Abstract
Are the lockdown measures limiting the propagation of COVID-19? Recent analyses on the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions in reducing COVID-19 growth rates delivered conflicting conclusions. While Haug et al. (2020) did find strong empirical support for reductions in COVID-19 growth rates, Bendavid et al. (2021) did not. Here, I present the results of a reanalysis of the data by Bendavid et al. (2021). Instead of relying on pairwise comparisons between 10 countries with fixed-effects regression models to isolate the effect of lockdown measures, I modelled the development of the pandemic with and without lockdown measures for the entire period and all countries included in the data with one mixed-effects regression model. My results reconciled the conflicting conclusions of Haug et al. (2020) and Bendavid et al. (2021): while mandatory business closure orders did not affect COVID-19 growth rates, a general decrease in COVID-19 growth rates was attributable to the implementation of mandatory stay-at-home orders. However, the effect of mandatory stay-at-home orders varied, being weaker, even zero, in some countries and sub-national units and stronger in others, where COVID-19 growth rates only decreased due to the implementation of mandatory stay-at-home orders. The heterogeneity in the effect of mandatory stay-at-home orders on the spread of COVID-19 is challenging from a scientific and political point of view.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The university of Leipzig funded my research
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:
I conducted a reanalysis of the data in Bendavid et al. (2021). No oversight body approved the research
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.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
I added two people to the acknowledgement and the .R files to recapitulate my analysis
Data Availability
Data is already available in Bendavid et al. (2021)
