BACKGROUND: Respiratory viral infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. However, their characterization is incomplete because prevalence estimates are based on syndromic surveillance data. Here, we address this shortcoming through the analysis of infection rates among individuals tested regularly for respiratory viral infections, irrespective of their symptoms. METHODS: We carried out longitudinal sampling and analysis among 214 individuals enrolled at multiple New York City locations from fall 2016 to spring 2018. We combined personal information with weekly nasal swab collection to investigate the prevalence of 18 respiratory viruses among different age groups and to assess risk factors associated with infection susceptibility. RESULTS: 17.5% of samples were positive for respiratory viruses. Some viruses circulated predominantly during winter, whereas others were found year round. Rhinovirus and coronavirus were most frequently detected. Children registered the highest positivity rates, and adults with daily contacts with children experienced significantly more infections than their counterparts without children. CONCLUSION: Respiratory viral infections are widespread among the general population with the majority of individuals presenting multiple infections per year. The observations identify children as the principal source of respiratory infections. These findings motivate further active surveillance and analysis of differences in pathogenicity among respiratory viruses.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory viral infections are a leading cause of disease worldwide. However, the overall community prevalence of infections has not been properly assessed, as standard surveillance is typically acquired passively among individuals seeking clinical care. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study in which participants provided daily diaries and weekly nasopharyngeal specimens that were tested for respiratory viruses. These data were used to analyze healthcare seeking behavior, compared with cross-sectional ED data and NYC surveillance reports, and used to evaluate biases of medically attended ILI as signal for population respiratory disease and infection. RESULTS: The likelihood of seeking medical attention was virus-dependent: higher for influenza and metapneumovirus (19%-20%), lower for coronavirus and RSV (4%), and 71% of individuals with self-reported ILI did not seek care and half of medically attended symptomatic manifestations did not meet the criteria for ILI. Only 5% of cohort respiratory virus infections and 21% of influenza infections were medically attended and classifiable as ILI. We estimated 1 ILI event per person/year but multiple respiratory infections per year. CONCLUSION: Standard, healthcare-based respiratory surveillance has multiple limitations. Specifically, ILI is an incomplete metric for quantifying respiratory disease, viral respiratory infection, and influenza infection. The prevalence of respiratory viruses, as reported by standard, healthcare-based surveillance, is skewed toward viruses producing more severe symptoms. Active, longitudinal studies are a helpful supplement to standard surveillance, can improve understanding of the overall circulation and burden of respiratory viruses, and can aid development of more robust measures for controlling the spread of these pathogens.