 27 | 27 | 2 | 0 | 7.4% | ok | | 2022-01-03 | 2022-01-09 | 54 | 56 | 10 | 1 | 17.9% | ok | | 2022-01-10 | 2022-01-16 | 75 | 75 | 18 | 0 | 24.0% | ok | | 2022-01-17 | 2022-01-23 | 63 | 63 | 23 | 0 | 36.5% | ok | | 2022-01-24 | 2022-01-30 | 36 | 36 | 4 | 0 | 11.1% | ok | | 2022-01-31 | 2022-02-06 | 24 | 24 | 1 | 0 | 4.2% | ok | | 2022-02-07 | 2022-02-13 | 38 | 38 | 6 | 0 | 15.8% | ok | | 2022-02-14 | 2022-02-20 | 97 | 97 | 0 | 1 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-02-21 | 2022-02-27 | 128 | 129 | 3 | 0 | 2.3% | ok | | 2022-02-28 | 2022-03-06 | 99 | 101 | 3 | 0 | 3.0% | ok | | 2022-03-07 | 2022-03-13 | 86 | 86 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-14 | 2022-03-20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-03-21 | 2022-03-27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-03-28 | 2022-04-03 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-04-04 | 2022-04-10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-04-11 | 2022-04-17 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-18 | 2022-04-24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-04-25 | 2022-05-01 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-05-02 | 2022-05-08 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-15 | 9 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | # 4,804 COMB_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: COMB_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2022-08-15 title: COMB Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: NA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 2892 tokens: 4804 notes: summary_short: The "COMB_pilot-data_summary" covers the FloodLAMP pilot program for Combate which was a martial arts production organization in Miami, FL where FloodLAMP staff provided individual HCW-collected testing of martial artists and production staff, with test processing done in a hotel room using a standard equipment configuration. The program ran over 5 months (2022-03-20 to 2022-08-15), testing 1,981 tubes from 1,672 participants with 14 positive tubes detected. CONTENT ## Plots ### Composite ![COMB Weekly Composite](_plots/COMB_weekly_composite.png) ### Percent Positive Tubes ![COMB Weekly Percent Positives](_plots/COMB_weekly_percent_positives.png) ### Volume ![COMB Weekly Volume](_plots/COMB_weekly_volume.png) ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [COMB_APS_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LFbt-1PJ6c9qoDfwMx2pw9f39i21yZvpYWuzSxg0nhk) - [COMB_RFR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1P_FWpqIBJV0FqluwOZMjMumc6wynKbdR-70WJR03DZc/edit?usp=sharing) - [COMB_RTR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ODszJJPOKDcEBwA3MiMwAH98TVB65cpz6lqisSF1Uqo) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `COMB_curated_csvs/` - Stats key-values CSV: [COMB_APS_stats_key-values.csv](COMB_curated_csvs/COMB_APS_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: [COMB_APS_weekly-summary.csv](COMB_curated_csvs/COMB_APS_weekly-summary.csv) - Referral tests by person CSV: [COMB_RTR_referral-tests-by-person.csv](COMB_curated_csvs/COMB_RTR_referral-tests-by-person.csv) ### XLSX downloads: - [COMB_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx](COMB_xlsx_downloads/COMB_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [COMB_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx](COMB_xlsx_downloads/COMB_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [COMB_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx](COMB_xlsx_downloads/COMB_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | value_status | details | comments | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Files | RFR File | COMB_RFR_deID_PUB | ok | | | Stats | 1 | | Files | RTR File | COMB_RTR_deID_PUB | ok | | | Stats | 2 | | Files | RSR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 3 | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 1,981 | ok | initial run tubes only so excludes re-runs | | Stats | 5 | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 2,012 | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 6 | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | 80 | ok | | | Stats | 7 | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | 63 | ok | | | Stats | 8 | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 2,060 | ok | includes technical replicates (the same tube sample in multiple reactions in the same run) | | Stats | 9 | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 1,672 | ok | counts individual samples in pools and excludes re-runs | | Stats | 11 | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 309 | ok | tubes run and present in RFR but not in Appivo - created tube IDs that start with ARF | | Stats | 12 | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 1,981 | ok | Will be equal to the number of tubes tested if no pooling. | | Stats | 13 | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 1.0 | ok | | | Stats | 14 | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | 31 | ok | from RFR Audit Num Run Tubes | | Stats | 17 | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | 96 | ok | from RFR Audit Num rxns (excl ctrls) | | Stats | 18 | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | 1.6% | ok | re-run / initial | | Stats | 19 | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | 19 | ok | | | Stats | 20 | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | 23.8% | ok | | | Stats | 21 | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 14 | ok | | | Stats | 24 | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | 0.7% | ok | | | Stats | 25 | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | 12 | ok | Subtract off Re-tests | | Stats | 26 | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | 2 | ok | Previous tested (including by FloodLAMP test) or reported positive | | Stats | 27 | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | 10 | ok | | | Stats | 28 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 3 | ok | | | Stats | 31 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 32 | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 3 | ok | | | Stats | 33 | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | 0.2% | ok | | | Stats | 34 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | 2 | ok | | | Stats | 35 | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | 66.7% | ok | | | Stats | 36 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 37 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 38 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | 4 | ok | Count Result Correction Code=2.5 in preDel col AJ, or from RFR preExcl if not resulted as Incl in App | 4 in OLD pre-Data Project summary | Stats | 39 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 12 | ok | includes re-runs - from RFR Audit only and excludes any APS only resulted inconclusives | | Stats | 40 | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 0.6% | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 41 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 12 | ok | Indiv or Pool, Cases used instead of Person to account for people being contracting COVID multiple times, and instead of Results to exclude re-tests | | Stats | 44 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 10 | ok | Sometimes also termed Agree Positives - Include initial Inconclusive with Referral or Correspondence Positive | | Stats | 45 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 2 | ok | | | Stats | 46 | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 100.0% | ok | | | Stats | 47 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 48 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 49 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | 11 | ok | | | Stats | 52 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | 11 | ok | | | Stats | 53 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | 5 | ok | Agree with Referral Test Positive (usually PCR or later Antigen) but Initial Antigen Negative | | Stats | 54 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | 45.5% | ok | | | Stats | 55 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 0 | ok | | Referral Tests were Antigen and if Antigen Negative then followup PCR | Stats | 56 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 57 | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | 0 | ok | From reviewing APS/Pos and Incl tab Unconfirmed FL Positives | For the 2 FL Positives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence there is no indication they are false | Stats | 60 | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | 0 | ok | From reviewing Referral Tests by Person and correspondence with Program Admin | None in RTR or reported by Admin. There is 1 positive referral tests that is not in our FloodLAMP data (2022-06-30 and 2022-07-01) but the name is not in our App anywhere so the conclusion is that this person did not receive FloodLAMP testing at all but was antigen tested. | Stats | 61 | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | 369 | ok | Includes UnknownPerson additions but not ARF tubes | | Stats | 64 | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | 2 | ok | People who collect using the app | | Stats | 65 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | 14 | ok | includes Inconclusive FloodLAMP result confirmed Positive by follow-up or Referral | | Stats | 68 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | 3.8% | ok | | | Stats | 69 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | 14 | ok | | | Stats | 70 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | 3.8% | ok | | | Stats | 71 | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2022-03-20 | ok | | | Stats | 74 | | Dates | End Run Date | 2022-08-15 | ok | | | Stats | 75 | | Info | Test Operator | FloodLAMP | ok | Who ran the actual testing (running LAMP reactions) | | Stats | 78 | | Info | Test Processing Site | Hotel room | ok | Where the test processing (running LAMP reactions) was done | | Stats | 79 | | Info | Population Tested | Martial artists, Production Staff | ok | Description of the participants | | Stats | 80 | | Info | Configuration | Standard | ok | Equipment set used for test processing (relates to throughput and type of test tube used) | | Stats | 81 | | Info | Collection Type | Individual | ok | Pooled, Individual, or Both | | Stats | 82 | | Info | Self or HCW Collected | HCW | ok | HCW is Health Care Worker | | Stats | 83 | | Info | App Used? | Yes | ok | Was the FloodLAMP Mobile App and Admin Portal utilized in the program | | Stats | 84 | | Info | Bring-up Type | In Person | ok | How the initial setup and validation of the testing site was done | | Stats | 85 | | Info | Program Name | Combate | ok | Shorthand name used internally at FloodLAMP and in other documents for this program | | Stats | 86 | | Info | Site | Embassy Hotel | ok | Broader physical space where the testing was done and/or where participants congregated | | Stats | 87 | | Info | Site Type | Production Organization | ok | Type of entity or organization receiving the testing program | | Stats | 88 | | Info | Location | Miami, FL | ok | Geographical location of where the FloodLAMP testing program occurred | | Stats | 89 | ### Weekly summary | week_start_date | week_end_date | participants_n | tubes_n | positive_tubes_n | inconclusive_tubes_n | pct_positive | pct_positive_status | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2022-03-14 | 2022-03-20 | 18 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-21 | 2022-03-27 | 99 | 100 | 1 | 0 | 1.0% | ok | | 2022-03-28 | 2022-04-03 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-04 | 2022-04-10 | 127 | 142 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-11 | 2022-04-17 | 120 | 120 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-18 | 2022-04-24 | 134 | 134 | 1 | 0 | 0.7% | ok | | 2022-04-25 | 2022-05-01 | 108 | 108 | 2 | 0 | 1.9% | ok | | 2022-05-02 | 2022-05-08 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-15 | 112 | 112 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-16 | 2022-05-22 | 99 | 99 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-23 | 2022-05-29 | 128 | 137 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-30 | 2022-06-05 | 114 | 114 | 1 | 0 | 0.9% | ok | | 2022-06-06 | 2022-06-12 | 55 | 130 | 3 | 0 | 2.3% | ok | | 2022-06-13 | 2022-06-19 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-06-20 | 2022-06-26 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-06-27 | 2022-07-03 | 90 | 125 | 4 | 3 | 3.2% | ok | | 2022-07-04 | 2022-07-10 | 131 | 132 | 1 | 0 | 0.8% | ok | | 2022-07-11 | 2022-07-17 | 122 | 123 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-07-18 | 2022-07-24 | 97 | 200 | 4 | 0 | 2.0% | ok | | 2022-07-25 | 2022-07-31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-08-01 | 2022-08-07 | 54 | 86 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-08-08 | 2022-08-14 | 62 | 62 | 1 | 0 | 1.6% | ok | | 2022-08-15 | 2022-08-21 | 0 | 37 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | ### Referral tests by person | participant_id | num_sequential_referral_tests | num_floodlamp_results_pos_or_incl | floodlamp_tube_id | floodlamp_test_result | floodlamp_test_date | first_referral_test_date | referral_overall_result | first_referral_test_type | first_referral_test_result | second_referral_test_type | second_referral_test_result | third_referral_test_type | third_referral_test_result | antigen_neg_with_other_positive_flag | referral_eval | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | COMB170110 | 1 | 1 | FM2159 | Positive | 2022-06-27 | 2022-06-27 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | | | | | 0 | Referral Confirmed FL Positive | | COMB185924 | 2 | 0 | not found | not found | not found | 2022-08-08 | Positive | Antigen | Negative | Lab Purif PCR | Positive | | | 1 | Referral Confirmed FL Positive | | COMB213226 | 1 | 1 | FM1080 | Positive | 2022-07-22 | 2022-07-22 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | | | | | 0 | Referral Confirmed FL Positive | | COMB242905 | 2 | 1 | FM1198 | Positive | 2022-07-19 | 2022-07-19 | Positive | Antigen | Negative | Lab Purif PCR | Positive | | | 1 | Referral Confirmed FL Positive | | COMB353066 | 2 | 2 | FM2198 | Positive | 2022-06-27 | 2022-06-27 | Positive | Antigen | Negative | Lab Purif PCR | Positive | | | 1 | Referral Confirmed FL Positive | | COMB413047 | 1 | 1 | FM1303 | Positive | 2022-07-22 | 2022-07-22 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | | | | | 0 | Referral Confirmed FL Positive | | COMB596496 | 2 | 1 | FM2472 | Inconclusive | 2022-06-28 | 2022-06-28 | Positive | Antigen | Negative | Lab Purif PCR | Positive | | | 1 | Referral Confirmed FL Inconclusive | | COMB638337 | 1 | 0 | not found | not found | not found | 2022-06-30 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | | | | | 0 | Referral Confirmed FL Positive - ARF positive but name is in App and was tested many other times | | COMB704360 | 2 | 2 | FM4123 | Positive | 2022-04-25 | 2022-04-25 | Positive | Antigen | Negative | Lab Purif PCR | Positive | | | 1 | Referral Confirmed FL Positive | | COMB724402 | 1 | 1 | FM2492 | Inconclusive | 2022-07-01 | 2022-07-01 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | | | | | 0 | Referral Confirmed FL Inconclusive | | COMB770137 | 1 | 1 | FM2799 | Positive | 2022-06-06 | 2022-06-06 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | | | | | 0 | Referral Confirmed FL Positive | | COMB945952 | 2 | 1 | FM2128 | Positive | 2022-06-27 | 2022-06-27 | Positive | Antigen | Negative | Lab Purif PCR | Positive | | | 1 | Referral Confirmed FL Positive | | COMB999900 | 1 | 0 | not found | not found | not found | 2022-07-01 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | | | | | 0 | Name not in App anywhere - Appeared only in correspondence w Test Admin re: positive cases. Treat as not tested by FL because only pos/incl is accounted for. | # 3,949 COSP_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: COSP_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2022-03-07 title: COSP Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: NA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 2451 tokens: 3949 notes: summary_short: The "COSP_pilot-data_summary" covers the FloodLAMP pilot program in a city/EMS program in Coral Springs, FL where city staff operated FloodLAMP for pooled self-collection testing of EMS, first responders, and city employees, with test processing done on-site using a double standard configuration. The program ran over 6 months (2021-08-31 to 2022-03-07), testing 7,146 tubes from 22,643 participant results (avg pool size 3.2) with 347 positive tubes detected. CONTENT ## Plots ### Composite ![COSP Weekly Composite](_plots/COSP_weekly_composite.png) ### Percent Positive Tubes ![COSP Weekly Percent Positives](_plots/COSP_weekly_percent_positives.png) ### Volume ![COSP Weekly Volume](_plots/COSP_weekly_volume.png) ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [COSP_APS_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LnTBrjaiG5Eg8uDSXU7C4sAcKxiF978MzCWPg-VDtx4) - [COSP_RSR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1H7Dgq-RRdBbd3pMm9Fynb8sPu-mzpb-kdFqzOEUVkZI) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `COSP_curated_csvs/` - Stats key-values CSV: [COSP_APS_stats_key-values.csv](COSP_curated_csvs/COSP_APS_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: [COSP_APS_weekly-summary.csv](COSP_curated_csvs/COSP_APS_weekly-summary.csv) - Referral tests by person CSV: _not available_ ### XLSX downloads: - [COSP_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx](COSP_xlsx_downloads/COSP_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [COSP_RSR_deID_PUB.xlsx](COSP_xlsx_downloads/COSP_RSR_deID_PUB.xlsx) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | value_status | details | comments | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Files | RFR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 1 | | Files | RTR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 2 | | Files | RSR File | COSP_RSR_deID_PUB | ok | | | Stats | 3 | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 7,146 | ok | initial run tubes only so excludes re-runs | | Stats | 5 | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 7,146 | ok | includes re-runs | no RFR so no info on re-runs | Stats | 6 | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | 123 | ok | | use collection date assuming all tubes run same day | Stats | 7 | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | 7,146 | ok | | No RFR so all tubes are APS Only | Stats | 8 | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 7,146 | ok | includes technical replicates (the same tube sample in multiple reactions in the same run) | | Stats | 9 | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 22,643 | ok | counts individual samples in pools and excludes re-runs | | Stats | 11 | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 0 | ok | tubes run and present in RFR but not in Appivo - created tube IDs that start with ARF | | Stats | 12 | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 22,643 | ok | Will be equal to the number of tubes tested if no pooling. | | Stats | 13 | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 3.2 | ok | | | Stats | 14 | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | | not_available | from RFR Audit Num Run Tubes | | Stats | 17 | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | | not_available | from RFR Audit Num rxns (excl ctrls) | | Stats | 18 | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | | not_available | re-run / initial | | Stats | 19 | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | | not_available | | | Stats | 20 | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | | not_available | | | Stats | 21 | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 347 | ok | | | Stats | 24 | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | 4.9% | ok | | | Stats | 25 | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | | not_available | Subtract off Re-tests | Not Available - Data provided to FloodLAMP by does not enable us to calculate this | Stats | 26 | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | | not_available | Previous tested (including by FloodLAMP test) or reported positive | Not Available - Coral Springs did not report this in RSR forms | Stats | 27 | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | | not_available | | Not Available - Coral Springs did not report this in RSR forms | Stats | 28 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 1 | ok | | from RSR - Run Summary Report that draws from google form of weekly testing summary provided by test Admin | Stats | 31 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | | not_available | | | Stats | 32 | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 33 | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 34 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 35 | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 36 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | | not_available | | | Stats | 37 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | | not_available | | | Stats | 38 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | 12 | ok | Count Result Correction Code=2.5 in preDel col AJ, or from RFR preExcl if not resulted as Incl in App | Conclude the "Other Per Week" column was Initial Inconclusives and Final Inconclusives were reported in App (Run Summary Form had an Inconclusives question field) | Stats | 39 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 12 | ok | includes re-runs - from RFR Audit only and excludes any APS only resulted inconclusives | | Stats | 40 | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 0.2% | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 41 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 0 | ok | Indiv or Pool, Cases used instead of Person to account for people being