Dataset Information

County-Level Social Distancing and Policy Impact in the United States: A Dynamical Systems Model.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Social distancing and public policy have been crucial for minimizing the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the United States. Publicly available, county-level time series data on mobility are derived from individual devices with global positioning systems, providing a variety of indices of social distancing behavior per day. Such indices allow a fine-grained approach to modeling public behavior during the pandemic. Previous studies of social distancing and policy have not accounted for the occurrence of pre-policy social distancing and other dynamics reflected in the long-term trajectories of public mobility data.

Objective

We propose a differential equation state-space model of county-level social distancing that accounts for distancing behavior leading up to the first official policies, equilibrium dynamics reflected in the long-term trajectories of mobility, and the specific impacts of four kinds of policy. The model is fit to each US county individually, producing a nationwide data set of novel estimated mobility indices.

Methods

A differential equation model was fit to three indicators of mobility for each of 3054 counties, with T=100 occasions per county of the following: distance traveled, visitations to key sites, and the log number of interpersonal encounters. The indicators were highly correlated and assumed to share common underlying latent trajectory, dynamics, and responses to policy. Maximum likelihood estimation with the Kalman-Bucy filter was used to estimate the model parameters. Bivariate distributional plots and descriptive statistics were used to examine the resulting county-level parameter estimates. The association of chronology with policy impact was also considered.

Results

Mobility dynamics show moderate correlations with two census covariates: population density (Spearman r ranging from 0.11 to 0.31) and median household income (Spearman r ranging from -0.03 to 0.39). Stay-at-home order effects were negatively correlated with both (r=-0.37 and r=-0.38, respectively), while the effects of the ban on all gatherings were positively correlated with both (r=0.51, r=0.39). Chronological ordering of policies was a moderate to strong determinant of their effect per county (Spearman r ranging from -0.12 to -0.56), with earlier policies accounting for most of the change in mobility, and later policies having little or no additional effect.

Conclusions

Chronological ordering, population density, and median household income were all associated with policy impact. The stay-at-home order and the ban on gatherings had the largest impacts on mobility on average. The model is implemented in a graphical online app for exploring county-level statistics and running counterfactual simulations. Future studies can incorporate the model-derived indices of social distancing and policy impacts as important social determinants of COVID-19 health outcomes.

SUBMITTER: McKee KL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7759510 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

County-Level Social Distancing and Policy Impact in the United States: A Dynamical Systems Model.

McKee Kevin L KL Crandell Ian C IC Hanlon Alexandra L AL

JMIR public health and surveillance 20201223 4

<h4>Background</h4>Social distancing and public policy have been crucial for minimizing the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the United States. Publicly available, county-level time series data on mobility are derived from individual devices with global positioning systems, providing a variety of indices of social distancing behavior per day. Such indices allow a fine-grained approach to modeling public behavior during the pandemic. Previous studies of social distancing and policy have not accounted for ...[more]

PMID: 33296866

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeHIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly efficacious, and yet most individuals indicated for it are not currently using it. To provide guidance for health policymakers, researchers, and community advocates, we developed county-level PrEP use estimates and assessed locality and policy associations.MethodsUsing data from a national aggregator, we applied a validated crosswalk procedure to generate county-level estimates of PrEP users in 2018. A multilevel Poisson regression explored associations between PrEP use and (1) state policy variables of Medicaid expansion and state Drug Assistance Programs (PrEP-DAPs) and (2) county-level characteristics from the U.S. Census Bureau. Outcomes were PrEP per population (prevalence) and PrEP-to-need ratio (PnR), defined as the ratio of PrEP users per new HIV diagnosis. Higher levels of PrEP prevalence or PnR indicate more PrEP users relative to the total population or estimated need, respectively.ResultsOur 2018 county-level data set included a total of 188,546 PrEP users in the United States. Nationally, PrEP prevalence was 70.3/100,000 population and PnR was 4.9. In an adjusted model, counties with a 5% higher proportion of black residents had 5% lower PnR (rate ratio (RR): 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.93, 0.96). Similarly, counties with higher concentration of residents uninsured or living in poverty had lower PnR. Relative to states without Medicaid expansion or PrEP-DAPs, states with only one of those programs had 25% higher PrEP prevalence (RR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.09, 1.45), and states with both programs had 99% higher PrEP prevalence (RR: 1.99, 95% CI: 1.60, 2.48). There was a significant linear trend across the three policy groups, and similar findings for the relation between PnR and the policy groups.ConclusionsIn a data set comprising approximately 80% of PrEP users in the United States, we found that Medicaid expansion and PrEP-DAPs were associated with higher PrEP use in states that adopted those policies, after controlling for potential confounders. Future research should identify which components of PrEP support programs have the most success and how to best promote PrEP among groups most impacted by the epidemic. States should support the admirable health decisions of their residents to get on PrEP by implementing policies that facilitate access.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine which county-level social, economic, demographic, epidemiologic and access to care factors are associated with Latino/non-Latino White disparities in prevalence of diagnosed HIV infection.Methods and findingsWe used 2016 county-level prevalence rates of diagnosed HIV infection rates for Latinos and non-Latino Whites obtained from the National HIV Surveillance System and factors obtained from multiple publicly available datasets. We used mixed effects Poisson modeling of observed HIV prevalence at the county-level to identify county-level factors that explained homogeneous effects across race/ethnicity and differential effects for Latinos and NL-Whites. Overall, the median Latinos disparity in HIV prevalence is 2.4; 94% of the counties have higher rates for Latinos than non-Latinos, and one-quarter of the counties' disparities exceeded 10. Of the 41 county-level factors examined, 24 showed significant effect modification when examined individually. In multi-variable modeling, 11 county-level factors were found that significantly affected disparities. Factors that increased disparity with higher, compared to lower values included proportion of HIV diagnoses due to injection drug use, percent Latino living in poverty, percent not English proficient, and percent Puerto Rican. Latino disparities increased with decreasing percent severe housing, drug overdose mortality rate, percent rural, female prevalence rate, social association rate, percent change in Latino population, and Latino to NL-White proportion of the population. These factors while significant had minimal effects on diminishing disparity, but did substantially reduce the variance in disparity rates.ConclusionsLarge differences in HIV prevalence rates persist across almost all counties even after controlling for county-level factors. Counties that are more rural, have fewer Latinos, or have lower NL-White prevalence rates tend to have higher disparities. There is also higher disparity when community risk is low.

