RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Sensitivity analysis of the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.06.15.20131953
DO 10.1101/2020.06.15.20131953
A1 Kristian Soltesz
A1 Fredrik Gustafsson
A1 Toomas Timpka
A1 Joakim Jaldén
A1 Carl Jidling
A1 Albin Heimerson
A1 Thomas B. Schön
A1 Armin Spreco
A1 Joakim Ekberg
A1 Örjan Dahlström
A1 Fredrik Bagge Carlson
A1 Anna Jöud
A1 Bo Bernhardsson
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/06/18/2020.06.15.20131953.abstract
AB The role of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) on the spread of SARS-CoV-2 has drawn significant attention, both scientific and political. Particularly, an article by the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team (ICCRT), published online in Nature on June 8, 2020, evaluates the efficiency of 5 NPIs. Based on mortality data up to early May, it concludes that only one of the interventions, lockdown, has been efficient in 10 out of 11 studied European countries.We show, via simulations using the ICCRT model code, that conclusions regarding the effectiveness of individual NPIs are not justified. Our analysis focuses on the 11th country, Sweden, an outlier in that no lockdown was effectuated. The new simulations show that estimated NPI efficiencies across all 11 countries change drastically unless the model is adapted to give the Swedish data special treatment. While stated otherwise in the Nature article, such adaptation has been done in the model code reproducing its results: An ungrounded country-specific parameter said to have been introduced in all 11 countries, is in the code only activated for Sweden. This parameter de facto provides a new NPI category, only present in Sweden, and with an impact comparable to that of a lockdown.While the considered NPIs have unarguably contributed to reduce virus spread, our analysis reveals that their individual efficiency cannot be reliably quantified by the ICCRT model, provided mortality data up to early May.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was partially supported by the ELLIIT Strategic Research Area, by the Wallenberg AI, Autonomous Systems and Software Program (WASP) funded by the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, and by the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (SSF) via the project ASSEMBLE (contract number: RIT15-0012).Author 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:N/AAll 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.YesWe have used the original model code and associated data, provided in [9] and described as "the exact code that was used" in [4]. A fork of this code, generating the figures in this manuscript, is provided in [10].