contracting COVID multiple times, and instead of Results to exclude re-tests | | Stats | 44 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 0 | ok | Sometimes also termed Agree Positives - Include initial Inconclusive with Referral or Correspondence Positive | Not Available | Stats | 45 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 0 | ok | | Not Available | Stats | 46 | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | | not_available | | Not Available | Stats | 47 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | | not_available | | Not Available | Stats | 48 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | | not_available | | Not Available | Stats | 49 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | | not_available | | Not Available | Stats | 52 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | | not_available | | Not Available | Stats | 53 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | | not_available | Agree with Referral Test Positive (usually PCR or later Antigen) but Initial Antigen Negative | Not Available | Stats | 54 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | | not_available | | Not Available | Stats | 55 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | | not_available | | Not Available | Stats | 56 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | | not_available | | Not Available | Stats | 57 | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | 0 | ok | From reviewing APS/Pos and Incl tab Unconfirmed FL Positives | | Stats | 60 | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | 0 | ok | From reviewing Referral Tests by Person and correspondence with Program Admin | | Stats | 61 | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | 1,074 | ok | Includes UnknownPerson additions but not ARF tubes | | Stats | 64 | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | 264 | ok | People who collect using the app | | Stats | 65 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | 347 | ok | includes Inconclusive FloodLAMP result confirmed Positive by follow-up or Referral | | Stats | 68 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | 32.3% | ok | | | Stats | 69 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | 347 | ok | | | Stats | 70 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | 32.3% | ok | | | Stats | 71 | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2021-08-31 | ok | | | Stats | 74 | | Dates | End Run Date | 2022-03-07 | ok | | | Stats | 75 | | Info | Test Operator | City of Coral Springs | ok | Who ran the actual testing (running LAMP reactions) | | Stats | 78 | | Info | Test Processing Site | Office Space | ok | Where the test processing (running LAMP reactions) was done | | Stats | 79 | | Info | Population Tested | EMS, First Responders, City Staff | ok | Description of the participants | | Stats | 80 | | Info | Configuration | Double Standard | ok | Equipment set used for test processing (relates to throughput and type of test tube used) | | Stats | 81 | | Info | Collection Type | Pooled | ok | Pooled, Individual, or Both | | Stats | 82 | | Info | Self or HCW Collected | Self | ok | HCW is Health Care Worker | | Stats | 83 | | Info | App Used? | Yes | ok | Was the FloodLAMP Mobile App and Admin Portal utilized in the program | | Stats | 84 | | Info | Bring-up Type | In Person | ok | How the initial setup and validation of the testing site was done | | Stats | 85 | | Info | Program Name | Coral Springs | ok | Shorthand name used internally at FloodLAMP and in other documents for this program | | Stats | 86 | | Info | Site | Municipal Building | ok | Broader physical space where the testing was done and/or where participants congregated | | Stats | 87 | | Info | Site Type | City / EMS | ok | Type of entity or organization receiving the testing program | | Stats | 88 | | Info | Location | Coral Springs, FL | ok | Geographical location of where the FloodLAMP testing program occurred | | Stats | 89 | ### Weekly summary | week_start_date | week_end_date | participants_n | tubes_n | positive_tubes_n | inconclusive_tubes_n | pct_positive | pct_positive_status | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2021-08-30 | 2021-09-05 | 111 | 32 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-09-06 | 2021-09-12 | 113 | 35 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-09-13 | 2021-09-19 | 110 | 33 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-09-20 | 2021-09-26 | 153 | 44 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-09-27 | 2021-10-03 | 116 | 32 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-04 | 2021-10-10 | 98 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-11 | 2021-10-17 | 100 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-18 | 2021-10-24 | 49 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-25 | 2021-10-31 | 84 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-01 | 2021-11-07 | 79 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-08 | 2021-11-14 | 61 | 16 | 14 | 0 | 87.5% | ok | | 2021-11-15 | 2021-11-21 | 69 | 18 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-22 | 2021-11-28 | 30 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-29 | 2021-12-05 | 81 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-12-06 | 2021-12-12 | 76 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-12-13 | 2021-12-19 | 84 | 29 | 1 | 2 | 3.4% | ok | | 2021-12-20 | 2021-12-26 | 216 | 67 | 9 | 0 | 13.4% | ok | | 2021-12-27 | 2022-01-02 | 1263 | 418 | 58 | 0 | 13.9% | ok | | 2022-01-03 | 2022-01-09 | 2451 | 828 | 93 | 0 | 11.2% | ok | | 2022-01-10 | 2022-01-16 | 2580 | 858 | 74 | 0 | 8.6% | ok | | 2022-01-17 | 2022-01-23 | 2310 | 746 | 41 | 0 | 5.5% | ok | | 2022-01-24 | 2022-01-30 | 2649 | 844 | 30 | 0 | 3.6% | ok | | 2022-01-31 | 2022-02-06 | 2512 | 773 | 15 | 0 | 1.9% | ok | | 2022-02-07 | 2022-02-13 | 2469 | 744 | 8 | 0 | 1.1% | ok | | 2022-02-14 | 2022-02-20 | 2424 | 734 | 3 | 0 | 0.4% | ok | | 2022-02-21 | 2022-02-27 | 1865 | 570 | 1 | 0 | 0.2% | ok | | 2022-02-28 | 2022-03-06 | 488 | 153 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-07 | 2022-03-13 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | # 6,546 CRLN_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: CRLN_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2022-05-31 title: CRLN Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: NA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 3973 tokens: 6546 notes: summary_short: The "CRLN_pilot-data_summary" covers the FloodLAMP pilot program for Carillon, a preschool in Portola Valley, CA that used FloodLAMP for pooled household and individual self-collection testing of students, staff, and families, with test processing done by FloodLAMP in a dedicated garage room using a standard equipment configuration. The program ran over 5 months (2021-12-24 to 2022-05-31), testing 1,016 tubes from 2,340 participant results (avg pool size 2.4) with 32 positive tubes detected. CONTENT ## Plots ### Composite ![CRLN Weekly Composite](_plots/CRLN_weekly_composite.png) ### Percent Positive Tubes ![CRLN Weekly Percent Positives](_plots/CRLN_weekly_percent_positives.png) ### Volume ![CRLN Weekly Volume](_plots/CRLN_weekly_volume.png) ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [FLMP_APS_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ni39vn-fdXq0HrOgHbim_FK0OZidUv-YBLvzPwhhlFQ) - [FLMP_RFR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16CwPJ9LeknD8lJFTr-gJSx916WZaGEMbN6iKnlVx4dI) - [FLMP_RTR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16R3LlannlrGfiIIJq4T3EWjbtFLZrtPC4gkKycu8RXc) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `CRLN_curated_csvs/` - Stats key-values CSV: [CRLN_APS_stats_key-values.csv](CRLN_curated_csvs/CRLN_APS_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: [CRLN_RFR_weekly-summary.csv](CRLN_curated_csvs/CRLN_RFR_weekly-summary.csv) - Referral tests by person CSV: [CRLN_RTR_referral-tests-by-person.csv](CRLN_curated_csvs/CRLN_RTR_referral-tests-by-person.csv) ### XLSX downloads: - [FLMP_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx](../FLMP_pilot-data/FLMP_xlsx_downloads/FLMP_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [FLMP_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx](../FLMP_pilot-data/FLMP_xlsx_downloads/FLMP_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [FLMP_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx](../FLMP_pilot-data/FLMP_xlsx_downloads/FLMP_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | details | comments | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Files | RFR File | FLMP_RFR_deID_PUB | | | Stats | 1 | | Files | RTR File | FLMP_RTR_deID_PUB | | | Stats | 2 | | Files | RSR File | NONE | | | Stats | 3 | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 1,016 | initial run tubes only so excludes re-runs | | Stats | 5 | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 1,086 | includes re-runs | | Stats | 6 | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | 79 | | divide CRLN by time period 1-2 to 5-31 | Stats | 7 | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | 111 | | divide CRLN by time period 1-2 to 5-31 | Stats | 8 | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 1,130 | includes technical replicates (the same tube sample in multiple reactions in the same run) | divide CRLN by time period 1-2 to 5-31 - 135 is num FLSP tubes in CRLN time period and 1290 is num RFR audit rxns during CRLN time period | Stats | 9 | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 2,340 | counts individual samples in pools and excludes re-runs | | Stats | 11 | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 48 | tubes run and present in RFR but not in Appivo - created tube IDs that start with ARF | all during CRLN period so assign to CRLN | Stats | 12 | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 2,388 | Will be equal to the number of tubes tested if no pooling. | | Stats | 13 | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 2.4 | | | Stats | 14 | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | 70 | from RFR Audit Num Run Tubes | | Stats | 17 | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | 205 | from RFR Audit Num rxns (excl ctrls) | | Stats | 18 | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | 6.9% | re-run / initial | | Stats | 19 | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | 31 | | | Stats | 20 | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | 39.2% | | | Stats | 21 | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 32 | | count from VALUES Pos and Incl | Stats | 24 | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | 3.1% | | | Stats | 25 | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | 13 | Subtract off Re-tests | | Stats | 26 | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | 3 | Previous tested (including by FloodLAMP test) or reported positive | | Stats | 27 | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | 10 | | | Stats | 28 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 4 | | | Stats | 31 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | 0 | | | Stats | 32 | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 4 | | | Stats | 33 | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | 0.4% | | | Stats | 34 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | 1 | | 2022-05-08T00:00:00 | Stats | 35 | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | 25.0% | | 2/4 unknown and 1 of those was in household of positives | Stats | 36 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | 1 | | | Stats | 37 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | 2 | | | Stats | 38 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | 33 | Count Result Correction Code=2.5 in preDel col AJ, or from RFR preExcl if not resulted as Incl in App | No 2.5 correction code, Sum AE - AF = 36 | Stats | 39 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 40 | includes re-runs - from RFR Audit only and excludes any APS only resulted inconclusives | | Stats | 40 | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 3.7% | includes re-runs | | Stats | 41 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 10 | Indiv or Pool, Cases used instead of Person to account for people being contracting COVID multiple times, and instead of Results to exclude re-tests | | Stats | 44 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 9 | Sometimes also termed Agree Positives - Include initial Inconclusive with Referral or Correspondence Positive | | Stats | 45 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 1 | | 2022-05-08T00:00:00 | Stats | 46 | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 100.0% | | | Stats | 47 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | 1 | | 2022-02-14T00:00:00 | Stats | 48 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | 2 | | | Stats | 49 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | 8 | | | Stats | 52 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | 8 | | | Stats | 53 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | 4 | Agree with Referral Test Positive (usually PCR or later Antigen) but Initial Antigen Negative | | Stats | 54 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | 50.0% | | | Stats | 55 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 0 | | | Stats | 56 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 0.0% | | | Stats | 57 | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | | From reviewing APS/Pos and Incl tab Unconfirmed FL Positives | | Stats | 60 | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | | From reviewing Referral Tests by Person and correspondence with Program Admin | | Stats | 61 | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | 142 | Includes UnknownPerson additions but not ARF tubes | | Stats | 64 | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | 51 | People who collect using the app | | Stats | 65 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | 17 | includes Inconclusive FloodLAMP result confirmed Positive by follow-up or Referral | | Stats | 68 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | 12.0% | | | Stats | 69 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | 40 | | | Stats | 70 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | 28.2% | | | Stats | 71 | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2021-12-24 | | | Stats | 74 | | Dates | End Run Date | 2022-05-31 | | | Stats | 75 | | Info | Test Operator | FloodLAMP | Who ran the actual testing (running LAMP reactions) | | Stats | 78 | | Info | Test Processing Site | Garage Dedicated Room | Where the test processing (running LAMP reactions) was done | | Stats | 79 | | Info | Population Tested | Students, Staff, Families | Description of the participants | | Stats | 80 | | Info | Configuration | Standard | Equipment set used for test processing (relates to throughput and type of test tube used) | | Stats | 81 | | Info | Collection Type | Pooled Household, Individual | Pooled, Individual, or Both | | Stats | 82 | | Info | Self or HCW Collected | Self | HCW is Health Care Worker | | Stats | 83 | | Info | App Used? | Yes | Was the FloodLAMP Mobile App and Admin Portal utilized in the program | | Stats | 84 | | Info | Bring-up Type | In Person | How the initial setup and validation of the testing site was done | | Stats | 85 | | Info | Program Name | Carillon | Shorthand name used internally at FloodLAMP and in other documents for this program | | Stats | 86 | | Info | Site | Preschool | Broader physical space where the testing was done and/or where participants congregated | | Stats | 87 | | Info | Site Type | Preschool | Type of entity or organization receiving the testing program | | Stats | 88 | | Info | Location | Portola Valley, CA | Geographical location of where the FloodLAMP testing program occurred | | Stats | 89 | | Pooling | Number of Initial FloodLAMP Positive Pools | 10 | | | Stats | 92 | | Pooling | Number of Initial FloodLAMP Positive Pools with Indiv Deconvolution | 5 | | | Stats | 93 | | Pooling | Number of Initial FloodLAMP Positive Pools Confirmed by Referral Testing | 6 | | | Stats | 94 | | Pooling | Number of Initial Confirmed FL Pools where the organization member (i.e. parent or other child) was Positive | 4 | | | Stats | 95 | | Pooling | Number of Initial Confirmed FL Pools where Positive Individual was not the organization member (i.e. parent or other child) | 2 | | | Stats | 96 | | Pooling | % Confirmed Positive Pools where Positive Individual was not the organization member (i.e. parent or other child) | 33.3% | | | Stats | 97 | ### Weekly summary | week_start_date | week_end_date | participants_n | tubes_n | positive_tubes_n | inconclusive_tubes_n | pct_positive | pct_positive_status | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2021-12-20 | 2021-12-26 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-12-27 | 2022-01-02 | 34 | 12 | 2 | 0 | 16.7% | ok | | 2022-01-03 | 2022-01-09 | 85 | 37 | 6 | 0 | 16.2% | ok | | 2022-01-10 | 2022-01-16 | 173 | 83 | 11 | 1 | 13.3% | ok | | 2022-01-17 | 2022-01-23 | 162 | 71 | 5 | 0 | 7.0% | ok | | 2022-01-24 | 2022-01-30 | 150 | 62 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-01-31 | 2022-02-06 | 143 | 58 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-02-07 | 2022-02-13 | 148 | 60 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-02-14 | 2022-02-20 | 128 | 54 | 0 | 1 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-02-21 | 2022-02-27 | 55 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-02-28 | 2022-03-06 | 51 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-07 | 2022-03-13 | 113 | 52 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-14 | 2022-03-20 | 91 | 42 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-21 | 2022-03-27 | 110 | 44 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-28 | 2022-04-03 | 22 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-04 | 2022-04-10 | 110 | 43 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-11 | 2022-04-17 | 100 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-18 | 2022-04-24 | 110 | 47 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-25 | 2022-05-01 | 107 | 42 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-02 | 2022-05-08 | 108 | 47 | 2 | 0 | 4.3% | ok | | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-15 | 111 | 62 | 4 | 2 | 6.5% | ok | | 2022-05-16 | 2022-05-22 | 92 | 44 | 1 | 0 | 2.3% | ok | | 2022-05-23 | 2022-05-29 | 89 | 41 | 1 | 0 | 2.4% | ok | | 2022-05-30 | 2022-06-05 | 42 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | ### Referral tests by person | participant_id | num_sequential_referral_tests | num_floodlamp_results_pos_or_incl | floodlamp_tube_id | floodlamp_test_result | floodlamp_test_date | first_referral_test_date | referral_overall_result | first_referral_test_type | first_referral_test_result | second_referral_test_type | second_referral_test_result | third_referral_test_type | third_referral_test_result | antigen_neg_with_other_positive_flag | referral_eval | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | FLMP132170 | 7 | 0 | MA100A | Negative | 2022-05-02 | 2022-05-02 | Negative | PCR | Negative | Antigen | Negative | Antigen | Negative | False | FL pos pool of 3 in morning then indiv deconvl with FL and this person was neg but there was 1 FL deconv pos that was confirmed by PCR (neg by antigen initally then pos 2 days later) | | FLMP147333 | 6 | 2 | FLT1465 | Positive | 2022-01-10 | 2022-01-09 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | PCR | Positive | | | False | known pos that tested pos by FL - not sure if they told us about antigen result before FL test | | FLMP172687 | 1 | 1 | FLB5889 | Positive | 2022-01-06 | 2022-12-30 | NA - Return Test | Antigen | Positive | | | | | NA - Return Test | FL test (pos) was test to return after anitgen pos test 7 days prior | | FLMP254321 | 2 | 0 | FLE269 | Negative | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-09 | Negative | Antigen | Negative | PCR | Negative | | | False | FL incl pool of 3, then indiv deconv and 1 of 3 pos, this one was FL neg and also neg by PCR and antigen | | FLMP290315 | 1 | 0 | NO FL testing | | | 2022-05-16 | Negative | Antigen | Negative | | | | | False | | | FLMP302189 | 3 | 4 | FLT1433 | Positive | 2022-01-02 | 2022-01-02 | Positive | Antigen | Negative | PCR | Positive | | | True | parent tested neg by antigen so did indiv deconv FL test and was pos | | FLMP322473 | 1 | 0 | AH679 | Negative | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-09 | Negative | PCR | Negative | | | | | False | | | FLMP325595 | 1 | 0 | AH245 | Negative | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-09 | Negative | PCR | Negative | | | | | False | | | FLMP330127 | 4 | 2 | FLT1400 | Positive | 2022-01-10 | 2022-01-07 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | PCR | Positive | | | False | known pos that tested pos by FL - not sure if they told us about antigen result before FL test | | FLMP464138 | 7 | 0 | MA82 | Negative | 2022-05-02 | 2022-05-02 | Negative | PCR | Negative | Antigen | Negative | Antigen | Negative | False | FL pos pool of 3 in morning then indiv deconvl with FL and this person was neg but there was 1 FL deconv pos that was confirmed by PCR (neg by antigen initally then pos 2 days later) | | FLMP472803 | 7 | 1 | MA57 | Negative | 2022-05-02 | 2022-05-02 | Negative | PCR | Negative | Antigen | Negative | Antigen | Negative | False | FL pos pool of 3 in morning then indiv deconvl with FL and this person was neg but there was 1 FL deconv pos that was confirmed by PCR (neg by antigen initally then pos 2 days later) | | FLMP473007 | 2 | 0 | FLB6845 | Positive | 2022-01-02 | 2022-01-03 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | PCR | Positive | | | False | Only initial FL positive pool - no indiv deconv | | FLMP549529 | 1 | 1 | FLB5830 | Positive | 2022-01-06 | 2022-01-01 | NA - Return Test | Antigen | Positive | | | | | NA - Return Test | FL test (pos) was test to return after