Project description:BackgroundThe spread of COVID-19 has highlighted the long-standing health inequalities across the U.S. as neighborhoods with fewer resources were associated with higher rates of COVID-19 transmission. Although the stay-at-home order was one of the most effective methods to contain its spread, residents in lower-income neighborhoods faced barriers to practicing social distancing. We aimed to quantify the differential impact of stay-at-home policy on COVID-19 transmission and residents' mobility across neighborhoods of different levels of socioeconomic disadvantage.MethodsThis was a comparative interrupted time-series analysis at the county level. We included 2087 counties from 38 states which both implemented and lifted the state-wide stay-at-home order. Every county was assigned to one of four equally-sized groups based on its levels of disadvantage, represented by the Area Deprivation Index. Prevalence of COVID-19 was calculated by dividing the daily number of cumulative confirmed COVID-19 cases by the number of residents from the 2010 Census. We used the Social Distancing Index (SDI), derived from the COVID-19 Impact Analysis Platform, to measure the mobility. For the evaluation of implementation, the observation started from Mar 1st 2020 to 1 day before lifting; and, for lifting, it ranged from 1 day after implementation to Jul 5th 2020. We calculated a comparative change of daily trends in COVID-19 prevalence and Social Distancing Index between counties with three highest disadvantage levels and those with the least level before and after the implementation and lifting of the stay-at-home order, separately.ResultsOn both stay-at-home implementation and lifting dates, COVID-19 prevalence was much higher among counties with the highest or lowest disadvantage level, while mobility decreased as the disadvantage level increased. Mobility of the most disadvantaged counties was least impacted by stay-at-home implementation and relaxation compared to counties with the most resources; however, disadvantaged counties experienced the largest relative increase in COVID-19 infection after both stay-at-home implementation and relaxation.ConclusionsNeighborhoods with varying levels of socioeconomic disadvantage reacted differently to the implementation and relaxation of COVID-19 mitigation policies. Policymakers should consider investing more resources in disadvantaged counties as the pandemic may not stop until most neighborhoods have it under control.

Project description:ImportanceDespite substantial research, the drivers of the widening gap in life expectancy between rich and poor individuals in the United States-known as the longevity gap-remain unknown. The hypothesis of this study is that social mobility may play an important role in explaining the longevity gap.ObjectiveTo assess whether social mobility is associated with income-related differences in life expectancy in the United States.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional, ecological study used data from 1559 counties in the United States to assess the association of social mobility with average life expectancy at age 40 years by sex and income quartile among adult men and women over the period of January 2000 through December 2014. Bayesian generalized linear multilevel regression models were used to estimate the association, with adjustment for a range of socioeconomic, demographic, and health care system characteristics.ExposuresCounty-level social mobility, here operationalized as the association of the income rank of individuals born during the period of January 1980 through December 1982 (based on tax record data, averaged over the period January 2010 through December 2012) with the income ranks of their parents (averaged over the period January 1996 through December 2000) using the location where the parent first claimed the child as a dependent at age 15 years to identify counties.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was life expectancy at age 40 years by sex and income quartile.ResultsThe sample consisted of 1559 counties, which represented 93% of the US population in 2000. Each 1-SD increase in social mobility-equivalent to the difference between a low-mobility state, such as Alabama (ranked 49th on this measure), and a higher-mobility state, such as Massachusetts (ranked 23rd on this measure)-was associated with a 0.38-year (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.29-0.47) and a 0.29-year (95% CrI, 0.21-0.38) increase in county-level life expectancy among men and women, respectively, in the lowest income quartile. Estimates for life expectancies among county residents in the highest income quartile were smaller in magnitude and not robust to covariate adjustment (men: 0.10-year [95% CrI, -0.02 to 0.22] increase; women: 0.08-year [95% CrI, -0.05 to 0.20] increase). Increasing social mobility in all counties to the value of the highest social mobility county was associated with decreases in the life expectancy gap between the highest and lowest income quartiles by 1.4 (95% CrI, 0.7-2.1) years for men and 1.1 (95% CrI, 0.5-1.6) years for women nationally, representing a 20% decrease.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, higher county-level social mobility was associated with smaller county-level gaps in life expectancy by income. These findings motivate further investigation of causal relationships between policies that shift social mobility and health outcomes.

Dataset Information

County-Level Social Distancing and Policy Impact in the United States: A Dynamical Systems Model.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

County-Level Social Distancing and Policy Impact in the United States: A Dynamical Systems Model.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets