AI-assisted tracking of worldwide non-pharmaceutical interventions for COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Suryanarayanan P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7994304 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Governments worldwide have rapidly deployed non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the effect of these individual NPI measures across space and time has yet to be sufficiently assessed, especially with the increase of policy fatigue and the urge for NPI relaxation in the vaccination era. Using the decay ratio in the suppression of COVID-19 infections and multi-source big data, we investigated the changing performance of different NPIs across waves from global and regional levels (in 133 countries) to national and subnational (in the United States of America [USA]) scales before the implementation of mass vaccination. The synergistic effectiveness of all NPIs for reducing COVID-19 infections declined along waves, from 95.4% in the first wave to 56.0% in the third wave recently at the global level and similarly from 83.3% to 58.7% at the USA national level, while it had fluctuating performance across waves on regional and subnational scales. Regardless of geographical scale, gathering restrictions and facial coverings played significant roles in epidemic mitigation before the vaccine rollout. Our findings have important implications for continued tailoring and implementation of NPI strategies, together with vaccination, to mitigate future COVID-19 waves, caused by new variants, and other emerging respiratory infectious diseases.
| S-EPMC8666325 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Covid-19 Pandemic Policy Monitor (COV-PPM) dataset prospectively documents non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) taken to contain SARS-Cov-2 transmission across countries in EU27, EEA and UK. In Germany, measures have also been recorded at the federal state and, partially, at the district levels. NPIs implemented since January 2020 have been retrieved and updated weekly from March 2020, from official governments webpages, Ministries of Health, National (Public) Health Institutes or Administrations. NPI categories collected refer to restrictions, closures or changes in functioning implemented in 13 domains: public events (gatherings in indoor or outdoor spaces); public institutions (kindergartens, schools, universities); public spaces (shops, bars, restaurants); public transport (trains, buses, trams, metro); citizens movement/mobility (e.g. pedestrians, cars, ships); border closures (air, land or sea, all incoming travels, from high-risk regions, only non-nationals); measures to improve the healthcare system (e.g. human resources or technical reinforcement, redistribution, material or infrastructural); measures for risk/vulnerable groups (e.g. elderly, chronically ill, pregnant); economic measures (e.g. lay-off rules establishment, actions to avoid job-loss, tax relaxation); testing policies (e.g. testing criteria changes); nose and mouth protection rules, vaccination and others/miscellaneous measures.
| S-EPMC8592638 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectiveThe outbreak of the current pandemic begun from the first individual of a 55-year old from Hubei province in China, the disease instigated by the new coronavirus spreading across the world. Scientists presently speculate this coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, originated in a bat and by one way or another jumped to another creature, potentially the pangolin, which at that point gave it to people. The ailment is currently spreading between individuals with no animal delegate. Researchers are struggling to follow the infection back to where it started to become familiar with its spread. In the event that, for example, specialists can locate the soonest cases, they might have the option to distinguish the creature have where the infection hides. In March and April 2020, researchers detailed that this virus created normally. Coronavirus has been become of the serious global phenomena in the recent years and has negative effects in the entire world health and economy. The virus is believed to have been associated with a host animal which human contracted. Subsequently, human-to-human infection began. Through migration as humans have become complex with easy mobility the disease has traveled to the entire continent. Now, numerous scientist are going on in the hope of obtaining medication and vaccination to prevent the spread of the disease and mortality of the disease. It is important that we obtain quantitative and qualitative information about the etiology of this disease which is crucial. Mathematical modeling is capable of providing qualitative information on many parameters that guides the decision making of health practitioners. In this work we focus the optimal control of COVID-19 with the help of Non Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs). To find the role of factors/parameters in the transmission of the syndrome we find R0; the ratio of reproduction for the proposed model.MethodsTo find the role of parameters in the transmission of the syndrome we find R0; the ratio of reproduction for the proposed model. On the basis of sensitivity indices of the parameters we apply Non Pharmaceutical Interventions(NPIs) to control the sensitive parameters and hence formulate the optimal control mode. With the help of Hamiltonian and Lagrangian we minimize the density of contaminated stuff and infected human population.ResultsWe focus the optimal control of COVID-19 with the help of Non Pharmaceutical Interventions(NPIs). On the basis of sensitivity indices of the parameters we apply Non Pharmaceutical Interventions(NPIs) to control the sensitive parameters and hence formulate the optimal control model. The major NPIs are, STAY HOME, SANITIZER (wash hands), EARLY CASE DETECTION (PCR Test) and FACE MASK. These NPIs helps in mitigation and reducing the size of outbreak of the disease.ConclusionWe check the existence of the optimal solution for the system. At the end, Using matlab we produce numerical simulations for validation of results of control variables. The results demonstrate that if there is no control (variables/interventios), 900 out 1000 susceptible individuals may be infected (exposed) in very short period. As such a circumstances no agency fighting against COVID-19 could be successful due to its limited resources.
