PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Jeff Lane
AU  - Michelle M. Garrison
AU  - James Kelley
AU  - Priya Sarma
AU  - Aaron Katz
TI  - Strengthening Policy Coding Methodologies to Improve COVID-19 Disease Modeling and Policy Responses: A Proposed Coding Framework and Recommendations
AID  - 10.1101/2020.08.12.20173740
DP  - 2020 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2020.08.12.20173740
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/14/2020.08.12.20173740.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/14/2020.08.12.20173740.full
AB  - In recent months, multiple efforts have sought to characterize COVID-19 social distancing policy responses. These efforts have used various coding frameworks, but most have relied on binary coding that may not adequately describe the gradient in social distancing policies as states “re-open.” We developed a COVID-19 social distancing intensity framework that is sufficiently specific and sensitive to capture this gradient. Based on a review of policies from a 12-state sample, we developed a social distancing intensity framework consisting of 16 domains and intensity scales of 0-5 for each domain. We found that the states with the highest average daily intensity from our sample were Pennsylvania, Washington, Colorado, California, and New Jersey, with Georgia, Florida, Massachusetts, and Texas having the lowest. While some domains (such as restaurants and movie theaters) showed bimodal policy intensity distributions compatible with binary (yes/no) coding, others (such as childcare and religious gatherings) showed broader variability that would be missed without more granular coding. We also present a range of methodological recommendations to strengthen COVID-19 comparative policy coding efforts.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNoneAuthor 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:This analysis did not involve human subjects research. Therefore, no IRB review was required.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as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.YesThe data referred to in the manuscript is available at the indicated website. https://openicpsr.org/openicpsr/project/120598/version/V1/view