4.8 Article

Understanding the effectiveness of government interventions against the resurgence of COVID-19 in Europe

Journal

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-26013-4

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. EPSRC [EP/S024050/1, EP/V002910/1]
  2. EA Funds programme
  3. Oxford University
  4. DeepMind
  5. Open Philanthropy
  6. U.K. BBSRC [BB/T008784/1]
  7. Augustinus Foundation
  8. Knud HOjgaard Foundation
  9. William Demant Foundation
  10. Kai Lange and Gunhild Kai Lange Foundation
  11. Aage and Johanne Louis-Hansen Foundation
  12. UKRI Centre for Doctoral Training in Interactive Artificial Intelligence [EP/S022937/1]
  13. Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds
  14. MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis - U.K. Medical Research Council (MRC) [MR/R015600/1]
  15. MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis - U.K. Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), under the MRC/FCDO Concordat agreement [MR/R015600/1]
  16. European Union
  17. Community Jameel
  18. Imperial College COVID-19 Research Fund
  19. EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Autonomous Intelligent Machines and Systems [EP/S024050/1]
  20. Cancer Research UK
  21. UK Research and Innovation [MR/V038109/1]
  22. Academy of Medical Sciences Springboard Award [SBF004/1080]
  23. MRC [MR/R015600/1]
  24. BMGF [OPP1197730]
  25. Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust-BRC Funding [RDA02]
  26. Novo Nordisk Young Investigator Award [NNF20OC0059309]
  27. NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Modelling Methodology
  28. BBSRC [BB/T008784/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  29. EPSRC [EP/S022937/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  30. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1197730] Funding Source: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Research shows that in Europe's second wave, interventions such as business closures, educational institution closures, and gathering bans help reduce virus transmission, but with slightly less effectiveness compared to the first wave. This difference is attributed to the implementation of safety measures and individual protective behaviors in public life during the pandemic.
European governments control resurging waves of COVID-19 using nonpharmaceutical interventions. Here, the authors estimate the effectiveness of 17 interventions in Europe's second wave, and analyse differences to the first wave as well as implications for the future of the pandemic. European governments use non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to control resurging waves of COVID-19. However, they only have outdated estimates for how effective individual NPIs were in the first wave. We estimate the effectiveness of 17 NPIs in Europe's second wave from subnational case and death data by introducing a flexible hierarchical Bayesian transmission model and collecting the largest dataset of NPI implementation dates across Europe. Business closures, educational institution closures, and gathering bans reduced transmission, but reduced it less than they did in the first wave. This difference is likely due to organisational safety measures and individual protective behaviours-such as distancing-which made various areas of public life safer and thereby reduced the effect of closing them. Specifically, we find smaller effects for closing educational institutions, suggesting that stringent safety measures made schools safer compared to the first wave. Second-wave estimates outperform previous estimates at predicting transmission in Europe's third wave.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available