anitgen pos test 5 days prior | | FLMP552537 | 2 | 2 | FLE202 | Positive | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-09 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | PCR | Positive | | | False | FL incl pool of 3, then indiv deconv and 1 of 3 pos, this one was confrimed by PCR and antigen | | FLMP601970 | 1 | 1 | FLT1129 | Positive | 2022-01-17 | 2022-01-18 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | | | | | False | this was a later return test - the CRLN child did not test on 1-10 with parents | | FLMP608363 | 1 | 2 | AH365 | Positive | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-09 | Positive | PCR | Positive | | | | | False | CRLN child (no symptomys) - FL pos pool of 4 then indiv deconv by FL with 1 of 4 pos and this one confimed by PCR | | FLMP652238 | 2 | 1 | FLB6845 | Positive | 2022-01-02 | 2022-01-03 | Negative | Antigen | Negative | PCR | Negative | | | False | Only initial FL positive pool - no indiv deconv | | FLMP687722 | 8 | 2 | MA108 | Positive | 2022-05-02 | 2022-05-02 | Positive | Antigen | Negative | PCR | Positive | Antigen | Positive | True | FL pos pool of 3 in morning then indiv deconvl with FL and this person was pos that was confirmed by PCR (neg by antigen initally then pos 2 days later) - other 3 in pool neg by PCR and antigen | | FLMP705416 | 2 | 0 | FLB5969 | Negative | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-09 | Positive | Antigen | Negative | PCR | Positive | | | True | FL incl pool of 3, then indiv deconv and 1 of 3 pos, this one was FL neg and also neg by antigen byt pos by PCR | | FLMP776278 | 3 | 3 | FLT1433 | Positive | 2022-01-02 | 2022-01-04 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | PCR | Positive | | | False | Non-CRLN child that test pos by antigen so no indiv deconv FL test | | FLMP779627 | 1 | 0 | AJ9253 | Negative | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-09 | Negative | PCR | Negative | | | | | False | | | FLMP828735 | 4 | 3 | FLT1433 | Positive | 2022-01-02 | 2022-01-04 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | PCR | Positive | | | False | CRLN child that test pos by antigen so no indiv deconv FL test | | FLMP857562 | 3 | 2 | FLT1433 | Positive | 2022-01-02 | 2022-01-02 | Positive | Antigen | Negative | PCR | Positive | | | True | parent tested neg by antigen so did indiv deconv FL test and was pos | | FLMP858721 | 1 | 1 | FLT1136 | Positive | 2022-01-06 | 2022-12-29 | NA - Return Test | Antigen | Positive | | | | | NA - Return Test | FL test (pos) was test to return after anitgen pos test 8 days prior | | FLMP876455 | 1 | 0 | FLT1161 | Positive | 2022-01-10 | 2022-01-12 | Negative | PCR | Negative | | | | | False | FL pos pool of 3 in morning then indiv deconvl with FL and this person was neg along with one other both by PCR, and 3rd pool person was PCR pos | | FLMP887888 | 4 | 2 | FLT1161 | Positive | 2022-01-10 | 2022-01-04 | Positive | PCR | Positive | | | | | False | FL pos pool of 3 in morning then indiv deconvl with FL and only this person was pos (other 2 FL and the referral PCR neg) - ignore neg antigen tests for analysis because they were 6 days before and 5 days after FL tests | | FLMP915544 | 2 | 0 | FLB6845 | Positive | 2022-01-02 | 2022-01-03 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | PCR | Positive | | | False | Only initial FL positive pool - no indiv deconv | | FLMP939793 | 1 | 0 | FLB5852 | Negative | 2022-01-06 | 2022-12-30 | NA - Return Test | Antigen | Positive | | | | | NA - Return Test | FL test (neg) was test to return after anitgen pos test 7 days prior | | FLMP942437 | 1 | 0 | NO FL testing | | | 2022-05-16 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | | | | | False | | | FLMP969044 | 1 | 0 | FLT1161 | Positive | 2022-01-10 | 2022-01-12 | Negative | PCR | Negative | | | | | False | FL pos pool of 3 in morning then indiv deconvl with FL and this person was neg along with one other both by PCR, and 3rd pool person was PCR pos | | FLMP987142 | 4 | 2 | FLB6807 | Positive | 2022-05-19 | 2022-05-16 | Positive | Antigen | Negative | Antigen | Negative | PCR | Positive | True | Partner tested pos by antigen then this partner tested neg by antigen 3 days in a row then next day was FL pos, which was confirmed by PCR collected same day and resulted 2 days later (this was a teacher - so FL screening likely stopped spread!) | # 4,070 DAVI_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: DAVI_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2022-03-18 title: DAVI Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: NA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 2539 tokens: 4070 notes: summary_short: The "DAVI_pilot-data_summary" covers the FloodLAMP pilot program in a city/EMS program in Davie, FL where fire department staff operated FloodLAMP for pooled self-collection testing of EMS, first responders, and city staff at their fire station, using a standard configuration without the FloodLAMP mobile app. The program ran over 6 months (2021-09-01 to 2022-03-18), testing 2,279 tubes from 4,409 participant results with 384 positive tubes detected (16.8% positivity rate during the Delta and Omicron waves). All sample processing for the ROSA production pilot program was performed at the Davie site by the Davie staff. CONTENT ## Plots ### Composite ![DAVI Weekly Composite](_plots/DAVI_weekly_composite.png) ### Percent Positive Tubes ![DAVI Weekly Percent Positives](_plots/DAVI_weekly_percent_positives.png) ### Volume ![DAVI Weekly Volume](_plots/DAVI_weekly_volume.png) ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [DAVI_RTR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gIvvt-IHhGwbIv_mVSF5QEfjbm5WdoSUDe4MW8SSCcA) - [DAVI_RSR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QslpxtCjyHeau4SIHuLbkjLaLtB7tNrK3jQh96s3bIo) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `DAVI_curated_csvs/` - Stats key-values CSV: [DAVI_RSR_stats_key-values.csv](DAVI_curated_csvs/DAVI_RSR_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: [DAVI_RSR_weekly-summary.csv](DAVI_curated_csvs/DAVI_RSR_weekly-summary.csv) - Referral tests by person CSV: _not available_ ### XLSX downloads: - [DAVI_RSR_deID_PUB.xlsx](DAVI_xlsx_downloads/DAVI_RSR_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [DAVI_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx](DAVI_xlsx_downloads/DAVI_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | value_status | details | comments | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Files | RFR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 1 | | Files | RTR File | DAVI_RTR_PHI_v2.0 | ok | | | Stats | 2 | | Files | APS File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 3 | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 2,279 | ok | initial run tubes only so excludes re-runs | Have no data on re-runs so just use reported tubes/pools total | Stats | 5 | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 2,279 | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 6 | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | 50 | ok | | Use estimated number of runs based on number of days and pools run in RSR reported weekly total | Stats | 7 | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 8 | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 2,279 | ok | includes technical replicates (the same tube sample in multiple reactions in the same run) | | Stats | 9 | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 4,409 | ok | counts individual samples in pools and excludes re-runs | | Stats | 11 | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 0 | ok | tubes run and present in RFR but not in Appivo - created tube IDs that start with ARF | | Stats | 12 | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 4,409 | ok | Will be equal to the number of tubes tested if no pooling. | | Stats | 13 | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 1.9 | ok | | | Stats | 14 | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | | not_available | from RFR Audit Num Run Tubes | | Stats | 17 | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | | not_available | from RFR Audit Num rxns (excl ctrls) | | Stats | 18 | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | | not_available | re-run / initial | | Stats | 19 | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | | not_available | | | Stats | 20 | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | | not_available | | | Stats | 21 | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 384 | ok | | | Stats | 24 | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | 16.8% | ok | | | Stats | 25 | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | | not_available | Subtract off Re-tests | Not Available - not tube level data so no way to know cases | Stats | 26 | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | 329 | ok | Previous tested (including by FloodLAMP test) or reported positive | Many Return To Work tests after Initial Positive | Stats | 27 | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | 55 | ok | | | Stats | 28 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 31 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | | not_available | | | Stats | 32 | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 33 | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 34 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | | not_available | | | Stats | 35 | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 36 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | | not_available | | | Stats | 37 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | 1 | ok | | No information on how this Final Inconclusive was resolved | Stats | 38 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | | not_available | Count Result Correction Code=2.5 in preDel col AJ, or from RFR preExcl if not resulted as Incl in App | | Stats | 39 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 26 | ok | includes re-runs - from RFR Audit only and excludes any APS only resulted inconclusives | | Stats | 40 | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 1.1% | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 41 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 44 | ok | Indiv or Pool, Cases used instead of Person to account for people being contracting COVID multiple times, and instead of Results to exclude re-tests | from Col C of RTR/Referral Antigen Comparison (formula to right) | Stats | 44 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 43 | ok | Sometimes also termed Agree Positives - Include initial Inconclusive with Referral or Correspondence Positive | One missing was antigen neg same day but never follow up antigen tested - it tested positive by FloodLAMP 4 times over the next 10 days and the person became symptomatic but we cannot count it was an Agree because technically there's no Pos referral test | Stats | 45 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 0 | ok | | No information on the singe Final Inconclusive | Stats | 46 | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 97.7% | ok | | This excludes many we do not have referral data on | Stats | 47 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 48 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 49 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | 44 | ok | | | Stats | 52 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | 38 | ok | | | Stats | 53 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | 4 | ok | Agree with Referral Test Positive (usually PCR or later Antigen) but Initial Antigen Negative | See table at the top right of RTR/Referral Antigen Comparison (formula to right) | Stats | 54 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | 10.5% | ok | | | Stats | 55 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 56 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 57 | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | 0 | ok | From reviewing APS/Pos and Incl tab Unconfirmed FL Positives | | Stats | 60 | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | 0 | ok | From reviewing Referral Tests by Person and correspondence with Program Admin | | Stats | 61 | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | | not_available | Includes UnknownPerson additions but not ARF tubes | Not Available - Data provided to FloodLAMP does not enable us to calculate this | Stats | 64 | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | | not_available | People who collect using the app | Not Available - Data provided to FloodLAMP does not enable us to calculate this | Stats | 65 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | | not_available | includes Inconclusive FloodLAMP result confirmed Positive by follow-up or Referral | Not Available - Data provided to FloodLAMP does not enable us to calculate this | Stats | 68 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | | not_available | | | Stats | 69 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | | not_available | | Not Available - Data provided to FloodLAMP does not enable us to calculate this | Stats | 70 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | | not_available | | | Stats | 71 | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2021-09-01 | ok | | | Stats | 74 | | Dates | End Run Date | 2022-03-18 | ok | | | Stats | 75 | | Info | Test Operator | Davie Fire and Rescue | ok | Who ran the actual testing (running LAMP reactions) | | Stats | 78 | | Info | Test Processing Site | Fire Station Office | ok | Where the test processing (running LAMP reactions) was done | | Stats | 79 | | Info | Population Tested | EMS, First Responders, City Staff | ok | Description of the participants | | Stats | 80 | | Info | Configuration | Standard | ok | Equipment set used for test processing (relates to throughput and type of test tube used) | | Stats | 81 | | Info | Collection Type | Pooled | ok | Pooled, Individual, or Both | | Stats | 82 | | Info | Self or HCW Collected | Self | ok | HCW is Health Care Worker | | Stats | 83 | | Info | App Used? | No | ok | Was the FloodLAMP Mobile App and Admin Portal utilized in the program | | Stats | 84 | | Info | Bring-up Type | In Person | ok | How the initial setup and validation of the testing site was done | | Stats | 85 | | Info | Program Name | Davie | ok | Shorthand name used internally at FloodLAMP and in other documents for this program | | Stats | 86 | | Info | Site | Fire Station | ok | Broader physical space where the testing was done and/or where participants congregated | | Stats | 87 | | Info | Site Type | City / EMS | ok | Type of entity or organization receiving the testing program | | Stats | 88 | | Info | Location | Davie, FL | ok | Geographical location of where the FloodLAMP testing program occurred | | Stats | 89 | ### Weekly summary | week_start_date | week_end_date | participants_n | tubes_n | positive_tubes_n | inconclusive_tubes_n | pct_positive | pct_positive_status | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2021-08-30 | 2021-09-05 | 54 | 19 | 2 | 0 | 10.5% | ok | | 2021-09-06 | 2021-09-12 | 75 | 26 | 3 | 1 | 11.5% | ok | | 2021-09-13 | 2021-09-19 | 75 | 26 | 4 | 0 | 15.4% | ok | | 2021-09-20 | 2021-09-26 | 75 | 27 | 4 | 0 | 14.8% | ok | | 2021-09-27 | 2021-10-03 | 107 | 59 | 1 | 0 | 1.7% | ok | | 2021-10-04 | 2021-10-10 | 130 | 49 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-11 | 2021-10-17 | 91 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-18 | 2021-10-24 | 123 | 52 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-25 | 2021-10-31 | 80 | 30 | 1 | 0 | 3.3% | ok | | 2021-11-01 | 2021-11-07 | 61 | 28 | 3 | 0 | 10.7% | ok | | 2021-11-08 | 2021-11-14 | 80 | 34 | 2 | 0 | 5.9% | ok | | 2021-11-15 | 2021-11-21 | 111 | 41 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-22 | 2021-11-28 | 48 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-29 | 2021-12-05 | 117 | 62 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-12-06 | 2021-12-12 | 115 | 55 | 2 | 0 | 3.6% | ok | | 2021-12-13 | 2021-12-19 | 159 | 85 | 4 | 0 | 4.7% | ok | | 2021-12-20 | 2021-12-26 | 269 | 151 | 16 | 0 | 10.6% | ok | | 2021-12-27 | 2022-01-02 | | | 0 | | | not_available | | 2022-01-03 | 2022-01-09 | 801 | 575 | 217 | 0 | 37.7% | ok | | 2022-01-10 | 2022-01-16 | 350 | 225 | 60 | 0 | 26.7% | ok | | 2022-01-17 | 2022-01-23 | 216 | 118 | 29 | 0 | 24.6% | ok | | 2022-01-24 | 2022-01-30 | 202 | 108 | 14 | 0 | 13.0% | ok | | 2022-01-31 | 2022-02-06 | 217 | 110 | 11 | 0 | 10.0% | ok | | 2022-02-07 | 2022-02-13 | 223 | 91 | 9 | 0 | 9.9% | ok | | 2022-02-14 | 2022-02-20 | 227 | 92 | 2 | 0 | 2.2% | ok | | 2022-02-21 | 2022-02-27 | 168 | 63 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-02-28 | 2022-03-06 | 94 | 37 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-07 | 2022-03-13 | 70 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-14 | 2022-03-20 | 71 | 33 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | # 8,120 DAVI_pilot-data_referral-antigen-comparison.md METADATA last updated: 2026-01-25 file_name: DAVI_pilot-data_referral-antigen-comparison.md file_date: 2022-03-18 title: DAVI Pilot Data Referral Antigen Comparison category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13mShkjR7lnJSbZnggKarg6NDrgYXdhvEaPbQSLn3zaA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 4754 tokens: 8120 notes: DAVI has a custom referral-antigen-comparison format instead of standard referral tests. summary_short: The "DAVI_pilot-data_referral-antigen-comparison" covers a custom FloodLAMP referral-antigen comparison dataset from the Davie city/EMS pilot in Davie, FL, where fire department staff ran pooled self-collection testing of EMS, first responders, and city staff at a fire station using a standard configuration without the FloodLAMP mobile app. It summarizes same-day and follow-up comparisons between FloodLAMP and BinaxNOW results across three testing-policy periods during the 2021-09-01 to 2022-03-18 program, including 44 FloodLAMP-positive cases with referral antigen data, 38 same-day antigen comparisons, and 4 same-day antigen-negative cases later supported by follow-up results. CONTENT ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [DAVI_RTR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gIvvt-IHhGwbIv_mVSF5QEfjbm5WdoSUDe4MW8SSCcA/edit?usp=drive_link) - [DAVI_RSR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QslpxtCjyHeau4SIHuLbkjLaLtB7tNrK3jQh96s3bIo/edit?usp=drive_link) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `DAVI_curated_csvs/` - [DAVI_RSR_stats_key-values.csv](DAVI_curated_csvs/DAVI_RSR_stats_key-values.csv) - [DAVI_RSR_stats_referral-agreement.csv](DAVI_curated_csvs/DAVI_RSR_stats_referral-agreement.csv) - [DAVI_RSR_weekly-summary.csv](DAVI_curated_csvs/DAVI_RSR_weekly-summary.csv) - [DAVI_RTR_referral-antigen-comparison.csv](DAVI_curated_csvs/DAVI_RTR_referral-antigen-comparison.csv) - [DAVI_csv-manifest.csv](DAVI_curated_csvs/DAVI_csv-manifest.csv) ### XLSX downloads: - [DAVI_RSR_deID_PUB.xlsx](DAVI_xlsx_downloads/DAVI_RSR_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [DAVI_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx](DAVI_xlsx_downloads/DAVI_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx) ## Summary: Same Day Test Comparison Comparison of FloodLAMP (FL) and BinaxNOW (B) same-day test results: | | FL +, B - | FL +, B + | | --- | --- | --- | | Asymptomatic | 3 | 12 | | Symptomatic | 1 | 26 | | Total | 4 | 38 | | % Asymp | 0.75 | 31.6% | ## Legend | Abbreviation | Meaning | | --- | --- | | FL | FloodLAMP | | B | BinaxNOW Rapid Antigen | | ASY | Asymptomatic | | SYM | Symptomatic | | RTW | Return To Work | | V1/V2/V3 | Vaccinated 1/2/3 doses | | UN | Unvaccinated | - + on FloodLAMP and - on BinaxNOW: 3 - + on FloodLAMP and + on BinaxNOW: 12 (80%) ## Group 1 _Testing between Sept 15th and Dec 23rd (FloodLAMP used as main test and BinaxNOW used sometimes at home on day 0)_ ### As Reported | No Referral | Disagree | Agree | Vaccine | | Employee | Test Results Day 0 | Day 1 | Day 2 | Day 3 | Day 4 | Day 5 | Day 6 | Day 7 | Day 8 | Day 9 | Day 10 | Day 11 | Day 12 | Day 13 | Day 14 | Day 15 | Day 10+ | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | | | True | V2 | 1 | 1 | FL +, B +, ASY | | FL +, SYM | | FL +, SYM | | FL +, SYM | FL - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | True | V3 | | 2 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, SYM | | FL +, SYM | | FL +, SYM | | FL + | | FL - | RTW | | | | | Day 10 FL -, Day 11 RTW | | | | True | V2 | | 3 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, SYM | | FL +, SYM | | FL +, SYM | FL - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | True | | | UN | | 4 | FL +, ASY | | FL + | | FL + | | FL + | | FL + | | FL + | FL - | RTW | | | | Day 10 FL +, Day 11 FL -, Day 12 RTW | | True | | | V3 | | 5 | FL +, SYM | | FL + | | FL + | | FL + | | FL + | FL - | RTW | | | | | | Day 10 RTW | | True | | | V3 | | 6 | FL +, SYM | | | FL +, SYM | FL +, SYM | | FL + | | FL + | | FL + | | | FL - | RTW | | Day 10 FL +, Day 13 FL -, Day 14 RTW | | | | True | V2 | | 7 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL + | | FL - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | True | UN | | 8 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL + SYM | FL + | | FL - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | | | True | V3 | | 9 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL + SYM | | FL + SYM | | FL - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | | True | V3 | | 10 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL + SYM | | FL + | | FL - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | True | | | V3 | | 11 | FL +, ASY | | FL + ASY | | FL + | | FL - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | True | | | V3 | | 12 | FL +, ASY | | FL + ASY | | FL + | FL - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | True | | | UN | | 13 | FL +, SYM | | | FL + SYM | | | FL + SYM | | | FL - | RTW | | | | | | Day 10 RTW | | | 1 | | UN | 1 | 14 | FL +, B -, ASY | | FL + SYM | | | FL + SYM | | FL + SYM | | | FL + | | | FL - | RTW | | Day 10 FL +, Day 13 FL -, Day 14 RTW | | True | | | V3 | | 15 | FL +, SYM | | FL + SYM | | FL + SYM | | FL + | | | FL - | RTW | | | | | | Day 10 RTW | ### Structured | Start Date Range | End Date Range | Vaccinated Doses | Symptoms | Day 0 FloodLAMP Result | Day 0 Antigen Result | FloodLAMP Test with Same Day Antigen | Day # FloodLAMP Neg | Day # Antigen Neg | Day # Return to Work | # FL Pos Tests after Initial before Neg | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 2 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 7 | | 8 | 3 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 10 | | 11 | 4 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 2 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 7 | | 8 | 3 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 0 | Asymptomatic | Positive | | False | 11 | | 12 | 5 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | | False | 9 | | 10 | 4 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | | False | 13 | | 14 | 5 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 2 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 4 | | 5 | 1 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 0 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 5 | | 6 | 2 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 6 | | 7 | 2 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 6 | | 7 | 2 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 3 | Asymptomatic | Positive | | False | 6 | | 7 | 2 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 3 | Asymptomatic | Positive | | False | 5 | | 6 | 2 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 0 | Symptomatic | Positive | | False | 9 | | 10 | 2 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 0 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Negative | True | 13 | | 14 | 4 | | 2021-09-15 00:00:00 | 2021-12-23 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | | False | 9 | | 10 | 3 | ## Group 2 _Testing between Dec 24th and Jan 9th (Both FloodLAMP and BinaxNOW used until cleared to RTW)_ ### As Reported | No Referral | Disagree | Agree | Vaccine | | Employee | Test Results Day 0 | Day 1 | Day 2 | Day 3 | Day 4 | Day 5 | Day 6 | Day 7 | Day 8 | Day 9 | Day 10 | Day 11 | Day 12 | Day 13 | Day 14 | Day 15 | Day 10+ | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | | | True | V3 | 1 | 16 | FL +, B +, ASY | FL +, B + SYM | | FL +, B + | | | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | | True | V2 | 1 | 17 | FL +, B +, ASY | FL +, B + SYM | | FL +, B + | | | FL +, B + | | FL +, B + | | FL +, B + | | B - | RTW | | | Day 10 FL +, B +, Day 12 B -, Day 13 RTW | | | | True | UN | 1 | 18 | FL +, B -, ASY | | FL +, B + SYM | | FL +, B + SYM | | FL +, B + SYM | | FL +, B + SYM | | FL +, B + | | B + | B + | B - | RTW | Day 10 FL +, B +, Day 12 B +, Day 13 B +, Day 14 B -, Day 15 RTW | | | | True | V3 | | 19 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B + SYM | | FL +, B + SYM | | FL +, B + SYM | | | B - | RTW | | | | | | Day 10 RTW | | | | True | V3 | | 20 | FL +, B +, SYM | | | | FL +, B + SYM | | FL +, B + SYM | | | B - | RTW | | | | | | Day 10 RTW | | | | True | V3 | | 21 | B + SYM | FL +, B + SYM | | | FL +, B + SYM | | FL +, B + SYM | | | FL +, B + | FL +, B + | | FL -, B - | RTW | | | Day 10 FL +, B +, Day 12 FL -, B -, Day 13 RTW | | | | True | V2 | | 22 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL -, B - SYM | | SYM | SYM | SYM | | SYM | | | RTW | Day 10 SYM, Day 12 SYM, Day 15 RTW | | | | True | V1 | 1 | 23 | FL +, B +, ASY | | FL +, B + | | FL +, B + | | FL +, B + | | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | True | V2 | | 24 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B + SYM | | FL +, B + SYM | | FL +, B + SYM | | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | True | V3 | | 25 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | | FL +, B + | | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | | Day 10 RTW | | | | True | V3 | | 26 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | | | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | True | UN | | 27 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | | FL +, B + | FL +, B + | FL +, B + | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | Day 10 FL -, B -, Day 11 RTW | | | | True | V3 | | 28 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B + | | | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | | Day 10 RTW | | | | True | V3 | | 29 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | | FL +, B + | | FL +, B + | FL +, B + | | FL +, B + | | FL -, B - | RTW | Day 10 FL +, B +, Day 12 FL +, B +, Day 14 FL -, B -, Day 15 RTW | | | | True | V3 | | 30 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B + | FL +, R + | FL +, B + | FL -, B - | RTW | | | Day 10 FL +, B +, Day 11 FL +, B +, Day 12 FL -, B -, Day 13 RTW | | | | True | V3 | 1 | 31 | FL +, B +, ASY | | FL +, B +, SYM | | | | | FL +, B +, SYM | | | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | Day 10 FL -, B -, Day 11 RTW | | | | True | V2 | | 32 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B + | | FL +, B + | | FL +, B + | | FL +, B + | FL -,B - | RTW | | | | Day 10 FL +, B +, Day 11 FL -,B -, Day 12 RTW | | | | True | V3 | | 33 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | | | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | True | V3 | | 34 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B + | | FL +, B + | FL +, B + | FL +, B + | FL +, B + | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | Day 10 FL -, B -, Day 11 RTW | | | | True | UN | | 35 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B + | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | | | True | V3 | 1 | 36 | FL +, B +, ASY | FL +, B +, SYM | | | FL +, B +, SYM | | | FL +, B + | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | True | V3 | | 37 | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL +, B +, SYM | | FL -, B - | RTW | | | | | Day 10 FL -, B -, Day 11 RTW | ### Structured | Start Date Range | End Date Range | Vaccinated Doses | Symptoms | Day 0 FloodLAMP Result | Day 0 Antigen Result | FloodLAMP Test with Same Day Antigen | Day # FloodLAMP Neg | Day # Antigen Neg | Day # Return to Work | # FL Pos Tests after Initial before Neg | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 6 | 6 | 7 | 2 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 2 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 12 | 13 | 5 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 0 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Negative | True | | 14 | 15 | 5 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 9 | 10 | 3 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 9 | 10 | 2 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | | Positive | False | 12 | 12 | 13 | 5 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 2 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 6 | 6 | 15 | 2 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 1 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 8 | 8 | 9 | 3 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 2 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 8 | 8 | 9 | 3 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 9 | 9 | 10 | 3 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 8 | 8 | 9 | 2 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 0 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 10 | 10 | 11 | 5 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 9 | 9 | 10 | 3 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 14 | 14 | 15 | 6 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 12 | 12 | 13 | 6 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 10 | 10 | 11 | 2 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 2 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 11 | 11 | 12 | 5 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 8 | 8 | 9 | 2 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 10 | 10 | 11 | 6 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 0 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 5 | 5 | 6 | 2 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 8 | 8 | 9 | 3 | | 2021-12-24 00:00:00 | 2022-01-09 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | 10 | 10 | 11 | 4 | ## Group 3 _Testing between Jan 10th and Feb 7th (FloodLAMP used for initial + diagnosis and BinaxNOW used to RTW)_ ### As Reported | No Referral | Disagree | Agree | Vaccine | | Employee | Test Results Day 0 | Day 1 | Day 2 | Day 3 | Day 4 | Day 5 | Day 6 | Day 7 | Day 8 | Day 9 | Day 10 | Day 11 | Day 12 | Day 13 | Day 14 | Day 15 | Day 10+ | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | | | True | V2 | 1 | 38 | FL +, B +, ASY | | B + SYM | | B + SYM | | B + | B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | True | V1 | 1 | 39 | FL +, B +, ASY | | B + SYM | | B + SYM | | B + | B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | True | V3 | 1 | 40 | FL +, B +, ASY | | B + ASY | | B + SYM | B + SYM | | B + SYM | | B + SYM | B + SYM | | B + | | B + | | Day 10 B + SYM, Day 12 B +, Day 14 B +, Day 16 B -, Day 17 RTW | | | | True | V3 | | 41 | FL +, B -, SYM | | B + SYM | | B + SYM | | B + SYM | | B + | B - | RTW | | | | | | Day 10 RTW | | | | True | V3 | | 42 | FL +, B +, SYM | | B + SYM | | B + SYM | | B + SYM | | B + | | B + | B - | RTW | | | | Day 10 B +, Day 11 B -, Day 12 RTW | | | | True | UN | | 43 | SYM | | | | B + SYM | FL + SYM | | B + SYM | | B - | RTW | | | | | | Day 10 RTW | | | | True | V2 | 1 | 44 | FL +, B +, ASY | | | | B + SYM | | B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | | True | V3 | 1 | 45 | FL +, B -, ASY | | B + SYM | | B + SYM | | B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | | True | V3 | 1 | 46 | FL +, B +, ASY | | B + SYM | | B + SYM | | B + | | B + | B + | B + | B - | RTW | | | | Day 10 B +, Day 11 B -, Day 12 RTW | | | | True | UN | 1 | 47 | FL +, B +, ASY | | B + ASY | | B + ASY | B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | | | True | V3 | | 48 | FL +, B +, SYM | | B + SYM | | B + SYM | | B + | | B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | True | V3 | | 49 | FL +, B +, SYM | | B + SYM | | B + | | B - | RTW | | | | | | | | | | | | | True | UN | | 50 | FL +, B +, SYM | | B + SYM | | B + SYM | | B + | | B + | B - | RTW | | | | | | Day 10 RTW | | | | True | V3 | | 51 | FL +, B +, SYM | | B + SYM | | B + SYM | | B + | | B + | | B - | RTW | | | | | Day 10 B -, Day 11 RTW | ### Structured | Start Date Range | End Date Range | Vaccinated Doses | Symptoms | Day 0 FloodLAMP Result | Day 0 Antigen Result | FloodLAMP Test with Same Day Antigen | Day # FloodLAMP Neg | Day # Antigen Neg | Day # Return to Work | # FL Pos Tests after Initial before Neg | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 2 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 7 | 8 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 1 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 7 | 8 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 3 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 16 | 17 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Negative | True | | 0 | 10 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 11 | 12 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 0 | Symptomatic | | | False | | 9 | 10 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 2 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 6 | 7 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 3 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Negative | True | | 0 | 7 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 3 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 11 | 12 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 0 | Asymptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 5 | 6 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 8 | 9 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 6 | 7 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 0 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 9 | 10 | 0 | | 2022-01-10 00:00:00 | 2022-02-07 00:00:00 | 3 | Symptomatic | Positive | Positive | True | | 10 | 11 | 0 | # 4,317 DAVI_pilot-data_referral-antigen-comparison_AI-ANALYSIS-AND-CHECK.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-04 BA file_name: _AI_DAVI Pilot Data Referral Antigen Comparison Analysis.md file_date: 2026-03-04 title: FloodLAMP DAVI Pilot Data Referral Antigen Comparison Analysis category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: davi, pilot-data, referral-antigen-comparison, ai-analysis source_file_type: md xfile_type: NA gfile_url: https://docs.google.com/document/d/18kmV9Ezn2ORHu7Mh1z9MMyLp3EUHZxaV01QAJgJLNU4 xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA conversion_input_file_type: NA conversion: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ tokens: 4317 words: 2590 notes: Created by Opus 4.6 during archive preparation. **PARTIAL HUMAN VERIFICATION - MAY CONTAIN ERRORS** Commentary and analysis of DAVI referral-antigen comparison data, based primarily on `DAVI_pilot-data_referral-antigen-comparison.md` and `DAVI_pilot-data_summary.md`, with an included human verification checklist covering row-level and summary-level claims. summary_short: DAVI pilot data referral-antigen comparison analysis summarizing same-day agreement between FloodLAMP and BinaxNOW across 51 employee cases, highlighting four FloodLAMP-positive and antigen-negative detections and the strongest sensitivity advantage in asymptomatic cases. Includes a detailed human verification checklist tied to the DAVI comparison and summary files. CONTENT ## Commentary on DAVI Referral-Antigen Comparison Data (AI Generated - Opus 4.6) The Davie site produced the archive's most detailed head-to-head comparison between FloodLAMP and BinaxNOW rapid antigen testing, tracking 51 employee cases through three evolving testing protocols during the Delta and Omicron waves. Across cases where both tests were administered on the same day, FloodLAMP and BinaxNOW agreed 90% of the time. In the remaining 10% of cases -- four employees -- FloodLAMP detected the infection while BinaxNOW did not. Three of those four were asymptomatic. There were no cases where antigen detected a positive that FloodLAMP missed. During the intensive dual-testing phase (Group 2, Dec 24 -- Jan 9), when both tests were used for daily follow-up through return to work, the two tests tracked closely, typically clearing on the same day. This pattern suggests that the practical sensitivity difference between FloodLAMP and antigen testing was concentrated at the onset of infection, particularly in asymptomatic or low-viral-load individuals -- precisely the detection gap that molecular screening is designed to address. The Davie data, combined with the anecdotal reports from Coral Springs where 21 of 22 FloodLAMP positives in a single plate were antigen-negative but subsequently confirmed, reinforced a consistent finding across the pilot programs: BinaxNOW rapid antigen tests lagged FloodLAMP molecular detection at infection onset, especially in asymptomatic individuals. ## Analysis of DAVI Referral-Antigen Comparison Data (AI Generated - Opus 4.6) The file tracks 51 employee COVID cases at the Davie Fire and Rescue site across three protocol phases during the Delta and Omicron waves (Sept 2021 -- Feb 2022), each with a different approach to using FloodLAMP (FL) and BinaxNOW rapid antigen (B) together: - **Group 1** (15 employees, Sep 15 -- Dec 23): FL as primary test; BinaxNOW used sometimes at home on Day 0. Only 8 of 15 had same-day antigen comparison data. - **Group 2** (22 employees, Dec 24 -- Jan 9): Both FL and BinaxNOW used throughout until return-to-work clearance. This is the most informative group for head-to-head comparison. - **Group 3** (14 employees, Jan 10 -- Feb 7): FL for initial detection/diagnosis; BinaxNOW for return-to-work clearance. FL was not used for ongoing follow-up. ### Key findings 1. **Same-day concordance on Day 0**: Of ~42 cases with same-day FL and antigen results, 38 (90.5%) agreed (both positive) and 4 (9.5%) disagreed -- all 4 being FL-positive / antigen-negative. There were zero cases of antigen catching a positive that FloodLAMP missed. 2. **Sensitivity advantage in asymptomatic cases**: Of the 4 FL+/B- discordant cases, 3 (75%) were asymptomatic. By contrast, only 31.6% of the concordant FL+/B+ cases were asymptomatic. This suggests FloodLAMP's molecular sensitivity was most valuable in exactly the population with lower viral loads where antigen tests are known to underperform. 3. **Group 2 tracking data**: When both tests were run side by side over the course of illness, they generally agreed on a day-to-day basis and cleared on the same day. The average time to negative was approximately 9 days (range 5--14). This close tracking indicates that when viral load was high enough for antigen detection, the two tests gave consistent results -- the divergence arose at low viral loads near detection onset. 4. **Zero false positives**: Across the full DAVI program, the stats file reports 0 false positives and 0 suspected false negatives for FloodLAMP, with 97.7% of FL positives confirmed by referral or correspondence. ### Inconsistency - (CAN REMOVE; ERROR HAS BEEN CORRECTED) The inconsistency is in the original xlsx spreadsheet, not in the md processing. The md file faithfully reproduced what was in the spreadsheet. Here's what's happening: The correct numbers come from the "Same Day" summary table (columns AB--AD, rows 2--6), which uses proper COUNTIFS formulas scanning the structured data columns. These correctly compute FL+/B+ = 38 and FL+/B- = 4 (total 42 same-day comparisons). The incorrect "11 (73.3%)" numbers come from cells K7--K8 and L8 in the legend/header area, which use a broken formula chain: Cell K7 = 4 (hard-coded) -- the total FL+/B- count. This number is correct. Cell E11 = SUM(E14:E80) = 15 -- this counts column E, which is a flag marking asymptomatic employees who had same-day antigen testing (15 of the 18 total asymptomatic cases; the 3 without the flag -- emps 4, 11, 12 -- had no antigen test). Cell K8 = E11 - K7 = 15 - 4 = 11 -- labeled "FL+ and B+" but actually computing "asymptomatic-with-antigen minus total FL+/B-," which is a nonsensical subtraction of two unrelated quantities. Cell L8 = K8/(K7+K8) = 11/15 = 0.7333 (73.3%) The most likely explanation is that these cells K7/K8/L8 were written at an early stage -- possibly when only Group 1 (15 employees) existed and column E may have been used differently (e.g., as a general count). When Groups 2 and 3 were added along with the proper structured columns (X--AH) and the correct COUNTIFS summary table (AB--AD rows 2--6), the old K7/K8 formulas were never updated. They now point at a cell (E11) whose meaning shifted, producing a spurious result. Bottom line: The "Same Day" summary table (FL+/B+ = 38, FL+/B- = 4) is the authoritative data. The "11 (73.3%)" line is a stale, broken formula artifact in the original spreadsheet. The md processing was faithful -- it just reproduced both the correct and incorrect values from the source. ## Human Verification Checklist Instructions: Verify each claim below against the source data file `DAVI_pilot-data_referral-antigen-comparison.md` and the stats file `DAVI_pilot-data_summary.md`. The claims are quoted from the AI-generated commentary and analysis above. Multiple checkboxes may appear under a single claim; each is a distinct item to verify. ### Commentary Paragraph Checks > "tracking 51 employee cases" - CONFIRMED [] Count employee rows in Group 1 "As Reported" table. Expected: 15 (employees 1--15). [] Count employee rows in Group 2 "As Reported" table. Expected: 22 (employees 16--37). [] Count employee rows in Group 3 "As Reported" table. Expected: 14 (employees 38--51). [] Confirm 15 + 22 + 14 = 51. > "three evolving testing protocols during the Delta and Omicron waves" - CONFIRMED [] Confirm three distinct groups exist in the source file with three different testing protocols. [] Group 1 dates (Sep 15 -- Dec 23, 2021) overlap with the Delta wave in the US. [] Group 2/3 dates (Dec 24 onward) overlap with the Omicron wave in the US. > "FloodLAMP and BinaxNOW agreed 90% of the time" - CONFIRMED [] Locate the summary table at the top of the source file under "Summary: Same Day Test Comparison." [] Confirm FL+, B+ total = 38. [] Confirm FL+, B- total = 4. [] Compute: 38 / (38 + 4) = 38 / 42 = 0.9048 ≈ 90.5%. Confirm "90%" is a fair rounding. > "four employees -- FloodLAMP detected the infection while BinaxNOW did not" - CONFIRMED [] Identify the 4 FL+/B- employees by scanning Day 0 results in all three "As Reported" tables. They should be: [] Employee 14 (Group 1): Day 0 = "FL +, B -, ASY" [] Employee 18 (Group 2): Day 0 = "FL +, B -, ASY" [] Employee 41 (Group 3): Day 0 = "FL +, B -, SYM" [] Employee 45 (Group 3): Day 0 = "FL +, B -, ASY" [] Confirm no other employees in any group have FL+, B- on Day 0. > "Three of those four were asymptomatic" - CONFIRMED [] Of the 4 FL+/B- employees identified above, confirm 3 have ASY in Day 0 (emps 14, 18, 45) and 1 has SYM (emp 41). [] Cross-check against the summary table: FL+, B- row shows Asymptomatic = 3, Symptomatic = 1. > "There were no cases where antigen detected a positive that FloodLAMP missed" - CONFIRMED [] Scan all Day 0 results in all three "As Reported" tables for any case of "FL -, B +" or "B +, FL -" or "B +" without FL+. Expected: none. [] Note employee 21 (Group 2) Day 0 is "B + SYM" without FL. In the Structured table, Day 0 FL is blank and "Same Day Antigen" = False. Confirm this case is excluded from the same-day comparison (not counted in the 42) and therefore does not represent a FL miss. [] Note employee 43 (Group 3) Day 0 is "SYM" without any test result. Confirm this is also excluded ("Same Day Antigen" = False). > "Group 2, Dec 24 -- Jan 9" - CONFIRMED [] Confirm Group 2 header in source file says "Testing