| S-EPMC7339477 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Various non-pharmaceutical interventions were adopted by countries worldwide in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic with adverse socioeconomic side effects, which raises the question about their differential effectiveness. We estimate the average dynamic effect of each intervention on the incidence of COVID-19 and on people's whereabouts by developing a statistical model that accounts for the contemporaneous adoption of multiple interventions. Using daily data from 175 countries, we show that, even after controlling for other concurrent lockdown policies, cancelling public events, imposing restrictions on private gatherings and closing schools and workplaces had significant effects on reducing COVID-19 infections. Restrictions on internal movement and public transport had no effects because the aforementioned policies, imposed earlier on average, had already de facto reduced human mobility. International travel restrictions, although imposed early, had a short-lived effect failing to prevent the epidemic from turning into a pandemic because they were less stringent. We interpret the impact of each intervention on containing the pandemic using a conceptual framework which relies on their effects on human mobility behaviors in a manner consistent with time-use and epidemiological factors.
| S-EPMC7820317 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Several non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been implemented across the world to control the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Social distancing (SD) interventions applied so far have included school closures, remote working and quarantine. These measures have been shown to have large impacts on pandemic influenza transmission. However, there has been comparatively little examination of such measures for COVID-19. Methods: We examined the existing literature, and collated data, on implementation of NPIs to examine their effects on the COVID-19 pandemic so far. Data on NPIs were collected from official government websites as well as from media sources. Results: Measures such as travel restrictions have been implemented in multiple countries and appears to have slowed the geographic spread of COVID-19 and reduced initial case numbers. We find that, due to the relatively sparse information on the differences with and without interventions, it is difficult to quantitatively assess the efficacy of many interventions. Similarly, whilst the comparison to other pandemic diseases such as influenza can be helpful, there are key differences that could affect the efficacy of similar NPIs. Conclusions: The timely implementation of control measures is key to their success and must strike a balance between early enough application to reduce the peak of the epidemic and ensuring that they can be feasibly maintained for an appropriate duration. Such measures can have large societal impacts and they need to be appropriately justified to the population. As the pandemic of COVID-19 progresses, quantifying the impact of interventions will be a vital consideration for the appropriate use of mitigation strategies.
| S-EPMC7255913 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Infectious diseases and human behavior are intertwined. On one side, our movements and interactions are the engines of transmission. On the other, the unfolding of viruses might induce changes to our daily activities. While intuitive, our understanding of such feedback loop is still limited. Before COVID-19 the literature on the subject was mainly theoretical and largely missed validation. The main issue was the lack of empirical data capturing behavioral change induced by diseases. Things have dramatically changed in 2020. Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been the key weapon against the SARS-CoV-2 virus and affected virtually any societal process. Travel bans, events cancellation, social distancing, curfews, and lockdowns have become unfortunately very familiar. The scale of the emergency, the ease of survey as well as crowdsourcing deployment guaranteed by the latest technology, several Data for Good programs developed by tech giants, major mobile phone providers, and other companies have allowed unprecedented access to data describing behavioral changes induced by the pandemic. Here, I review some of the vast literature written on the subject of NPIs during the COVID-19 pandemic. In doing so, I analyze 348 articles written by more than 2518 authors in the first 12 months of the emergency. While the large majority of the sample was obtained by querying PubMed, it includes also a hand-curated list. Considering the focus, and methodology I have classified the sample into seven main categories: epidemic models, surveys, comments/perspectives, papers aiming to quantify the effects of NPIs, reviews, articles using data proxies to measure NPIs, and publicly available datasets describing NPIs. I summarize the methodology, data used, findings of the articles in each category and provide an outlook highlighting future challenges as well as opportunities.
| S-EPMC7881715 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has forced societies across the world to resort to social distancing to slow the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Due to the economic impacts of social distancing, there is growing desire to relax these measures. To characterize a range of possible strategies for control and to understand their consequences, we performed an optimal control analysis of a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Given that the pandemic is already underway and controls have already been initiated, we calibrated our model to data from the USA and focused our analysis on optimal controls from May 2020 through December 2021. We found that a major factor that differentiates strategies that prioritize lives saved versus reduced time under control is how quickly control is relaxed once social distancing restrictions expire in May 2020. Strategies that maintain control at a high level until at least summer 2020 allow for tapering of control thereafter and minimal deaths, whereas strategies that relax control in the short term lead to fewer options for control later and a higher likelihood of exceeding hospital capacity. Our results also highlight that the potential scope for controlling COVID-19 until a vaccine is available depends on epidemiological parameters about which there is still considerable uncertainty, including the basic reproduction number and the effectiveness of social distancing. In light of those uncertainties, our results do not constitute a quantitative forecast and instead provide a qualitative portrayal of possible outcomes from alternative approaches to control.
