RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 How Timing of Stay-at-home Orders and Mobility Reductions Impacted First-Wave COVID-19 Deaths in US Counties
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.11.24.20238055
DO 10.1101/2020.11.24.20238055
A1 Michelle Audirac
A1 Mauricio Tec
A1 Lauren Ancel Meyers
A1 Spencer Fox
A1 Cory Zigler
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/26/2020.11.24.20238055.abstract
AB As SARS-CoV-2 transmission continues to evolve, understanding how location-specific variations in non-pharmaceutical interventions and behaviors contributed to disease transmission during the initial epidemic wave will be key for future control strategies. We offer a rigorous statistical analysis of the relative effectiveness of the timing of both official stay-at-home orders and population mobility reductions during the initial stage of the US epidemic. We use a Bayesian hierarchical regression to fit county-level mortality data from the first case on Jan 21 2020 through Apr 20 2020 and quantify associations between the timing of stay-at-home orders and population mobility with epidemic control. We find that among 882 counties with an early local epidemic, a 10-day delay in the enactment of stay-at-home orders would have been associated with 14,700 additional deaths by Apr 20 (95% credible interval: 9,100, 21,500), whereas shifting orders 10 days earlier would have been associated with nearly 15,700 fewer lives lost (95% credible interval: 11,350, 18,950). Analogous estimates are available for reductions in mobility—which typically occurred before stay-at-home orders—and are also stratified by county urbanicity, showing significant heterogeneity. Results underscore the importance of timely policy and behavioral action for early-stage epidemic control.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was partially funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, and by a gift from Tito's Handmade Vodka to the UT COVID-19 Modeling ConsortiumAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:No IRB exemption was sought or required as all data used in the analysis are publicly available.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesData on COVID-19 deaths were provided by the New York Times and are publicly available: https://github.com/nytimes/covid-19-data/ Data on social-distancing metrics were provided under a Data Use Agreement by SafeGraph and are available by contacting SafeGraph directly: https://www.safegraph.com/dashboard/covid19-shelter-in-place https://github.com/nytimes/covid-19-data/ https://www.safegraph.com