On the impact of early non-pharmaceutical interventions as containment strategies against the COVID-19 pandemic
Hernandez, A.; Correa-Agudelo, E.; Kim, H.; Branscum, A. J.; Miller, F. D.; MacKinnon, N.; Cuadros, D. F.
Show abstract
BackgroundThe novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan, China and has spread since then to around 210 countries and territories by April 2020. Consequently, countries have adopted physical distance measures in an attempt to mitigate the uncontrolled spread of the virus. A critical question for policymakers to inform evidence-based practice is if and how physical distance measures slowed the propagation of COVID-19 in the early phase of the pandemic. MethodsThis study aims to quantify the effects of physical distance mitigation measures on the propagation of the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from John Hopkins University on confirmed cases and testing data from the Our World in Data were used in an interrupted time series analysis to estimate the effects of physical distance measures on the growth rates of the pandemic in 12 countries of Asia, Africa, and Europe. FindingsWe found that physical distance measures produced a significant decrease in the growth rates of the COVID-19 pandemic in five countries (Austria, Belgium, Italy, Malaysia, and South Korea). The test-positivity rate was significant in understanding the slowing growth rate of COVID-19 cases caused by the mitigation measures, as it provides important context that is missing from analysis based only on confirmed case data. InterpretationPhysical distance interventions effectively slowed the progression of the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this study could inform infectious disease mitigation policies based on physical distance measures by quantifying the differential health outcomes of a pandemic with and without physical distance interventions. RESEARCH IN CONTEXTO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSThe SARS-CoV-2 is a new virus identified in December 2019 in the province of Wuhan, China and as never before, a remarkable number of studies and reports have been released since the start of the pandemic. Several studies have used confirmed COVID-19 cases to estimate the growth rate of the pandemic. However, many studies have discussed limitations of including only confirmed cases attributable to the lack of information about testing protocols and testing rates among different countries. Finally, some researchers proposed the analysis of reported deaths by COVID-19 as a potential solution. However, this metric results in biased estimates because deaths by COVID-19 are known to be underreported. Added value of this studyWe designed and implemented analytic methods based on our previous research applied to different infectious disease epidemics, to add evidence related to the impact of non-pharmaceutical containment strategies on the temporal progression of the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, this study adds quantitative evidence about the effects of physical distance measures on limiting the propagation of COVID-19 pandemics in different countries. Additionally, we included testing data in the analysis to assess intra- and inter-country variation in testing growth rates. We hypothesized that the test-positivity rate is an approximation to the incidence of the COVID-19 pandemics in countries with high testing rates. Additionally, we hypothesize that a significant decrease in the pandemic over time could be identified by a significant decrease in the confirmed cases along with a significant decrease in the test-positivity rate. Our results quantified the potential effects of physical distance interventions on the COVID-19 pandemic progression under different levels of testing and enforcement of mitigation policies. Implications of all the available evidenceOur analysis could lead to better approaches for estimating the effects of physical distance measures on the time course of infectious diseases. In addition, our analysis highlights the potential bias of estimated COVID-19 growth rates based only on confirmed cases. The results from our study could inform strategies for mitigating the COVID-19 or other future pandemics, especially in countries in an earlier stage of a pandemic.
Matching journals
The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Recommended distances for physical distancing during COVID-19 pandemics reveal cultural connections between countries 93%
- Interdependence between confirmed and discarded cases of dengue, chikungunya and Zika viruses in Brazil: A multivariate time-series analysis 93%
- Seroprevalence of zoonotic diseases (leptospirosis and Japanese encephalitis) in swine in ten provinces of Vietnam: a Bayesian approach to estimate prevalence 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- A systematic review and evaluation of Zika virus forecasting and prediction research during a public health emergency of international concern 93%
- An investigation of spatial-temporal patterns and predictions of the COVID-19 pandemic in Colombia, 2020-2021 92%
- Surveillance and control efficacy of the Bergerac, France, 2025 chikungunya outbreak 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Using A Socio-Ecological System (SES) Framework to Explain Factors Influencing Countries’ Success Level in Curbing COVID-19 92%
- Research on the Influence of Information Diffusion on the Transmission of the Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) 92%
- Studies of Novel Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) Pandemic: A Global Analysis of Literature 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Use of Interviewer-Administered Telephone Surveys during Infectious Disease Outbreaks, Epidemics, and Pandemics: A Scoping Review 91%
- An in-depth statistical analysis of the COVID-19 pandemic’s initial spread in the WHO African region 91%
- Cholera in Internally Displaced Persons Camps in Borno State--Nigeria, 2017: A qualitative study of the multi-sectorial emergency response to stop the spread of the outbreak 91%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.