between Dec 24th and Jan 9th." [] Confirm Group 2 Structured table dates show 2021-12-24 and 2022-01-09. > "the two tests tracked closely, typically clearing on the same day" - CONFIRMED [] In Group 2 Structured table, for every row where both "Day # FloodLAMP Neg" and "Day # Antigen Neg" have values, compare the two numbers. Expected: all 18 such pairs are identical (same day). [] Specifically verify these pairs (employee: FL neg day, B neg day): [] Emp 16: 6, 6 [] Emp 21: 12, 12 [] Emp 22: 6, 6 [] Emp 23: 8, 8 [] Emp 24: 8, 8 [] Emp 25: 9, 9 [] Emp 26: 8, 8 [] Emp 27: 10, 10 [] Emp 28: 9, 9 [] Emp 29: 14, 14 [] Emp 30: 12, 12 [] Emp 31: 10, 10 [] Emp 32: 11, 11 [] Emp 33: 8, 8 [] Emp 34: 10, 10 [] Emp 35: 5, 5 [] Emp 36: 8, 8 [] Emp 37: 10, 10 [] Confirm 4 rows (emps 17, 18, 19, 20) have blank FL neg day and only antigen neg day. These are excluded from the "same day clearing" comparison. > "21 of 22 FloodLAMP positives in a single plate were antigen-negative but subsequently confirmed" (Coral Springs reference) - CONFIRMED [] This claim is NOT from the DAVI data. It references Coral Springs (COSP) program. [] Verify against `_context-commentary_pilots-pilot-data_INITIAL.md`, COSP commentary section. The text there says: "the highest number of positives they had in a single plate, which was 22...only one of the 22 were antigen positive (BinaXNow)." [] Confirm 22 - 1 = 21 antigen-negative is the correct derivation. ### Analysis Section Checks > Group 1: "15 employees, Sep 15 -- Dec 23" - CONFIRMED [] Count rows in Group 1 "As Reported" table: expected 15 (employees 1--15). [] Count rows in Group 1 "Structured" table: expected 15. [] Confirm source header says "Testing between Sept 15th and Dec 23rd." > "Only 8 of 15 had same-day antigen comparison data" - CONFIRMED [] In Group 1 Structured table, count rows where "FloodLAMP Test with Same Day Antigen" = True. Expected: 8. [] Identify the 8 True rows: employees 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14 (match to Structured table row order). [] Count remaining False rows: expected 7 (employees 4, 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 15). > Group 2: "22 employees, Dec 24 -- Jan 9" - CONFIRMED [] Count rows in Group 2 "As Reported" table: expected 22 (employees 16--37). [] Count rows in Group 2 "Structured" table: expected 22. [] Confirm source header says "Testing between Dec 24th and Jan 9th." > Group 3: "14 employees, Jan 10 -- Feb 7" - CONFIRMED [] Count rows in Group 3 "As Reported" table: expected 14 (employees 38--51). [] Count rows in Group 3 "Structured" table: expected 14. [] Confirm source header says "Testing between Jan 10th and Feb 7th." > "Of ~42 cases with same-day FL and antigen results, 38 (90.5%) agreed and 4 (9.5%) disagreed" - CONFIRMED [] Count all "True" entries in "FloodLAMP Test with Same Day Antigen" column across all three Structured tables. Expected: 8 + 21 + 13 = 42. [] Group 2: Count True entries. Expected: 21 (emp 21 is the one False, with blank FL result Day 0). [] Group 3: Count True entries. Expected: 13 (emp 43 is the one False, with no Day 0 test results). [] Confirm 38 / 42 = 0.9048 = 90.5%. [] Confirm 4 / 42 = 0.0952 = 9.5%. [] Cross-check these totals against the summary table at top of source file: FL+, B- = 4, FL+, B+ = 38, total = 42. > "Of the 4 FL+/B- discordant cases, 3 (75%) were asymptomatic" - CONFIRMED [] Confirm 3/4 = 0.75 = 75%. [] Cross-check against summary table: "% Asymp" row under FL+, B- column = 0.75. > "only 31.6% of the concordant FL+/B+ cases were asymptomatic" - CONFIRMED [] From the summary table, FL+, B+ column: Asymptomatic = 12, Total = 38. [] Compute 12 / 38 = 0.3158 = 31.6%. Confirm. [] Cross-check against summary table: "% Asymp" row under FL+, B+ column = 31.6%. > "The average time to negative was approximately 9 days (range 5--14)" - CONFIRMED [] Using Group 2 Structured table only, list all "Day # FloodLAMP Neg" values that are not blank: 6, 12, 6, 8, 8, 9, 8, 10, 9, 14, 12, 10, 11, 8, 10, 5, 8, 10. Expected count: 18. [] Compute sum: 6+12+6+8+8+9+8+10+9+14+12+10+11+8+10+5+8+10 = 164. [] Compute average: 164 / 18 = 9.11. Confirm "approximately 9" is fair. [] Confirm minimum value = 5 and maximum value = 14 (range 5--14). [] Alternatively, using "Day # Antigen Neg" for all 22 Group 2 rows: sum = 6+12+14+9+9+12+6+8+8+9+8+10+9+14+12+10+11+8+10+5+8+10 = 208. Average = 208/22 = 9.45. Also approximately 9. Range also 5--14. > "the stats file reports 0 false positives and 0 suspected false negatives" - CONFIRMED [] In `DAVI_pilot-data_summary.md`, locate "False Positives Final Results" row. Expected value: 0. [] In `DAVI_pilot-data_summary.md`, locate "False Negative Final Results (Suspected)" row. Expected value: 0. > "97.7% of FL positives confirmed by referral or correspondence" - CONFIRMED [] In `DAVI_pilot-data_summary.md`, locate "% FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive" row. Expected value: 97.7%. [] Note the comments column for that row explains the one unconfirmed case: antigen negative same day, no follow-up antigen, but FL positive 4 more times and person became symptomatic. ### Internal Consistency Check (Summary Table vs. Raw Data) These checks verify that the summary table at the top of the source file is itself consistent with the row-level data. > Summary table: FL+, B+ Asymptomatic = 12 - CONFIRMED [] Count all employees across all three groups where Day 0 shows both FL+ and B+ AND ASY. List them and confirm total = 12. [] Expected: Emps 1, 16, 17, 23, 31, 36, 38, 39, 40, 44, 46, 47 (verify each). > Summary table: FL+, B+ Symptomatic = 26 - CONFIRMED [] Count all employees across all three groups where Day 0 shows both FL+ and B+ AND SYM. Confirm total = 26. > Summary table: FL+, B- Asymptomatic = 3 - CONFIRMED [] Confirm: Emps 14 (ASY), 18 (ASY), 45 (ASY). Total = 3. > Summary table: FL+, B- Symptomatic = 1 - CONFIRMED [] Confirm: Emp 41 (SYM). Total = 1. > Source file line: "+ on FloodLAMP and + on BinaxNOW: 11 (73.3%)" - CONFIRMED ERROR AND CORRECTED [] This line appears to be inconsistent with the summary table (which says 38). Determine if "11" refers to a subset (possibly Group 1 only, or a different counting method). Flag for author review. [] Note: If this is Group 1 only, count FL+, B+ in Group 1 "As Reported": Emps 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10 = 7, not 11. The number 11 does not obviously correspond to any subset. The "73.3%" also does not match 7/15 (46.7%) or 38/51 (74.5%). This likely needs author clarification. ### End of Checklist # 7,073 FLMP_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: FLMP_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2023-01-02 title: FLMP Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: NA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 3788 tokens: 7073 notes: summary_short: The "FLMP_pilot-data_summary" document was the organization's home-base testing in San Carlos and Portola Valley, CA, where FloodLAMP staff tested themselves and their working colleagues along with their household members. The testing used pooled household and individual self-collection across various sites and configurations. The program ran for over 2 years (2020-12-11 to 2023-01-02), testing 1,540 tubes with 3,399 participant results and 57 positive tubes detected. The files for FLMP include all data for the 2 programs Carillon, a local preschool where FloodLAMP founders kids attended (CRLN), and all other FloodLAMP internal and local testing, termed "FloodLAMP Staff Plus" (FLSP). These 2 programs were intermingled and utilized the same FloodLAMP app tenant. CONTENT ## Plots ### Composite ![FLMP Weekly Composite](_plots/FLMP_weekly_composite.png) ### Percent Positive Tubes ![FLMP Weekly Percent Positives](_plots/FLMP_weekly_percent_positives.png) ### Volume ![FLMP Weekly Volume](_plots/FLMP_weekly_volume.png) ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [FLMP_APS_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ni39vn-fdXq0HrOgHbim_FK0OZidUv-YBLvzPwhhlFQ) - [FLMP_RFR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16CwPJ9LeknD8lJFTr-gJSx916WZaGEMbN6iKnlVx4dI) - [FLMP_RTR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16R3LlannlrGfiIIJq4T3EWjbtFLZrtPC4gkKycu8RXc) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `FLMP_curated_csvs/` - Stats key-values CSV: [FLMP_APS_stats_key-values.csv](FLMP_curated_csvs/FLMP_APS_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: [FLMP_APS_weekly-summary.csv](FLMP_curated_csvs/FLMP_APS_weekly-summary.csv) - Referral tests by person CSV: _not available_ ### XLSX downloads: - [FLMP_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx](FLMP_xlsx_downloads/FLMP_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [FLMP_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx](FLMP_xlsx_downloads/FLMP_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [FLMP_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx](FLMP_xlsx_downloads/FLMP_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | details | comments | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Files | RFR File | FLMP_RFR_deID_PUB | | | Stats | 1 | | Files | RTR File | FLMP_RTR_deID_PUB | | | Stats | 2 | | Files | RSR File | NONE | | | Stats | 3 | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 1,540 | initial run tubes only so excludes re-runs | | Stats | 5 | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 1,618 | includes re-runs | | Stats | 6 | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | 243 | | divide CRLN by time period 1-2 to 5-31 | Stats | 7 | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | 436 | | divide CRLN by time period 1-2 to 5-31 | Stats | 8 | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 1,915 | includes technical replicates (the same tube sample in multiple reactions in the same run) | divide CRLN by time period 1-2 to 5-31 - 135 is num FLSP tubes in CRLN time period and 1290 is num RFR audit rxns during CRLN time period | Stats | 9 | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 3,399 | counts individual samples in pools and excludes re-runs | | Stats | 11 | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 48 | tubes run and present in RFR but not in Appivo - created tube IDs that start with ARF | all during CRLN period so assign to CRLN | Stats | 12 | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 3,447 | Will be equal to the number of tubes tested if no pooling. | | Stats | 13 | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 2.3 | | | Stats | 14 | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | 78 | from RFR Audit Num Run Tubes | | Stats | 17 | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | 230 | from RFR Audit Num rxns (excl ctrls) | | Stats | 18 | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | 5.1% | re-run / initial | | Stats | 19 | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | 37 | | | Stats | 20 | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | 15.2% | | | Stats | 21 | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 57 | | count from VALUES Pos and Incl | Stats | 24 | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | 3.7% | | | Stats | 25 | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | 19 | Subtract off Re-tests | | Stats | 26 | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | 3 | Previous tested (including by FloodLAMP test) or reported positive | | Stats | 27 | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | 16 | | | Stats | 28 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 4 | | | Stats | 31 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | 0 | | | Stats | 32 | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 4 | | | Stats | 33 | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | 0.3% | | | Stats | 34 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | 1 | | 2022-05-08T00:00:00 | Stats | 35 | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | 25.0% | | 2/4 unknown and 1 of those was in household of positives | Stats | 36 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | 1 | | | Stats | 37 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | 2 | | | Stats | 38 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | 36 | Count Result Correction Code=2.5 in preDel col AJ, or from RFR preExcl if not resulted as Incl in App | No 2.5 correction code, Sum AE - AF = 36 | Stats | 39 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 43 | includes re-runs - from RFR Audit only and excludes any APS only resulted inconclusives | | Stats | 40 | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 2.7% | includes re-runs | | Stats | 41 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 15 | Indiv or Pool, Cases used instead of Person to account for people being contracting COVID multiple times, and instead of Results to exclude re-tests | | Stats | 44 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 14 | Sometimes also termed Agree Positives - Include initial Inconclusive with Referral or Correspondence Positive | | Stats | 45 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 1 | | 2022-05-08T00:00:00 | Stats | 46 | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 100.0% | | | Stats | 47 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | 1 | | 2022-02-14T00:00:00 | Stats | 48 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | 2 | | | Stats | 49 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | 11 | | | Stats | 52 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | 11 | | | Stats | 53 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | 5 | Agree with Referral Test Positive (usually PCR or later Antigen) but Initial Antigen Negative | | Stats | 54 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | 45.5% | | | Stats | 55 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 1 | | | Stats | 56 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 9.1% | | | Stats | 57 | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | 0 | From reviewing APS/Pos and Incl tab Unconfirmed FL Positives | | Stats | 60 | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | 0 | From reviewing Referral Tests by Person and correspondence with Program Admin | | Stats | 61 | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | 212 | Includes UnknownPerson additions but not ARF tubes | | Stats | 64 | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | 60 | People who collect using the app | | Stats | 65 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | 26 | includes Inconclusive FloodLAMP result confirmed Positive by follow-up or Referral | | Stats | 68 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | 12.3% | | | Stats | 69 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | 52 | | | Stats | 70 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | 24.5% | | | Stats | 71 | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2020-12-11 | | | Stats | 74 | | Dates | End Run Date | 2023-01-02 | | | Stats | 75 | | Info | Test Operator | FloodLAMP | Who ran the actual testing (running LAMP reactions) | | Stats | 78 | | Info | Test Processing Site | Various | Where the test processing (running LAMP reactions) was done | | Stats | 79 | | Info | Population Tested | Staff, Students, Families, Community | Description of the participants | | Stats | 80 | | Info | Configuration | Various | Equipment set used for test processing (relates to throughput and type of test tube used) | | Stats | 81 | | Info | Collection Type | Pooled Household, Individual | Pooled, Individual, or Both | | Stats | 82 | | Info | Self or HCW Collected | Self | HCW is Health Care Worker | | Stats | 83 | | Info | App Used? | Yes | Was the FloodLAMP Mobile App and Admin Portal utilized in the program | | Stats | 84 | | Info | Bring-up Type | In Person | How the initial setup and validation of the testing site was done | | Stats | 85 | | Info | Program Name | FloodLAMP | Shorthand name used internally at FloodLAMP and in other documents for this program | | Stats | 86 | | Info | Site | Various | Broader physical space where the testing was done and/or where participants congregated | | Stats | 87 | | Info | Site Type | Various | Type of entity or organization receiving the testing program | | Stats | 88 | | Info | Location | Portola Valley, CA | Geographical location of where the FloodLAMP testing program occurred | | Stats | 89 | | Pooling | Number of Initial FloodLAMP Positive Pools | 13 | | | Stats | 92 | | Pooling | Number of Initial FloodLAMP Positive Pools with Indiv Deconvolution | 8 | | | Stats | 93 | | Pooling | Number of Initial FloodLAMP Positive Pools Confirmed by Referral Testing | 9 | | | Stats | 94 | | Pooling | Number of Initial Confirmed FL Pools where the organization member (i.e. parent or other child) was Positive | 5 | | | Stats | 95 | | Pooling | Number of Initial Confirmed FL Pools where Positive Individual was not the organization member (i.e. parent or other child) | 4 | | | Stats | 96 | | Pooling | % Confirmed Positive Pools where Positive Individual was not the organization member (i.e. parent or other child) | 44.4% | | | Stats | 97 | ### Weekly summary | week_start_date | week_end_date | participants_n | tubes_n | positive_tubes_n | inconclusive_tubes_n | pct_positive | pct_positive_status | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2020-12-07 | 2020-12-13 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2020-12-14 | 2020-12-20 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2020-12-21 | 2020-12-27 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2020-12-28 | 2021-01-03 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-01-04 | 2021-01-10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-01-11 | 2021-01-17 | 36 | 15 | 3 | 0 | 20.0% | ok | | 2021-01-18 | 2021-01-24 | 49 | 24 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-01-25 | 2021-01-31 | 45 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-02-01 | 2021-02-07 | 31 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-02-08 | 2021-02-14 | 40 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-02-15 | 2021-02-21 | 14 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-02-22 | 2021-02-28 | 24 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-03-01 | 2021-03-07 | 35 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-03-08 | 2021-03-14 | 30 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-03-15 | 2021-03-21 | 16 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-03-22 | 2021-03-28 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-03-29 | 2021-04-04 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-04-05 | 2021-04-11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-04-12 | 2021-04-18 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-04-19 | 2021-04-25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-04-26 | 2021-05-02 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-05-03 | 2021-05-09 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-05-10 | 2021-05-16 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-05-17 | 2021-05-23 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-05-24 | 2021-05-30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-05-31 | 2021-06-06 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-06-07 | 2021-06-13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-06-14 | 2021-06-20 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-06-21 | 2021-06-27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-06-28 | 2021-07-04 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-07-05 | 2021-07-11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-07-12 | 2021-07-18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-07-19 | 2021-07-25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-07-26 | 2021-08-01 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-08-02 | 2021-08-08 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-08-09 | 2021-08-15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-08-16 | 2021-08-22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-08-23 | 2021-08-29 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-08-30 | 2021-09-05 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-09-06 | 2021-09-12 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-09-13 | 2021-09-19 | 9 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-09-20 | 2021-09-26 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-09-27 | 2021-10-03 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-10-04 | 2021-10-10 | 10 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-11 | 2021-10-17 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-18 | 2021-10-24 | 15 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-25 | 2021-10-31 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-01 | 2021-11-07 | 19 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-08 | 2021-11-14 | 15 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-15 | 2021-11-21 | 15 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-22 | 2021-11-28 | 43 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-29 | 2021-12-05 | 18 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-12-06 | 2021-12-12 | 39 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-12-13 | 2021-12-19 | 43 | 22 | 2 | 0 | 9.1% | ok | | 2021-12-20 | 2021-12-26 | 38 | 30 | 6 | 0 | 20.0% | ok | | 2021-12-27 | 2022-01-02 | 78 | 43 | 6 | 0 | 14.0% | ok | | 2022-01-03 | 2022-01-09 | 94 | 43 | 7 | 0 | 16.3% | ok | | 2022-01-10 | 2022-01-16 | 183 | 93 | 15 | 1 | 16.1% | ok | | 2022-01-17 | 2022-01-23 | 177 | 86 | 9 | 0 | 10.5% | ok | | 2022-01-24 | 2022-01-30 | 154 | 65 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-01-31 | 2022-02-06 | 144 | 59 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-02-07 | 2022-02-13 | 148 | 60 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-02-14 | 2022-02-20 | 128 | 54 | 0 | 1 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-02-21 | 2022-02-27 | 55 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-02-28 | 2022-03-06 | 51 