Double-zero-event studies matter: A re-evaluation of physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection for preventing person-to-person transmission of COVID-19 and its policy impact.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Xiao M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8137366 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8376236 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes COVID-19 and is spread person-to-person through close contact. We aimed to investigate the effects of physical distance, face masks, and eye protection on virus transmission in health-care and non-health-care (eg, community) settings.MethodsWe did a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the optimum distance for avoiding person-to-person virus transmission and to assess the use of face masks and eye protection to prevent transmission of viruses. We obtained data for SARS-CoV-2 and the betacoronaviruses that cause severe acute respiratory syndrome, and Middle East respiratory syndrome from 21 standard WHO-specific and COVID-19-specific sources. We searched these data sources from database inception to May 3, 2020, with no restriction by language, for comparative studies and for contextual factors of acceptability, feasibility, resource use, and equity. We screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We did frequentist and Bayesian meta-analyses and random-effects meta-regressions. We rated the certainty of evidence according to Cochrane methods and the GRADE approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020177047.FindingsOur search identified 172 observational studies across 16 countries and six continents, with no randomised controlled trials and 44 relevant comparative studies in health-care and non-health-care settings (n=25 697 patients). Transmission of viruses was lower with physical distancing of 1 m or more, compared with a distance of less than 1 m (n=10 736, pooled adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·18, 95% CI 0·09 to 0·38; risk difference [RD] -10·2%, 95% CI -11·5 to -7·5; moderate certainty); protection was increased as distance was lengthened (change in relative risk [RR] 2·02 per m; pinteraction=0·041; moderate certainty). Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection (n=2647; aOR 0·15, 95% CI 0·07 to 0·34, RD -14·3%, -15·9 to -10·7; low certainty), with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar (eg, reusable 12-16-layer cotton masks; pinteraction=0·090; posterior probability >95%, low certainty). Eye protection also was associated with less infection (n=3713; aOR 0·22, 95% CI 0·12 to 0·39, RD -10·6%, 95% CI -12·5 to -7·7; low certainty). Unadjusted studies and subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed similar findings.InterpretationThe findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support physical distancing of 1 m or more and provide quantitative estimates for models and contact tracing to inform policy. Optimum use of face masks, respirators, and eye protection in public and health-care settings should be informed by these findings and contextual factors. Robust randomised trials are needed to better inform the evidence for these interventions, but this systematic appraisal of currently best available evidence might inform interim guidance.FundingWorld Health Organization.
| S-EPMC7263814 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8426154 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We often identify people using face images. This is true in occupational settings such as passport control as well as in everyday social environments. Mapping between images and identities assumes that facial appearance is stable within certain bounds. For example, a person's apparent age, gender and ethnicity change slowly, if at all. It also assumes that deliberate changes beyond these bounds (i.e., disguises) would be easy to spot. Hyper-realistic face masks overturn these assumptions by allowing the wearer to look like an entirely different person. If unnoticed, these masks break the link between facial appearance and personal identity, with clear implications for applied face recognition. However, to date, no one has assessed the realism of these masks, or specified conditions under which they may be accepted as real faces. Herein, we examined incidental detection of unexpected but attended hyper-realistic masks in both photographic and live presentations. Experiment 1 (UK; n = 60) revealed no evidence for overt detection of hyper-realistic masks among real face photos, and little evidence of covert detection. Experiment 2 (Japan; n = 60) extended these findings to different masks, mask-wearers and participant pools. In Experiment 3 (UK and Japan; n = 407), passers-by failed to notice that a live confederate was wearing a hyper-realistic mask and showed limited evidence of covert detection, even at close viewing distance (5 vs. 20 m). Across all of these studies, viewers accepted hyper-realistic masks as real faces. Specific countermeasures will be required if detection rates are to be improved.
| S-EPMC5655619 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Governments across the world have implemented restrictive policies to slow the spread of COVID-19. Recommended face mask use has been a controversially discussed policy, among others, due to potential adverse effects on physical distancing. Using a randomized field experiment (N = 300), we show that individuals kept a significantly larger distance from someone wearing a face mask than from an unmasked person during the early days of the pandemic. According to an additional survey experiment (N = 456) conducted at the time, masked individuals were not perceived as being more infectious than unmasked ones, but they were believed to prefer more distancing. This result suggests that wearing a mask served as a social signal that led others to increase the distance they kept. Our findings provide evidence against the claim that mask use creates a false sense of security that would negatively affect physical distancing. Furthermore, our results suggest that behavior has informational content that may be affected by policies. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40881-021-00108-6.