| S-EPMC7473596 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNon-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are mitigation strategies used to reduce the spread of transmissible diseases. The relative effectiveness of specific NPIs remains uncertain.MethodsWe used state-level Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case and mortality data between January 19, 2020 and March 7, 2021 to model NPI policy effectiveness. Empirically derived breakpoints in case and mortality velocities were used to identify periods of stable, decreasing, or increasing COVID-19 burden. The associations between NPI adoption and subsequent decreases in case or death velocities were estimated using generalized linear models accounting for weekly variability shared across states. State-level NPI policies included: stay at home order, indoor public gathering ban (mild >10 or severe ≤10), indoor restaurant dining ban, and public mask mandate.Results28,602,830 cases and 511,899 deaths were recorded. The odds of a decrease in COVID-19 case velocity were significantly elevated for stay at home (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.63-2.52), indoor dining ban (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.25-2.10), public mask mandate (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.47-3.23), and severe gathering ban (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.31-2.16). In mutually adjusted models, odds remained elevated for stay at home (AOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.04-2.07) and public mask mandate (AOR = 2.27, 95% CI 1.51-3.41). Stay at home (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.53-2.62; AOR 1.89, 95% CI 1.25-2.87) was also associated with greater likelihood of decrease in death velocity in unadjusted and adjusted models.ConclusionsNPIs employed in the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic, most significantly stay at home orders, were associated with decreased COVID-19 burden.
| S-EPMC8491859 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The information set from which individuals make their decision on vaccination includes signals from trusted agents, such as governments, community leaders and the media. By implementing restrictions, or by relaxing them, governments can provide a signal about the underlying risk of the pandemic and indirectly affect vaccination take-up. Rather than focusing on measures specifically designed to increase vaccine acceptance, this paper studies how governments' non-pharmaceutical policy responses to the pandemic can modify the degree of preventive health behavior, including vaccination. To do so, we use repeated waves of a global survey on COVID-19 Beliefs, Behaviors and Norms covering 18 countries from October 2020 to March 2021. Controlling for the usual determinants, we explore how individuals' willingness to get vaccinated is affected by changes in government restriction measures (as measured by the Oxford Stringency Index). This relationship is mediated by individual characteristics, social norms (social pressure to conform with what most people do), and trust in government institutions. Our results point to a complex picture as the implementation of restrictions is associated with increased acceptance in some contexts and decreased acceptance in others. The stringency of government restrictions has significant positive correlations with vaccine acceptance in contexts of weak social norms of vaccine acceptance and lower trust in government. In countries or communities with tighter social norms and high trust in health authorities, vaccine acceptance is high but less sensitive to changes in policies. These results suggest that the effect of government policy stringency is stronger among individuals who report lower trust and weaker social norms of vaccine acceptance.
| S-EPMC9840231 | biostudies-literature
Project description:On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) a pandemic1. The strategies based on non-pharmaceutical interventions that were used to contain the outbreak in China appear to be effective2, but quantitative research is still needed to assess the efficacy of non-pharmaceutical interventions and their timings3. Here, using epidemiological data on COVID-19 and anonymized data on human movement4,5, we develop a modelling framework that uses daily travel networks to simulate different outbreak and intervention scenarios across China. We estimate that there were a total of 114,325 cases of COVID-19 (interquartile range 76,776-164,576) in mainland China as of 29 February 2020. Without non-pharmaceutical interventions, we predict that the number of cases would have been 67-fold higher (interquartile range 44-94-fold) by 29 February 2020, and we find that the effectiveness of different interventions varied. We estimate that early detection and isolation of cases prevented more infections than did travel restrictions and contact reductions, but that a combination of non-pharmaceutical interventions achieved the strongest and most rapid effect. According to our model, the lifting of travel restrictions from 17 February 2020 does not lead to an increase in cases across China if social distancing interventions can be maintained, even at a limited level of an on average 25% reduction in contact between individuals that continues until late April. These findings improve our understanding of the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19, and will inform response efforts across the world.
| S-EPMC7116778 | biostudies-literature