Abstract
During the COVID-19 pandemic, aggregated mobility data was frequently used to estimate changing social contact rates. By taking pre-pandemic contact matrices, and transforming these using pandemic-era mobility data, infectious disease modellers attempted to predict the effect of large-scale behavioural changes on contact rates. This study explores the most accurate method for this transformation, using pandemic-era contact surveys as ground truth. We compared four methods for scaling synthetic contact matrices: two using fitted regression models and two using “naïve” mobility or mobility squared models. The regression models were fitted using the CoMix contact survey and Google mobility data from the UK over March 2020 – March 2021. The four models were then used to scale synthetic contact matrices—a representation of pre-pandemic behaviour—using mobility data from the UK, Belgium and the Netherlands to predict the number of contacts expected in “work” and “other” settings for a given mobility level. We then compared partial reproduction numbers estimated from the four models with those calculated directly from CoMix contact matrices across the three countries. The accuracy of each model was assessed using root mean squared error. The fitted regression models had substantially more accurate predictions than the naïve models, even when models were applied to out-of-sample data from the UK, Belgium and the Netherlands. Across all countries investigated, the linear fitted regression model was the most accurate and the naïve model using mobility alone was the least accurate. When attempting to estimate social contact rates during a pandemic without the resources available to conduct contact surveys, using a model fitted to data from another pandemic context is likely to be an improvement over using a “naïve” model based on mobility data alone. If a naïve model is to be used, mobility squared may be a better predictor of contact rates than mobility per se.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research was conducted as part of the first authors (Em Prestige) pre-doctoral fellowship funding by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR); grant number: NIHR301994. Funders did not play any role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Em Prestige is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Protection Research Unit in Modelling and Health Economics, a partnership between the UK Health Security Agency, Imperial College London and LSHTM (grant code NIHR200908). Disclaimer: ′The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR, UK Health Security Agency or the Department of Health and Social Care.′
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:
The study design and method of informed consent for the CoMix study were approved by the Ethics Committee of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (reference number 21795) in the UK, the Ethics Committee of Antwerp University Hospital (reference 3236 - BUN B3002020000054) in Belgium and need for approval was waived by the Medical Research Ethics Committee NedMec (research protocol number 22/917) in the Netherlands. All analyses were carried out on anonymised participant data. Additionally, Google mobility data was obtained from publicly available sources
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Minor clarifications to formulae and the addition of a new figure (fig 3).
Data Availability
CoMix survey data used for this study are available to download from Zenodo, for the UK, the Netherlands and Belgium. Google mobility data can be found on Google. The analysis code can be found on Github.
https://zenodo.org/records/13684044
https://zenodo.org/records/10549953
https://zenodo.org/records/7276465
