Ranking the effectiveness of worldwide COVID-19 government interventions
By Nina Haug, Lukas Geyrhofer, A. Londei, E. Dervić, A. Desvars-Larrive, V. Loreto, B. Pinior, Stefan Thurner 4, Peter Klimek. Nature Human Behaviour, 2020
1,273 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Assessing the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 is critical to inform future preparedness response plans. Here we quantify the impact of 6,068 hierarchically coded NPIs implemented in 79 territories on the effective reproduction number, Rt, of COVID-19. We propose a modelling approach that combines four computational techniques merging statistical, inference and artificial intelligence tools. We validate our findings with two external datasets recording 42,151 additional NPIs from 226 countries. Our results indicate that a suitable combination of NPIs is necessary to curb the spread of the virus. Less disruptive and costly NPIs can be as effective as more intrusive, drastic, ones (for example, a national lockdown). Using country-specific ‘what-if’ scenarios, we assess how the effectiveness of NPIs depends on the local context such as timing of their adoption, opening the way for forecasting the effectiveness of future interventions. Analysing over 50,000 government interventions in more than 200 countries, Haug et al. find that combinations of softer measures, such as risk communication or those increasing healthcare capacity, can be almost as effective as disruptive lockdowns.
Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Health, Modeling and Simulation
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d37385ffa9fff1625afeb6dc6fc392106aca22ec
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Economics and Econometrics
In Health
In Modeling and Simulation
Citations in the corpus
- Effectiveness of public health measures in reducing the incidence of covid-19, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and covid-19 mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis (2021, background): “…that entry, exit, and symptom screening measures to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 are not effective at detecting a meaningful proportion of cases, 125 and another review using real world data from multiple countries found that border closures had minimal impact on the control of covid-19.”
- Quarantine alone or in combination with other public health measures to control COVID‐19: a rapid review (2020, neutral): “In their analysis, quarantining people was relatively ineKective, but they used data from March to April 2020 when most countries had transmission rates that were too high to be able to identify all contacts and implement eKective quarantine (Haug 2020).”
- Non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A review (2020, background): “Effects on spreading Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay [308]; Australia [309] Bangladesh [310]; China [31–33, 311–314]; China, Germany, India, Italy, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, UK, USA [315]; Italy [316, 317]; New Zealand [318]; Puerto Rico [319]; South Kor”