Does the timing of government COVID-19 policy interventions matter? Policy analysis of an original database.
Stephens, M.; Berengueres, J.; Venkatapuram, S.; Moonesar, I. A.
Show abstract
ObjectiveThough the speed of policy interventions is critical in responding to a fast spreading pandemic, there is little research on this topic. This study aims to (1) review the state of research on the topic (2) compile an original dataset of 87 COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions across 17 countries and (3) analyses the timing of COVID-19 policy interventions on mortality rates of individual countries. DesignStatistical analysis using Excel and R language version 3.4.2 (2017-09-28) of 1479 non-pharmaceutical policy interventions data points. SettingChina, Singapore, South Korea, Japan, Australia, Germany, Canada, India, United Arab Emirates, United States of America, South Africa, Egypt, Jordan, France, Iran, United Kingdom and Italy. Population36 health policies, 19 fiscal policies; 8 innovation policies; 19 social distancing policies, and 5 travel policies - related to COVID-19. InterventionsWe calculate the time (time-lag) between the start date of a policy and three-time specific events: the first reported case in Wuhan, China; the first nationally reported disease case; the first nationally reported death. Main Outcome MeasuresNational level mortality rates across 17 countries. Mortality rate is equivalent to (death attributed to COVID-19) / (death attributed to COVID-19 + COVID-19 recovered cases). ResultsThe literature review found 22 studies that looked at policy and timing with respect to mortality rates. Only four were multicountry, multi-policy studies. Based on the analysis of the database, we find no significant direction of the association (positive or negative) between the time lag from the three specified points and mortality rates. The standard deviation (SD) of policy lags was of the same order of magnitude as the mean of lags (30.57 and 30.22 respectively), indicating that there is no consensus among countries on the optimal time lags to implement a given policy. At the country level, the average time lag to implement a policy decreased the longer the time duration between the countrys first case and the Wuhan first case, indicating countries got faster to implement policies as more time passed. ConclusionsThe timing of policy interventions across countries relative to the first Wuhan case, first national disease case, or first national death, is not found to be correlated with mortality. No correlation between country quickness of policy intervention and country mortality was found. Countries became quicker in implementing policies as time passed. However, no correlation between country quickness of policy intervention and country mortality was found. Policy interventions across countries relative to the first recorded case in each country, is not found to be correlated with mortality for 86 of the 87 policies. At the country level we find that no correlation was found between country-average delays in implementing policies and country mortality. Further there is no correlation with higher country rankings in The Global Health Security Index and policy timing and mortality rates. Funding StatementThis work was supported by the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research at the World Health Organization as part of the Knowledge to Policy (K2P) Center Mentorship Program. A competing interests statement"All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coidisclosure.pdf and declare: IAM and MS would like to acknowledge the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research at the World Health Organization for financial support for publishing as part of the Knowledge to Policy (K2P) Center Mentorship Program [BIRD Project].
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Health System Resilience-enhancing Strategies for Managing Public Health Emergencies of International Concerns (PHEIC): Success and Challenges A Systematic Review Protocol 94%
- Economic and social impacts of COVID-19 and public health measures: results from an anonymous online survey in Thailand, Malaysia, the United Kingdom, Italy and Slovenia 93%
- The use of social media platforms by migrant and ethnic minority populations during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Modelling the impact of behavioural interventions during pandemics: A systematic review 94%
- Recommended distances for physical distancing during COVID-19 pandemics reveal cultural connections between countries 92%
- Investigating the ‘ Bolsonaro effect ’ on the spread of the Covid-19 pandemic: an empirical analysis of observational data in Brazil 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%
- Have deaths of despair risen during the COVID-19 pandemic? A rapid systematic review 91%
- How the COVID-19 pandemic is shaping research in Africa: inequalities in scholarly output and collaborations and new opportunities for scientific leadership 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Adaptive time-dependent priors and Bayesian inference to evaluate SARS-CoV-2 public health measures validated on 31 countries 92%
- Tracking changes in reporting of epidemiological data during the COVID-19 pandemic in Southeast Asia: an observational study during the first wave 92%
- Health Belief, Planned Behavior, or Psychological Antecedents: What predicts COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy better among the Bangladeshi Adults? 91%
"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.