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-07 | 2022-03-13 | 113 | 52 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-14 | 2022-03-20 | 91 | 42 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-21 | 2022-03-27 | 113 | 47 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-28 | 2022-04-03 | 25 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-04 | 2022-04-10 | 119 | 47 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-11 | 2022-04-17 | 104 | 43 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-18 | 2022-04-24 | 116 | 53 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-25 | 2022-05-01 | 113 | 48 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-02 | 2022-05-08 | 114 | 53 | 2 | 0 | 3.8% | ok | | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-15 | 117 | 67 | 4 | 2 | 6.0% | ok | | 2022-05-16 | 2022-05-22 | 102 | 51 | 1 | 0 | 2.0% | ok | | 2022-05-23 | 2022-05-29 | 93 | 44 | 1 | 0 | 2.3% | ok | | 2022-05-30 | 2022-06-05 | 49 | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-06-06 | 2022-06-12 | 13 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-06-13 | 2022-06-19 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-06-20 | 2022-06-26 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-06-27 | 2022-07-03 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-07-04 | 2022-07-10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-07-11 | 2022-07-17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-07-18 | 2022-07-24 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-07-25 | 2022-07-31 | 8 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-08-01 | 2022-08-07 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-08-08 | 2022-08-14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-08-15 | 2022-08-21 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-08-22 | 2022-08-28 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-08-29 | 2022-09-04 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-09-05 | 2022-09-11 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-09-12 | 2022-09-18 | 11 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-09-19 | 2022-09-25 | 10 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-09-26 | 2022-10-02 | 12 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-03 | 2022-10-09 | 13 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-10 | 2022-10-16 | 14 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-17 | 2022-10-23 | 12 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-24 | 2022-10-30 | 12 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-31 | 2022-11-06 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-11-07 | 2022-11-13 | 12 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-11-14 | 2022-11-20 | 8 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-11-21 | 2022-11-27 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-11-28 | 2022-12-04 | 13 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-12-05 | 2022-12-11 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-12-12 | 2022-12-18 | 23 | 11 | 1 | 0 | 9.1% | ok | | 2022-12-19 | 2022-12-25 | 10 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-12-26 | 2023-01-01 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-01-02 | 2023-01-08 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | # 7,893 FLSP_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: FLSP_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2023-01-02 title: FLSP Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: NA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 4284 tokens: 7893 notes: summary_short: The "FLSP_pilot-data_summary" covers the FloodLAMP pilot program for FloodLAMP staff who tested themselves and their working colleagues along with their household members. The testing used pooled household and individual self-collection across various sites and configurations. The program ran for over 2 years (2020-12-11 to 2023-01-02), testing 524 tubes with 1,061 participant results and 25 positive tubes detected. CONTENT ## Plots ### Composite ![FLSP Weekly Composite](_plots/FLSP_weekly_composite.png) ### Percent Positive Tubes ![FLSP Weekly Percent Positives](_plots/FLSP_weekly_percent_positives.png) ### Volume ![FLSP Weekly Volume](_plots/FLSP_weekly_volume.png) ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [FLMP_APS_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ni39vn-fdXq0HrOgHbim_FK0OZidUv-YBLvzPwhhlFQ) - [FLMP_RFR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16CwPJ9LeknD8lJFTr-gJSx916WZaGEMbN6iKnlVx4dI) - [FLMP_RTR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16R3LlannlrGfiIIJq4T3EWjbtFLZrtPC4gkKycu8RXc) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `FLSP_curated_csvs/` - Stats key-values CSV: [FLSP_APS_stats_key-values.csv](FLSP_curated_csvs/FLSP_APS_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: [FLSP_RFR_weekly-summary.csv](FLSP_curated_csvs/FLSP_RFR_weekly-summary.csv) - Referral tests by person CSV: [FLSP_RTR_referral-tests-by-person.csv](FLSP_curated_csvs/FLSP_RTR_referral-tests-by-person.csv) ### XLSX downloads: - [FLMP_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx](../FLMP_pilot-data/FLMP_xlsx_downloads/FLMP_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [FLMP_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx](../FLMP_pilot-data/FLMP_xlsx_downloads/FLMP_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [FLMP_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx](../FLMP_pilot-data/FLMP_xlsx_downloads/FLMP_RTR_deID_PUB.xlsx) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | details | comments | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Files | RFR File | FLMP_RFR_deID_PUB | | | Stats | 1 | | Files | RTR File | FLMP_RTR_deID_PUB | | | Stats | 2 | | Files | RSR File | NONE | | | Stats | 3 | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 524 | initial run tubes only so excludes re-runs | | Stats | 5 | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 532 | includes re-runs | | Stats | 6 | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | 164 | | divide CRLN by time period 1-2 to 5-31 | Stats | 7 | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | 325 | | divide CRLN by time period 1-2 to 5-31 | Stats | 8 | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 785 | includes technical replicates (the same tube sample in multiple reactions in the same run) | divide CRLN by time period 1-2 to 5-31 - 135 is num FLSP tubes in CRLN time period and 1290 is num RFR audit rxns during CRLN time period | Stats | 9 | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 1,059 | counts individual samples in pools and excludes re-runs | | Stats | 11 | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 0 | tubes run and present in RFR but not in Appivo - created tube IDs that start with ARF | all during CRLN period so assign to CRLN | Stats | 12 | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 1,059 | Will be equal to the number of tubes tested if no pooling. | | Stats | 13 | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 2.0 | | | Stats | 14 | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | 8 | from RFR Audit Num Run Tubes | | Stats | 17 | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | 25 | from RFR Audit Num rxns (excl ctrls) | | Stats | 18 | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | 1.5% | re-run / initial | | Stats | 19 | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | 6 | | | Stats | 20 | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | 3.7% | | | Stats | 21 | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 25 | | count from VALUES Pos and Incl | Stats | 24 | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | 4.8% | | | Stats | 25 | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | 6 | Subtract off Re-tests | | Stats | 26 | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | 0 | Previous tested (including by FloodLAMP test) or reported positive | | Stats | 27 | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | 6 | | | Stats | 28 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 0 | | | Stats | 31 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | 0 | | | Stats | 32 | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 0 | | | Stats | 33 | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | 0.0% | | | Stats | 34 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | 0 | | 2022-05-08T00:00:00 | Stats | 35 | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | | | 2/4 unknown and 1 of those was in household of positives | Stats | 36 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | 0 | | | Stats | 37 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | 0 | | | Stats | 38 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | 3 | Count Result Correction Code=2.5 in preDel col AJ, or from RFR preExcl if not resulted as Incl in App | No 2.5 correction code, Sum AE - AF = 36 | Stats | 39 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 3 | includes re-runs - from RFR Audit only and excludes any APS only resulted inconclusives | | Stats | 40 | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 0.6% | includes re-runs | | Stats | 41 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 5 | Indiv or Pool, Cases used instead of Person to account for people being contracting COVID multiple times, and instead of Results to exclude re-tests | | Stats | 44 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 5 | Sometimes also termed Agree Positives - Include initial Inconclusive with Referral or Correspondence Positive | | Stats | 45 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 0 | | 2022-05-08T00:00:00 | Stats | 46 | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 100.0% | | | Stats | 47 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | 0 | | 2022-02-14T00:00:00 | Stats | 48 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | 0 | | | Stats | 49 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | 3 | | | Stats | 52 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | 3 | | | Stats | 53 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | 1 | Agree with Referral Test Positive (usually PCR or later Antigen) but Initial Antigen Negative | | Stats | 54 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | 33.3% | | | Stats | 55 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 1 | | | Stats | 56 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 33.3% | | | Stats | 57 | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | | From reviewing APS/Pos and Incl tab Unconfirmed FL Positives | | Stats | 60 | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | | From reviewing Referral Tests by Person and correspondence with Program Admin | | Stats | 61 | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | 70 | Includes UnknownPerson additions but not ARF tubes | | Stats | 64 | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | 9 | People who collect using the app | | Stats | 65 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | 9 | includes Inconclusive FloodLAMP result confirmed Positive by follow-up or Referral | | Stats | 68 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | 12.9% | | | Stats | 69 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | 12 | | | Stats | 70 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | 17.1% | | | Stats | 71 | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2020-12-11 | | | Stats | 74 | | Dates | End Run Date | 2023-01-02 | | | Stats | 75 | | Info | Test Operator | FloodLAMP | Who ran the actual testing (running LAMP reactions) | | Stats | 78 | | Info | Test Processing Site | Biolab, Garage, Office | Where the test processing (running LAMP reactions) was done | | Stats | 79 | | Info | Population Tested | Staff, Community | Description of the participants | | Stats | 80 | | Info | Configuration | Various | Equipment set used for test processing (relates to throughput and type of test tube used) | | Stats | 81 | | Info | Collection Type | Pooled Household, Individual | Pooled, Individual, or Both | | Stats | 82 | | Info | Self or HCW Collected | Self | HCW is Health Care Worker | | Stats | 83 | | Info | App Used? | Yes | Was the FloodLAMP Mobile App and Admin Portal utilized in the program | | Stats | 84 | | Info | Bring-up Type | In Person | How the initial setup and validation of the testing site was done | | Stats | 85 | | Info | Program Name | FloodLAMP Staff Plus | Shorthand name used internally at FloodLAMP and in other documents for this program | | Stats | 86 | | Info | Site | MBC Biolabs and Home Garage | Broader physical space where the testing was done and/or where participants congregated | | Stats | 87 | | Info | Site Type | Company | Type of entity or organization receiving the testing program | | Stats | 88 | | Info | Location | San Carlos, CA | Geographical location of where the FloodLAMP testing program occurred | | Stats | 89 | | Pooling | Number of Initial FloodLAMP Positive Pools | 3 | | | Stats | 92 | | Pooling | Number of Initial FloodLAMP Positive Pools with Indiv Deconvolution | 3 | | | Stats | 93 | | Pooling | Number of Initial FloodLAMP Positive Pools Confirmed by Referral Testing | 3 | | | Stats | 94 | | Pooling | Number of Initial Confirmed FL Pools where the organization member (i.e. parent or other child) was Positive | 1 | | | Stats | 95 | | Pooling | Number of Initial Confirmed FL Pools where Positive Individual was not the organization member (i.e. parent or other child) | 2 | | | Stats | 96 | | Pooling | % Confirmed Positive Pools where Positive Individual was not the organization member (i.e. parent or other child) | 66.7% | | | Stats | 97 | ### Weekly summary | week_start_date | week_end_date | participants_n | tubes_n | positive_tubes_n | inconclusive_tubes_n | pct_positive | pct_positive_status | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2020-12-07 | 2020-12-13 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2020-12-14 | 2020-12-20 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2020-12-21 | 2020-12-27 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2020-12-28 | 2021-01-03 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-01-04 | 2021-01-10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-01-11 | 2021-01-17 | 36 | 15 | 3 | 0 | 20.0% | ok | | 2021-01-18 | 2021-01-24 | 49 | 24 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-01-25 | 2021-01-31 | 45 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-02-01 | 2021-02-07 | 31 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-02-08 | 2021-02-14 | 40 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-02-15 | 2021-02-21 | 14 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-02-22 | 2021-02-28 | 24 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-03-01 | 2021-03-07 | 35 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-03-08 | 2021-03-14 | 30 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-03-15 | 2021-03-21 | 16 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-03-22 | 2021-03-28 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-03-29 | 2021-04-04 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-04-05 | 2021-04-11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-04-12 | 2021-04-18 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-04-19 | 2021-04-25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-04-26 | 2021-05-02 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-05-03 | 2021-05-09 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-05-10 | 2021-05-16 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-05-17 | 2021-05-23 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-05-24 | 2021-05-30 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-05-31 | 2021-06-06 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-06-07 | 2021-06-13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-06-14 | 2021-06-20 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-06-21 | 2021-06-27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-06-28 | 2021-07-04 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-07-05 | 2021-07-11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-07-12 | 2021-07-18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-07-19 | 2021-07-25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-07-26 | 2021-08-01 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-08-02 | 2021-08-08 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-08-09 | 2021-08-15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-08-16 | 2021-08-22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-08-23 | 2021-08-29 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-08-30 | 2021-09-05 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-09-06 | 2021-09-12 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-09-13 | 2021-09-19 | 9 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-09-20 | 2021-09-26 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-09-27 | 2021-10-03 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2021-10-04 | 2021-10-10 | 10 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-11 | 2021-10-17 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-18 | 2021-10-24 | 15 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-25 | 2021-10-31 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-01 | 2021-11-07 | 19 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-08 | 2021-11-14 | 15 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-15 | 2021-11-21 | 15 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-22 | 2021-11-28 | 43 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-29 | 2021-12-05 | 18 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-12-06 | 2021-12-12 | 39 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-12-13 | 2021-12-19 | 43 | 22 | 2 | 0 | 9.1% | ok | | 2021-12-20 | 2021-12-26 | 34 | 29 | 6 | 0 | 20.7% | ok | | 2021-12-27 | 2022-01-02 | 44 | 31 | 4 | 0 | 12.9% | ok | | 2022-01-03 | 2022-01-09 | 9 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 16.7% | ok | | 2022-01-10 | 2022-01-16 | 10 | 10 | 4 | 0 | 40.0% | ok | | 2022-01-17 | 2022-01-23 | 15 | 15 | 4 | 0 | 26.7% | ok | | 2022-01-24 | 2022-01-30 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-01-31 | 2022-02-06 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-02-07 | 2022-02-13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-02-14 | 2022-02-20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-02-21 | 2022-02-27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-02-28 | 2022-03-06 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-03-07 | 2022-03-13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-03-14 | 2022-03-20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-03-21 | 2022-03-27 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-03-28 | 2022-04-03 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-04 | 2022-04-10 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-11 | 2022-04-17 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-18 | 2022-04-24 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-04-25 | 2022-05-01 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-02 | 2022-05-08 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-15 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-16 | 2022-05-22 | 10 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-23 | 2022-05-29 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-30 | 2022-06-05 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-06-06 | 2022-06-12 | 13 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-06-13 | 2022-06-19 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-06-20 | 2022-06-26 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-06-27 | 2022-07-03 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-07-04 | 2022-07-10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-07-11 | 2022-07-17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-07-18 | 2022-07-24 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-07-25 | 2022-07-31 | 8 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-08-01 | 2022-08-07 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-08-08 | 2022-08-14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-08-15 | 2022-08-21 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-08-22 | 2022-08-28 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-08-29 | 2022-09-04 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-09-05 | 2022-09-11 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-09-12 | 2022-09-18 | 11 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-09-19 | 2022-09-25 | 10 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-09-26 | 2022-10-02 | 12 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-03 | 2022-10-09 | 13 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-10 | 2022-10-16 | 14 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-17 | 2022-10-23 | 12 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-24 | 2022-10-30 | 12 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-10-31 | 2022-11-06 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-11-07 | 2022-11-13 | 12 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-11-14 | 2022-11-20 | 8 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-11-21 | 2022-11-27 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-11-28 | 2022-12-04 | 13 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-12-05 | 2022-12-11 | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-12-12 | 2022-12-18 | 23 | 11 | 1 | 0 | 9.1% | ok | | 2022-12-19 | 2022-12-25 | 10 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-12-26 | 2023-01-01 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2023-01-02 | 2023-01-08 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | ### Referral tests by person | participant_id | num_sequential_referral_tests | num_floodlamp_results_pos_or_incl | floodlamp_tube_id | floodlamp_test_result | floodlamp_test_date | first_referral_test_date | referral_overall_result | first_referral_test_type | first_referral_test_result | second_referral_test_type | second_referral_test_result | third_referral_test_type | third_referral_test_result | antigen_neg_with_other_positive_flag | referral_eval | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | FLMP183184 | 2 | 1 | AH7754 | Positive | 2022-12-15 | 2022-12-15 | Positive | LAMP Device | Positive | Rapid Antigen | Negative | | | 1 | FL pooled positive was confirmed with a Lucira that Antigen missed - see detailed report on referral testing FLSP Referral Test for 2022-12-15 Gary and Mithrabut confounding is that same 2 people in pool were Neg (AG2168) in a collection an hour later | | FLMP197976 | 3 | 0 | 351430A | Negative | 2021-01-15 | 2021-01-15 | Positive | Direct PCR | Negative | Direct PCR | Negative | Lab Purif PCR | Positive | 0 | Positive by Lab Purif PCR collected 2 days after FL initial pooled positive - had high exposure to person in pool who was positive | | FLMP233123 | 2 | 1 | MA26 | Positive | 2022-01-11 | 2022-01-12 | Positive | Lab PCR | Positive | Lab PCR | Negative | | | 0 | Was positive in duplicate on FL and confirmed by one LAB Purif PCR test (other said Neg) - see case report. | | FLMP268140 | 1 | 0 | 351430 | Positive | 2021-01-15 | 2021-01-15 | Positive | Direct PCR | Positive | | | | | 0 | Initial pooled positive that detected an unknown positive. | | FLMP466389 | 3 | 3 | 351430B | Positive | 2021-01-15 | 2021-01-16 | Positive | Direct PCR | Positive | Lab Purif PCR | Positive | Direct PCR | Positive | 0 | Confirmed positive using DirectPCR and also by a referral lab PCR test | | FLMP618864 | 2 | 0 | AH7754 | Positive | 2022-12-15 | 2022-12-15 | Negative | LAMP Device | Negative | Antigen | Negative | | | 0 | Other member of pooled positive that was neg by referral tests | | FLMP619442 | 1 | 8 | MA1215 | Positive | 2021-12-18 | 2021-12-18 | Positive | Antigen | Positive | | | | | 0 | FL pooled test during routine screening detected an unknown positive - confirmed right away by antigen test. | | FLMP964950 | 11 | 4 | MAX288FIX | Positive | 2021-12-31 | 2021-12-31 | Positive | Antigen | Negative | LAMP Device | Negative | Rapid Antigen | Positive | 1 | See Case Report 2022-01-01_MS Case Report - New Years Eve.pdf - was first Pos by FloodLAMP then was Neg by 3 molecular tests (Lucira, Detect, and Accula), before turning Pos by antigen 2 days later | # 2,673 FTFC_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: FTFC_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2021-06-18 title: FTFC Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: NA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 1891 tokens: 2673 notes: summary_short: The "FTFC_pilot-data_summary" covers the FloodLAMP pilot program at the FTFC Eagles EMS Leadership Conference in Ft. Lauderdale, FL, where FloodLAMP staff provided pooled and individual self-collection testing for EMS personnel and conference attendees at the Hard Rock Hotel, Fort Lauderdale. The short 5-day program (2021-06-14 to 2021-06-18) tested 61 tubes from 195 participants with no positive tubes detected. The pop-up "lab" was brought out in a suitcase and setup in a hotel storage room where the sample processing was done. CONTENT ## Plots ### Composite ![FTFC Weekly Composite](_plots/FTFC_weekly_composite.png) ### Percent Positive Tubes ![FTFC Weekly Percent Positives](_plots/FTFC_weekly_percent_positives.png) ### Volume ![FTFC Weekly Volume](_plots/FTFC_weekly_volume.png) ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [FTFC_STS_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17BcQljnvgzdSLB2KzgH0rrUvjOd44f9CfTAL5_9CTS4) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `FTFC_curated_csvs/` - Stats key-values CSV: [FTFC_STS_stats_key-values.csv](FTFC_curated_csvs/FTFC_STS_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: _not available_ - Referral tests by person CSV: _not available_ ### XLSX downloads: - [FTFC_STS_PUB.xlsx](FTFC_xlsx_downloads/FTFC_STS_PUB.xlsx) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | value_status | details | comments | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Files | RFR or APS Files | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 1 | | Files | RTR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 2 | | Files | RSR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 3 | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 61 | ok | initial run tubes only so excludes re-runs | all data from gsheet: Data Stats - Compilation PRE DP - Compilation tab (APS RAW data not available) | Stats | 5 | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 61 | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 6 | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | | not_available | | | Stats | 7 | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | | not_available | | | Stats | 8 | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 61 | ok | includes technical replicates (the same tube sample in multiple reactions in the same run) | | Stats | 9 | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 195 | ok | counts individual samples in pools and excludes re-runs | | Stats | 11 | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 0 | ok | tubes run and present in RFR but not in Appivo - created tube IDs that start with ARF | | Stats | 12 | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 195 | ok | Will be equal to the number of tubes tested if no pooling. | | Stats | 13 | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 3.2 | ok | | | Stats | 14 | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | | not_available | from RFR Audit Num Run Tubes | | Stats | 17 | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | | not_available | from RFR Audit Num rxns (excl ctrls) | | Stats | 18 | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | | not_available | re-run / initial | | Stats | 19 | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | | not_available | | | Stats | 20 | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | | not_available | | | Stats | 21 | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 24 | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 25 | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | 0 | ok | Subtract off Re-tests | | Stats | 26 | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | 0 | ok | Previous tested (including by FloodLAMP test) or reported positive | | Stats | 27 | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 28 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 31 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | | not_available | | Not Applicable - No RFR | Stats | 32 | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 33 | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 34 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 35 | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | | denom_zero | | denom zero | Stats | 36 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 37 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 38 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | 0 | ok | Count Result Correction Code=2.5 in preDel col AJ, or from RFR preExcl if not resulted as Incl in App | | Stats | 39 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 0 | ok | includes re-runs - from RFR Audit only and excludes any APS only resulted inconclusives | | Stats | 40 | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 0.0% | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 41 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 0 | ok | Indiv or Pool, Cases used instead of Person to account for people being contracting COVID multiple times, and instead of Results to exclude re-tests | | Stats | 44 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 0 | ok | Sometimes also termed Agree Positives - Include initial Inconclusive with Referral or Correspondence Positive | | Stats | 45 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 46 | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | | denom_zero | | denom zero | Stats | 47 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 48 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 49 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | | not_available | | Not Applicable - no positives | Stats | 52 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | | not_available | | Not Applicable - no positives | Stats | 53 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | | not_available | Agree with Referral Test Positive (usually PCR or later Antigen) but Initial Antigen Negative | Not Applicable - no positives | Stats | 54 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | | not_available | | Not Applicable - no positives | Stats | 55 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | | not_available | | Not Applicable - no positives | Stats | 56 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | | not_available | | | Stats | 57 | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | 0 | ok | From reviewing APS/Pos and Incl tab Unconfirmed FL Positives | | Stats | 60 | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | 0 | ok | From reviewing Referral Tests by Person and correspondence with Program Admin | | Stats | 61 | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | 195 | ok | Includes UnknownPerson additions but not ARF tubes | | Stats | 64 | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | 4 | ok | People who collect using the app | | Stats | 65 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | 0 | ok | includes Inconclusive FloodLAMP result confirmed Positive by follow-up or Referral | | Stats | 68 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 69 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 70 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 71 | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2021-06-14 | ok | | | Stats | 74 | | Dates | End Run Date | 2021-06-18 | ok | | | Stats | 75 | | Info | Test Operator | FloodLAMP | ok | Who ran the actual testing (running LAMP reactions) | | Stats | 78 | | Info | Test Processing Site | Hotel Storage Room | ok | Where the test processing (running LAMP reactions) was done | | Stats | 79 | | Info | Population Tested | EMS, Conference Attendees | ok | Description of the participants | | Stats | 80 | | Info | Configuration | Standard | ok | Equipment set used for test processing (relates to throughput and type of test tube used) | | Stats | 81 | | Info | Collection Type | Pooled & Individual | ok | Pooled, Individual, or Both | | Stats | 82 | | Info | Self or HCW Collected | Self | ok | HCW is Health Care Worker | | Stats | 83 | | Info | App Used? | Yes | ok | Was the FloodLAMP Mobile App and Admin Portal utilized in the program | | Stats | 84 | | Info | Bring-up Type | In Person | ok | How the initial setup and validation of the testing site was done | | Stats | 85 | | Info | Program Name | FTFC | ok | Shorthand name used internally at FloodLAMP and in other documents for this program | | Stats | 86 | | Info | Site | Hard Rock Hotel | ok | Broader physical space where the testing was done and/or where participants congregated | | Stats | 87 | | Info | Site Type | Conference | ok | Type of entity or organization receiving the testing program | | Stats | 88 | | Info | Location | Ft. Lauderdale, FL | ok | Geographical location of where the FloodLAMP testing program occurred | | Stats | 89 | | Info | Event | FTFC Eagles - EMS Leadership Conference | ok | | | Stats | 90 | ### Weekly summary _Weekly summary CSV not found for this site._ # 2,742 KENT_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: KENT_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2021-07-29 title: KENT Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: NA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 1929 tokens: 2742 notes: summary_short: The "KENT_pilot-data_summary" covers the FloodLAMP pilot program for a youth camp testing program at Camp Kenmont in Kent, CT, where volunteers and camp staff operated FloodLAMP for pooled HCW-collected testing of young adult campers and staff, brought up remotely, and using the FloodLAMP mobile app. The 1-month summer program (2021-06-28 to 2021-07-29) tested 190 tubes from 696 participant results (avg pool size 3.7) with 2 positive tubes detected. CONTENT ## Plots ### Composite ![KENT Weekly Composite](_plots/KENT_weekly_composite.png) ### Percent Positive Tubes ![KENT Weekly Percent Positives](_plots/KENT_weekly_percent_positives.png) ### Volume ![KENT Weekly Volume](_plots/KENT_weekly_volume.png) ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [KENT_STS_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1J1Gqc0KAQX_xxiSJ5MR8DVjGzFSfDR-ckCKRNDYmDNQ) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `KENT_curated_csvs/` - Stats key-values CSV: [KENT_STS_stats_key-values.csv](KENT_curated_csvs/KENT_STS_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: _not available_ - Referral tests by person CSV: _not available_ ### XLSX downloads: - [KENT_STS_PUB.xlsx](KENT_xlsx_downloads/KENT_STS_PUB.xlsx) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | value_status | details | comments | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Files | RFR or APS Files | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 1 | | Files | RTR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 2 | | Files | RSR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 3 | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 190 | ok | initial run tubes only so excludes re-runs | unless otherwise specified - all data from gsheet: Data Stats - Compilation PRE DP - Compilation tab (APS RAW data not available) | Stats | 5 | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 191 | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 6 | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | 3 | ok | | 4 - 2 bunk and 2 plate runs (6-28, 6-30, and 7-29) | Stats | 7 | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | 190 | ok | | | Stats | 8 | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 193 | ok | includes technical replicates (the same tube sample in multiple reactions in the same run) | | Stats | 9 | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 696 | ok | counts individual samples in pools and excludes re-runs | from Compilation data | Stats | 11 | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 0 | ok | tubes run and present in RFR but not in Appivo - created tube IDs that start with ARF | | Stats | 12 | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 696 | ok | Will be equal to the number of tubes tested if no pooling. | | Stats | 13 | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 3.7 | ok | | | Stats | 14 | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | 1 | ok | from RFR Audit Num Run Tubes | Assume one initial inconclusive tube was rerun and not included in 190 in Compilation because that was from Appivo data | Stats | 17 | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | 3 | ok | from RFR Audit Num rxns (excl ctrls) | Assume rerun was in triplicate | Stats | 18 | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | 0.5% | ok | re-run / initial | | Stats | 19 | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 20 | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | 33.3% | ok | | | Stats | 21 | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 2 | ok | | | Stats | 24 | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | 1.1% | ok | | | Stats | 25 | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | 1 | ok | Subtract off Re-tests | | Stats | 26 | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | 1 | ok | Previous tested (including by FloodLAMP test) or reported positive | tested twice once on 6-28 in bunk run and other on 6-30 in plate full camp run | Stats | 27 | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 28 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 31 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 32 | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 33 | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 34 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 35 | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | | denom_zero | | denom zero | Stats | 36 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 37 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 38 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | 1 | ok | Count Result Correction Code=2.5 in preDel col AJ, or from RFR preExcl if not resulted as Incl in App | | Stats | 39 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 1 | ok | includes re-runs - from RFR Audit only and excludes any APS only resulted inconclusives | | Stats | 40 | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 0.5% | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 41 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 1 | ok | Indiv or Pool, Cases used instead of Person to account for people being contracting COVID multiple times, and instead of Results to exclude re-tests | | Stats | 44 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 1 | ok | Sometimes also termed Agree Positives - Include initial Inconclusive with Referral or Correspondence Positive | | Stats | 45 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 46 | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 100.0% | ok | | | Stats | 47 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 48 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 49 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 52 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 53 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | 1 | ok | Agree with Referral Test Positive (usually PCR or later Antigen) but Initial Antigen Negative | | Stats | 54 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | 100.0% | ok | | | Stats | 55 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 56 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 57 | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | 0 | ok | From reviewing APS/Pos and Incl tab Unconfirmed FL Positives | | Stats | 60 | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | 0 | ok | From reviewing Referral Tests by Person and correspondence with Program Admin | | Stats | 61 | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | 342 | ok | Includes UnknownPerson additions but not ARF tubes | Equal to number of participants in 89 tubes in KENT_2021-06-30_App data import 6-30 8:30am | Stats | 64 | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | 10 | ok | People who collect using the app | | Stats | 65 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | 1 | ok | includes Inconclusive FloodLAMP result confirmed Positive by follow-up or Referral | | Stats | 68 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | 0.3% | ok | | | Stats | 69 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 70 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | 0.3% | ok | | | Stats | 71 | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2021-06-28 | ok | | | Stats | 74 | | Dates | End Run Date | 2021-07-29 | ok | | | Stats | 75 | | Info | Test Operator | Volunteers, Camp Staff | ok | Who ran the actual testing (running LAMP reactions) | | Stats | 78 | | Info | Test Processing Site | On Site Room | ok | Where the test processing (running LAMP reactions) was done | | Stats | 79 | | Info | Population Tested | Young Adult Campers, Staff | ok | Description of the participants | | Stats | 80 | | Info | Configuration | Standard | ok | Equipment set used for test processing (relates to throughput and type of test tube used) | | Stats | 81 | | Info | Collection Type | Pooled | ok | Pooled, Individual, or Both | | Stats | 82 | | Info | Self or HCW Collected | HCW | ok | HCW is Health Care Worker | | Stats | 83 | | Info | App Used? | Yes | ok | Was the FloodLAMP Mobile App and Admin Portal utilized in the program | | Stats | 84 | | Info | Bring-up Type | Remote (NSVD) | ok | How the initial setup and validation of the testing site was done | | Stats | 85 | | Info | Program Name | Kent | ok | Shorthand name used internally at FloodLAMP and in other documents for this program | | Stats | 86 | | Info | Site | Camp Kenmont | ok | Broader physical space where the testing was done and/or where participants congregated | | Stats | 87 | | Info | Site Type | Youth Camp | ok | Type of entity or organization receiving the testing program | | Stats | 88 | | Info | Location | Kent, CT | ok | Geographical location of where the FloodLAMP testing program occurred | | Stats | 89 | ### Weekly summary _Weekly summary CSV not found for this site._ # 3,617 NDHM_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: NDHM_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2022-10-03 title: NDHM Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: NA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 2266 tokens: 3617 notes: summary_short: The "NDHM_pilot-data_summary" covers the FloodLAMP pilot program in a K-12 school in Needham, MA that used FloodLAMP for pooled household self-collection testing, with on-site test processing by school staff using a standard configuration. The program tested students, staff, and their families over 5 months (2022-05-02 to 2022-10-03), running 80 tubes from 190 participant results with no positive tubes detected. This program was initiated late in the pandemic and did not ramp up to significant testing volumes. CONTENT ## Plots ### Composite ![NDHM Weekly Composite](_plots/NDHM_weekly_composite.png) ### Percent Positive Tubes ![NDHM Weekly Percent Positives](_plots/NDHM_weekly_percent_positives.png) ### Volume ![NDHM Weekly Volume](_plots/NDHM_weekly_volume.png) ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [NDHM_APS_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19gjZ2g6wjAQfB0WsPoEvDEr3R4sIK6sjT3g2ofL9Qeo) - [NDHM_RFR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SUcXSa-1wQggm8krA_VdFDp4_FCO_v1Xfrp78ITCjjQ) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `NDHM_curated_csvs/` - Stats