Supplementary Table 2, Additional File 1 presents the infection spread outcome measures, including the population infected or dead and the peak infection.
Figure 2 presents the daily new infections and the homebound adults over time across all scenarios. Under Scenarios 1, 3a, 3b, 3c (non-school closure scenarios), the homebound peak for adults decreased from 267,566 under Scenario 3a to 121,346 under Scenario 3c, and the peak under Scenario 1 was 242,948. Under Scenarios 2, 4a, 4b, 4c, 5a, 5b, 5c (school closure scenarios), the homebound peak for adults was highest under Scenarios 5a, 5b, 5c, due to shelter-in-place, ranging from 5,377,886 to 5,379,960, followed by homebound peak of 584,235 under Scenario 2. Adults absent from work followed a similar pattern as homebound adults across all scenarios (Supplementary Figure 1, Additional File 1).
Higher compliance with voluntary quarantine reduced homebound peak for adults to 566,973, 535,559, 522,775 under Scenarios 4a, 4b, 4c, respectively (Figure 2), decreased the peak infection (in Scenarios 3a, 3b, 3c, 4a, 4b, 4c) by at least half, and delayed the peak day by 14-61 days compared to Scenario 1 (Supplementary Table 2, Additional File 1).
Figure 3 presents a comparison of the percentage of the population infected or dead and the percentage of days adults homebound. The percentage of the population infected was 60.09% under Scenario 1 (no intervention) and 51.69% under Scenario 2 (school closure only). The percentage of the population infected reduced to a range of 11.68-44.15% under Scenarios 3a, 3b, 3c (voluntary quarantine) and 4.53-31.07% under Scenarios 4a, 4b, 4c (voluntary quarantine with school closure). The percentage of days adults homebound was 0.72% under Scenario 1 and 7.16% under Scenario 2 (school closure only). The percentage of days adults homebound ranged from 1.36-1.63% and 7.62-7.74% under Scenarios 3a, 3b, 3c (voluntary quarantine) and Scenarios 4a, 4b, 4c (voluntary quarantine with school closure), respectively. Compared to Scenario 2 (school closure only), Scenarios 5a, 5b, 5c (shelter-in-place with school closure) reduced the percentage of the total population infected from 51.69% to 48.11-50.55% but more than doubled the percentage of days adults homebound to a range of 18.92-30.66%. Supplementary Table 3, Additional File 1 provides the percentage of days children, youth, adults, and elderly are homebound across all scenarios.
Figure 4 presents the homebound days to prevent an infection or death. The homebound days to prevent an infection was 87 under Scenario 2 (school closure only) and over 200 under Scenarios 5a, 5b, 5c (shelter-in-place with school closure). The homebound days to prevent an infection was 1.9, 3.7, 4.7 under Scenarios 3c, 3b, 3a (voluntary quarantine), respectively, versus 14.4, 17.8, 27.3 under Scenarios 4c, 4b, 4a (voluntary quarantine with school closure), respectively. The homebound days to prevent a death was 30,650 under Scenario 2 (school closure only) and over 60,420 under Scenarios 5a, 5b, 5c (shelter-in-place with school closure). The homebound days to prevent a death was 500, 928, 1,130 under Scenarios 3c, 3b, 3a (voluntary quarantine), respectively, versus 4,050, 4,840, 7,360 under Scenarios 4c, 4b, 4a (voluntary quarantine with school closure), respectively.
Supplementary Table 4, Additional File 1 presents the homebound and inactive peak percentages for children, youth, adults, elderly, and the total population. Increasing voluntary quarantine compliance, regardless of school closure, decreased the homebound and inactive peak percentage for adults, elderly, and the total population. Supplementary Figures 2 and 3, Additional File 1 present the homebound peak broken down by statuses for adults and elderly and for children and youth, respectively.
Supplementary Figure 4, Additional File 1 shows the percentage distribution of statuses (at home childcare, voluntary quarantine, symptoms) for the homebound peak for adults. At the homebound peak, among homebound adults: (i) Under Scenarios 2, 4a, 4b, 4c (school closure scenarios without shelter-in-place), 0.33%-27.26% and 72.75%-83.47% were symptomatic or providing at home childcare, respectively. (ii) Under Scenarios 3a, 3b, 3c (non-school closure scenarios), 3.61%-26.59% and 0.89%-4.04% were symptomatic or providing at home childcare, respectively. (iii) Under no intervention, 89.99% and 10.01% were symptomatic or providing at home childcare, respectively.
Supplementary Tables 5-7, Additional File 1 summarize the impact of voluntary quarantine, school closure and shelter-in-place by comparing the percentage difference between a pair of scenarios in terms of the homebound days (for children, youth, adult and elderly populations), cumulative infections, and deaths.