Abstract
Background Governments are attempting to control the COVID-19 pandemic with nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). However, it is still largely unknown how effective different NPIs are at reducing transmission. Data-driven studies can estimate the effectiveness of NPIs while minimizing assumptions, but existing analyses lack sufficient data and validation to robustly distinguish the effects of individual NPIs.
Methods We collect chronological data on NPIs in 41 countries between January and May 2020, using independent double entry by researchers to ensure high data quality. We estimate NPI effectiveness with a Bayesian hierarchical model, by linking NPI implementation dates to national case and death counts. To our knowledge, this is the largest and most thoroughly validated data-driven study of NPI effectiveness to date.
Results We model each NPI’s effect as a multiplicative (percentage) reduction in the reproduction number R. We estimate the mean reduction in R across the countries in our data for eight NPIs: mandating mask-wearing in (some) public spaces (2%; 95% CI: −14%–16%), limiting gatherings to 1000 people or less (2%; −20%–22%), to 100 people or less (21%; 1%–39%), to 10 people or less (36%; 16%–53%), closing some high-risk businesses (31%; 13%–46%), closing most nonessential businesses (40%; 22%–55%), closing schools and universities (39%; 21%–55%), and issuing stay-at-home orders (18%; 4%–31%). These results are supported by extensive empirical validation, including 15 sensitivity analyses.
Conclusions Our results suggest that, by implementing effective NPIs, many countries can reduce R below 1 without issuing a stay-at-home order. We find a surprisingly large role for school and university closures in reducing COVID-19 transmission, a contribution to the ongoing debate about the relevance of asymptomatic carriers in disease spread. Banning gatherings and closing high-risk businesses can be highly effective in reducing transmission, but closing most businesses only has limited additional benefit.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Jan Brauner was supported by the EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Autonomous Intelligent Machines and Systems [EP/S024050/1] and by Cancer Research UK. Soeren Mindermann's funding for graduate studies was from Oxford University and DeepMind. Mrinank Sharma was supported by the EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Autonomous Intelligent Machines and Systems [EP/S024050/1]. Gavin Leech was supported by the UKRI Centre for Doctoral Training in Interactive Artificial Intelligence [EP/S022937/1]. The paid contractor work in the data collection and the development of the interactive website was funded by the Berkeley Existential Risk Initiative.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Not required.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
This work was conducted in association with the EpidemicForecasting.org project
c This is only approximately true. The negative binomial output distribution has a coefficient of variation diminishing with its mean; i.e., smaller observations are relatively more noisy and carry less weight. Further-more, whilst the prior over
could break scale invariance, the uninformative prior results in a negligible effect.
Data Availability
All NPI data with sources and model code are available at https://github.com/epidemics/COVIDNPIs/tree/paper