key-values CSV: [NDHM_APS_stats_key-values.csv](NDHM_curated_csvs/NDHM_APS_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: [NDHM_APS_weekly-summary.csv](NDHM_curated_csvs/NDHM_APS_weekly-summary.csv) - Referral tests by person CSV: _not available_ ### XLSX downloads: - [NDHM_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx](NDHM_xlsx_downloads/NDHM_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [NDHM_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx](NDHM_xlsx_downloads/NDHM_RFR_deID_PUB.xlsx) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | value_status | details | comments | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Files | RFR File | NDHM_RFR_deID_PUB | ok | | | Stats | 1 | | Files | RTR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 2 | | Files | RSR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 3 | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 80 | ok | initial run tubes only so excludes re-runs | | Stats | 5 | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 85 | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 6 | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | 15 | ok | | | Stats | 7 | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 8 | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 109 | ok | includes technical replicates (the same tube sample in multiple reactions in the same run) | | Stats | 9 | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 190 | ok | counts individual samples in pools and excludes re-runs | | Stats | 11 | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 2 | ok | tubes run and present in RFR but not in Appivo - created tube IDs that start with ARF | | Stats | 12 | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 192 | ok | Will be equal to the number of tubes tested if no pooling. | | Stats | 13 | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 2.4 | ok | | | Stats | 14 | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | 5 | ok | from RFR Audit Num Run Tubes | | Stats | 17 | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | 18 | ok | from RFR Audit Num rxns (excl ctrls) | | Stats | 18 | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | 6.2% | ok | re-run / initial | | Stats | 19 | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | 3 | ok | | | Stats | 20 | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | 20.0% | ok | | | Stats | 21 | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 24 | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | | not_available | | | Stats | 25 | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | 0 | ok | Subtract off Re-tests | | Stats | 26 | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | 0 | ok | Previous tested (including by FloodLAMP test) or reported positive | | Stats | 27 | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 28 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 31 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 32 | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 33 | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | | not_available | | | Stats | 34 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 35 | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | | not_available | | | Stats | 36 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 37 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 38 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | 3 | ok | Count Result Correction Code=2.5 in preDel col AJ, or from RFR preExcl if not resulted as Incl in App | | Stats | 39 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 4 | ok | includes re-runs - from RFR Audit only and excludes any APS only resulted inconclusives | | Stats | 40 | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 4.7% | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 41 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 0 | ok | Indiv or Pool, Cases used instead of Person to account for people being contracting COVID multiple times, and instead of Results to exclude re-tests | | Stats | 44 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 0 | ok | Sometimes also termed Agree Positives - Include initial Inconclusive with Referral or Correspondence Positive | | Stats | 45 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 46 | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | | denom_zero | | denom zero | Stats | 47 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 48 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 49 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | | not_available | | Not Applicable - no positives | Stats | 52 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | | not_available | | Not Applicable - no positives | Stats | 53 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | | not_available | Agree with Referral Test Positive (usually PCR or later Antigen) but Initial Antigen Negative | Not Applicable - no positives | Stats | 54 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | | not_available | | Not Applicable - no positives | Stats | 55 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | | not_available | | Not Applicable - no positives | Stats | 56 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | | not_available | | | Stats | 57 | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | 0 | ok | From reviewing APS/Pos and Incl tab Unconfirmed FL Positives | | Stats | 60 | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | 0 | ok | From reviewing Referral Tests by Person and correspondence with Program Admin | | Stats | 61 | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | 130 | ok | Includes UnknownPerson additions but not ARF tubes | | Stats | 64 | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | 19 | ok | People who collect using the app | | Stats | 65 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | 0 | ok | includes Inconclusive FloodLAMP result confirmed Positive by follow-up or Referral | | Stats | 68 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 69 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 70 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 71 | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2022-05-02 | ok | | | Stats | 74 | | Dates | End Run Date | 2022-10-03 | ok | | | Stats | 75 | | Info | Test Operator | Needham Beth Shalom School | ok | Who ran the actual testing (running LAMP reactions) | | Stats | 78 | | Info | Test Processing Site | Office Space | ok | Where the test processing (running LAMP reactions) was done | | Stats | 79 | | Info | Population Tested | Students, Staff, Families | ok | Description of the participants | | Stats | 80 | | Info | Configuration | Standard | ok | Equipment set used for test processing (relates to throughput and type of test tube used) | | Stats | 81 | | Info | Collection Type | Pooled Household | ok | Pooled, Individual, or Both | | Stats | 82 | | Info | Self or HCW Collected | Self | ok | HCW is Health Care Worker | | Stats | 83 | | Info | App Used? | Yes | ok | Was the FloodLAMP Mobile App and Admin Portal utilized in the program | | Stats | 84 | | Info | Bring-up Type | In Person & Remote | ok | How the initial setup and validation of the testing site was done | | Stats | 85 | | Info | Program Name | Needham | ok | Shorthand name used internally at FloodLAMP and in other documents for this program | | Stats | 86 | | Info | Site | Needham Beth Shalom School | ok | Broader physical space where the testing was done and/or where participants congregated | | Stats | 87 | | Info | Site Type | K-12 School | ok | Type of entity or organization receiving the testing program | | Stats | 88 | | Info | Location | Needham, MA | ok | Geographical location of where the FloodLAMP testing program occurred | | Stats | 89 | ### Weekly summary | week_start_date | week_end_date | participants_n | tubes_n | positive_tubes_n | inconclusive_tubes_n | pct_positive | pct_positive_status | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2022-05-02 | 2022-05-08 | 34 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-09 | 2022-05-15 | 22 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-16 | 2022-05-22 | 26 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-23 | 2022-05-29 | 22 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-05-30 | 2022-06-05 | 28 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-06-06 | 2022-06-12 | 19 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-06-13 | 2022-06-19 | 12 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-06-20 | 2022-06-26 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-06-27 | 2022-07-03 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-07-04 | 2022-07-10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-07-11 | 2022-07-17 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-07-18 | 2022-07-24 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-07-25 | 2022-07-31 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-08-01 | 2022-08-07 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-08-08 | 2022-08-14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-08-15 | 2022-08-21 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-08-22 | 2022-08-28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-08-29 | 2022-09-04 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-09-05 | 2022-09-11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-09-12 | 2022-09-18 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2022-09-19 | 2022-09-25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-09-26 | 2022-10-02 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | denom_zero | | 2022-10-03 | 2022-10-09 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | # 3,337 ROSA_pilot-data_summary.md METADATA last updated: 2026-03-23 file_name: ROSA_pilot-data_summary.md file_date: 2021-12-17 title: ROSA Pilot Data Summary category: pilots subcategory: pilot-data tags: source_file_type: csv xfile_type: xlsx gfile_url: NA xfile_github_download_url: NA pdf_gdrive_url: NA pdf_github_url: NA license: CC BY 4.0 - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ words: 2179 tokens: 3337 notes: summary_short: The "ROSA_pilot-data_summary" covers the FloodLAMP pilot program for a TV production in Davie, FL, where Davie Fire and Rescue operated surveillance testing for individual (non-pooled) HCW-collected testing of TV production staff at the production set. The program ran over 3 months (2021-09-28 to 2021-12-17), testing 781 tubes from 156 unique individuals with 1 positive tube detected, which was confirmed with antigen testing. CONTENT ## Plots ### Composite ![ROSA Weekly Composite](_plots/ROSA_weekly_composite.png) ### Percent Positive Tubes ![ROSA Weekly Percent Positives](_plots/ROSA_weekly_percent_positives.png) ### Volume ![ROSA Weekly Volume](_plots/ROSA_weekly_volume.png) ## Files ### Google Sheets URLs - [ROSA_APS_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pUr7UFD7gL4bUr6uBSe-H4rqQol5CwoGmRylvzEodEc) - [ROSA_RSR_deID_PUB](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12oIWiJjYQ8z--l4YUoXnmq9m-1pF0feO6-mnHIsSdiA) ### Curated CSVs - Curated CSV folder: `ROSA_curated_csvs/` - Stats key-values CSV: [ROSA_APS_stats_key-values.csv](ROSA_curated_csvs/ROSA_APS_stats_key-values.csv) - Weekly summary CSV: [ROSA_APS_weekly-summary.csv](ROSA_curated_csvs/ROSA_APS_weekly-summary.csv) - Referral tests by person CSV: _not available_ ### XLSX downloads: - [ROSA_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx](ROSA_xlsx_downloads/ROSA_APS_deID_PUB.xlsx) - [ROSA_RSR_deID_PUB.xlsx](ROSA_xlsx_downloads/ROSA_RSR_deID_PUB.xlsx) ## Key tables ### Stats key-values | section | metric | value | value_status | details | comments | source_sheet | source_row | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Files | RFR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 1 | | Files | RTR File | NONE | ok | | | Stats | 2 | | Files | RSR File | ROSA_RSR_deID_PUB | ok | | | Stats | 3 | | Overall | Number of Tubes Tested (initial only - no re-runs) | 781 | ok | initial run tubes only so excludes re-runs | only indiv testing - no pools. total 785 from RSR - Run Summary Report that draws from google form of weekly testing summary provided by test Admin | Stats | 5 | | Overall | Number of Tube Tests Run (includes re-runs) | 781 | ok | includes re-runs | no RFR so no info on re-runs | Stats | 6 | | Overall | Number of Initial Runs | 53 | ok | | use collection date assuming all tubes run same day | Stats | 7 | | Overall | Number of APS Only Tubes run | 781 | ok | | No RFR so all tubes are APS Only | Stats | 8 | | Overall | Number of Test Reactions (RFR plus APS only tubes run) | 781 | ok | includes technical replicates (the same tube sample in multiple reactions in the same run) | | Stats | 9 | | Overall | Number of Participant Results | 781 | ok | counts individual samples in pools and excludes re-runs | | Stats | 11 | | Overall | Number of ARF Tubes | 0 | ok | tubes run and present in RFR but not in Appivo - created tube IDs that start with ARF | | Stats | 12 | | Overall | Sum of Participant Results plus ARF Tubes | 781 | ok | Will be equal to the number of tubes tested if no pooling. | | Stats | 13 | | Overall | Average Pool Level (excludes ARF) | 1.0 | ok | | | Stats | 14 | | Re-runs | Number of Run Tubes (re-runs only) | | not_available | from RFR Audit Num Run Tubes | | Stats | 17 | | Re-runs | Number of Reactions (re-runs only) | | not_available | from RFR Audit Num rxns (excl ctrls) | | Stats | 18 | | Re-runs | Re-run % of Tubes | | not_available | re-run / initial | | Stats | 19 | | Re-runs | Number of Initial Runs with Re-runs | | not_available | | | Stats | 20 | | Re-runs | % Initial Runs with Re-runs | | not_available | | | Stats | 21 | | Positives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Positive | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 24 | | Positives | % of Tubes Positives (Final Result) | 0.1% | ok | | | Stats | 25 | | Positives | Number of Cases with Final Result Positive (Indiv or Pool) | 1 | ok | Subtract off Re-tests | | Stats | 26 | | Positives | Known Positive Cases | 0 | ok | Previous tested (including by FloodLAMP test) or reported positive | | Stats | 27 | | Positives | Unknown Positive Cases | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 28 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Final Result Inconclusive | 0 | ok | | from RSR - Run Summary Report that draws from google form of weekly testing summary provided by test Admin | Stats | 31 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes in RFR Audit Inconclusive not in Appivo Final Results | | not_available | | Not Applicable - No RFR | Stats | 32 | | Inconclusives | Total Number of Inconclusive Tubes | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 33 | | Inconclusives | % of Tubes Inconclusive | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 34 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes resolved Positive by Referral Test or Correspondence | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 35 | | Inconclusives | % Inconclusives resolved Positive by Referral Tests | | denom_zero | | denom zero | Stats | 36 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with Referral Test or Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 37 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Tubes with no Referral Test result or Correspondence | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 38 | | Inconclusives | Number of Tubes with Initial Inconclusives and Re-run Negative | 1 | ok | Count Result Correction Code=2.5 in preDel col AJ, or from RFR preExcl if not resulted as Incl in App | | Stats | 39 | | Inconclusives | Number of Inconclusive Test Run Calls | 1 | ok | includes re-runs - from RFR Audit only and excludes any APS only resulted inconclusives | | Stats | 40 | | Inconclusives | % Tube Tests Run Called Inconclusive | 0.1% | ok | includes re-runs | | Stats | 41 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of FloodLAMP Cases with Referral Tests or Correspondence | 1 | ok | Indiv or Pool, Cases used instead of Person to account for people being contracting COVID multiple times, and instead of Results to exclude re-tests | Single pos case was confirmed with same day pos antigen test (RT Jan26 email) | Stats | 44 | | Referrals and Correspondence | Number of Referral Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives | 1 | ok | Sometimes also termed Agree Positives - Include initial Inconclusive with Referral or Correspondence Positive | | Stats | 45 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 46 | | Referrals and Correspondence | % FloodLAMP Positive or Inconclusive with Referral / Correspondence Positive | 100.0% | ok | | | Stats | 47 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives but Referral / Correspondence Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 48 | | Referrals and Correspondence | FL Inconclusives with No Referral Tests or Correspondence | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 49 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Referral Antigen Tests (including non-Same Day) | 1 | ok | | Single pos case was confirmed with same day pos antigen test (RT Jan26 email) | Stats | 52 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Test Person Cases with Same Day Referral Antigen Tests | 1 | ok | | Single pos case was confirmed with same day pos antigen test (RT Jan26 email) | Stats | 53 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases with Same Day Antigen Negative | 0 | ok | Agree with Referral Test Positive (usually PCR or later Antigen) but Initial Antigen Negative | | Stats | 54 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives with Same Day Antigen Negative | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 55 | | Comparison to Antigen | Number of FloodLAMP Positive Test Person Cases confirmed with Referral Tests but Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 0 | ok | | | Stats | 56 | | Comparison to Antigen | % Confirmed FloodLAMP Positives that were Antigen and Other Non-Antigen Test Negative | 0.0% | ok | | | Stats | 57 | | False Calls | False Positives Final Results | 0 | ok | From reviewing APS/Pos and Incl tab Unconfirmed FL Positives | | Stats | 60 | | False Calls | False Negative Final Results (Suspected) | 0 | ok | From reviewing Referral Tests by Person and correspondence with Program Admin | | Stats | 61 | | People | Number of Unique Individuals Tested | 156 | ok | Includes UnknownPerson additions but not ARF tubes | | Stats | 64 | | People | Number of Unique Sponsors | 2 | ok | People who collect using the app | | Stats | 65 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive | 1 | ok | includes Inconclusive FloodLAMP result confirmed Positive by follow-up or Referral | | Stats | 68 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (excluding pools not deconv) | 0.6% | ok | | | Stats | 69 | | Positivity | Number of Unique Individual Tested FloodLAMP Positive (including if in a positive pool) | 1 | ok | | | Stats | 70 | | Positivity | % of Population FloodLAMP Positive (including everyone in a positive pool) | 0.6% | ok | | | Stats | 71 | | Dates | Start Run Date | 2021-09-28 | ok | | | Stats | 74 | | Dates | End Run Date | 2021-12-17 | ok | | | Stats | 75 | | Info | Test Operator | Davie Fire and Rescue | ok | Who ran the actual testing (running LAMP reactions) | | Stats | 78 | | Info | Test Processing Site | Office | ok | Where the test processing (running LAMP reactions) was done | | Stats | 79 | | Info | Population Tested | TV Production Staff | ok | Description of the participants | | Stats | 80 | | Info | Configuration | Standard | ok | Equipment set used for test processing (relates to throughput and type of test tube used) | | Stats | 81 | | Info | Collection Type | Individual | ok | Pooled, Individual, or Both | | Stats | 82 | | Info | Self or HCW Collected | HCW | ok | HCW is Health Care Worker | | Stats | 83 | | Info | App Used? | Yes | ok | Was the FloodLAMP Mobile App and Admin Portal utilized in the program | | Stats | 84 | | Info | Bring-up Type | In Person | ok | How the initial setup and validation of the testing site was done | | Stats | 85 | | Info | Program Name | Rosa | ok | Shorthand name used internally at FloodLAMP and in other documents for this program | | Stats | 86 | | Info | Site | Production Set / Fire Station | ok | Broader physical space where the testing was done and/or where participants congregated | | Stats | 87 | | Info | Site Type | Production Organization | ok | Type of entity or organization receiving the testing program | | Stats | 88 | | Info | Location | Davie, FL | ok | Geographical location of where the FloodLAMP testing program occurred | | Stats | 89 | ### Weekly summary | week_start_date | week_end_date | participants_n | tubes_n | positive_tubes_n | inconclusive_tubes_n | pct_positive | pct_positive_status | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 2021-09-27 | 2021-10-03 | 17 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-04 | 2021-10-10 | 84 | 84 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-11 | 2021-10-17 | 79 | 79 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-18 | 2021-10-24 | 64 | 64 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-10-25 | 2021-10-31 | 53 | 53 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-01 | 2021-11-07 | 68 | 68 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-08 | 2021-11-14 | 64 | 64 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-15 | 2021-11-21 | 76 | 76 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-22 | 2021-11-28 | 36 | 36 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-11-29 | 2021-12-05 | 59 | 59 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-12-06 | 2021-12-12 | 84 | 84 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | ok | | 2021-12-13 | 2021-12-19 | 97 | 97 | 1 | 0 | 1.0% | ok |