| S-EPMC8590132 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCOVID-19 was declared a pandemic in March 2020. With the sudden surge in demand for personal protective equipment (PPE), significant concerns regarding the ongoing availability emerged. One solution proposed is re-sterilisation of respirator masks and this has been commenced in some parts of the world. On review of the literature, very little is documented regarding the knowledge of masks and the attitudes of healthcare workers towards using re-sterilised masks.MethodsA comprehensive questionnaire was used to assess general knowledge and attitudes around facemasks and respirators.ResultsThere were 190 respondents. There were significant gaps in knowledge and understanding of when particular face masks should be worn. One-third had significant concerns about ongoing availability. One-third had concerns about the quality of the masks as the pandemic continued. Only 10% of respondents underwent formal face-fitting. Eighty percent of respondents stated they would wear a re-sterilised mask. A further 15% would use a re-sterilised mask but required certain reassurances. Five percent of our respondents would not use a re-sterilised mask under any circumstances.DiscussionEnsuring an adequate understanding of face masks is crucial among healthcare workers (HCWs) and this study highlights a need for further education. It also demonstrates a general acceptability among HCWs towards the use of re-sterilised face masks.
| S-EPMC7870031 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly impacted United States residents. Prevention behaviors are critical to minimizing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the U.S., to ultimately reduce the health, social, and economic burdens of COVID-19. Yet, health behavior decision-making is complex, and uptake of preventative behaviors has been variable. Women may provide pro-prevention behavior modeling to their networks, facilitating uptake diffusion. The COPE Study enrolled 491 women residing in the United States from May to June of 2020; women completed an online survey of COVID-19 experiences and prevention behaviors. We employed binary logistic modeling to identify factors predicting women's practice of (1) staying home except for essential activities, (2) physical distancing in public, and (3) wearing a face mask in public. Findings demonstrate that women's prevention behaviors are influenced by multilevel factors. Women living in urban environments, having minimal formal education, or having a household annual income of USD 30,000-50,000 are less likely to practice prevention behaviors. Cultural context may be an important factor in the decision-making process. Results aid in the identification what interventional "levers" may warrant consideration to promote uptake of such behaviors, and whom to engage. Because women are modelers of behavior, it is critical to engage them in prevention behavior interventions.
| S-EPMC7795406 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This population-based observational, cross-sectional, and descriptive survey was to investigate the relationship of increased face mask usage in the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) era with mask-associated dry eye (MADE). Participants aged 6-79 years old with formal school education were selected. All participants finished the 19-item questionnaire online, distributed through different social media platforms. From 6925 participants who submitted eligible questionnaires, MADE was reported in 547 participants, which included 419 participants who developed new dry eye symptoms after wearing face masks and 128 participants whose pre-existing dry eye symptoms worsened with mask wearing. Longer time of face mask wearing, nonstandard wearing of face masks, reduced outdoor time, decreased daily reading time, shortened visual display terminals time, and dry environment were positively associated with MADE. There were significant associations between perceived MADE and age, female sex, education, use of glasses and contact lenses, and pre-existing dry eye. MADE was more common in adults aged > 20 years than those aged ≤ 20 years or juveniles. MADE incidence increased. Standard wearing of face masks was suggested as a protective factor for MADE. Awareness about the possible risk of MADE should also be created and the clinical dry eye signs should be verified.Clinical trial registration number: NCT04744805.
| S-EPMC9007396 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cotton and surgical face masks in community settings: bacterial contamination and face mask hygiene
| PRJEB45406 | ENA
Project description:BackgroundSince the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic, the population in Germany has been asked to wear face masks in public areas. The masks are accepted by the public. People with a pollen allergy have an interest in knowing whether masks can also provide protection against pollen and thus prevent symptoms even without medication.MethodIn order to evaluate the potential 'antipollen effect' of face masks, 14 adults with confirmed grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis were exposed to grass pollen for a period of two hours following a standardised protocol. The test was conducted outside of the grass pollen season. The subjects wore either no mask, a medical mask or a FFP2 mask.ResultsSubjects wearing either mask were clearly able to avoid both nasal and conjunctival symptoms. There were no significant differences between the two masks in terms of effect. Mask wearing to prevent pollen exposure clearly supports overall well-being.ConclusionWearing a mask during pollen season can be recommended as an effective nondrug option for people with a pollen allergy.Supplementary informationThe online version of this article (10.1007/s40629-021-00180-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
| S-EPMC8278371 | biostudies-literature