Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33045008›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

The impact of social distancing on COVID19 spread: State of Georgia case study.

Pinar Keskinocak, Buse Eylul Oruc, Arden Baxter, John Asplund, Nicoleta Serban

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Agent Simulation Model of COVID-19 Epidemic Agent-Based on GIS: A Case Study of Huangpu District, Shanghai.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  12. Trend estimation and short-term forecasting of COVID-19 cases and deaths worldwide.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pinar KeskinocakH. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2686-546X
Buse Eylul OrucH. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2431-3864
Arden BaxterH. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
John AsplundH. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Nicoleta SerbanH. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Georgia Institute of Technology · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the spread of COVID19 in the US continues to grow, local and state officials face difficult decisions about when and how to transition to a "new normal." The goal of this study is to project the number of COVID19 infections and resulting severe outcomes, and the need for hospital capacity under social distancing, particularly, shelter-in-place and voluntary quarantine for the State of Georgia. We developed an agent-based simulation model to project the infection spread. The model utilizes COVID19-specific parameters and data from Georgia on population interactions and demographics. The simulation study covered a seven and a half-month period, testing different social distancing scenarios, including baselines (no-intervention or school closure only) and combinations of shelter-in-place and voluntary quarantine with different timelines and compliance levels. The following outcomes are compared at the state and community levels: the number and percentage of cumulative and daily new symptomatic and asymptomatic infections, hospitalizations, and deaths; COVID19-related demand for hospital beds, ICU beds, and ventilators. The results suggest that shelter-in-place followed by voluntary quarantine reduced peak infections from approximately 180K under no intervention and 113K under school closure, respectively, to below 53K, and delayed the peak from April to July or later. Increasing shelter-in-place duration from four to five weeks yielded 2-9% and 3-11% decrease in cumulative infection and deaths, respectively. Regardless of the shelter-in-place duration, increasing voluntary quarantine compliance decreased daily new infections from almost 53K to 25K, and decreased cumulative infections by about 50%. The cumulative number of deaths ranged from 6,660 to 19,430 under different scenarios. Peak infection date varied across scenarios and counties; on average, increasing shelter-in-place duration delayed the peak day by 6 days. Overall, shelter-in-place followed by voluntary quarantine substantially reduced COVID19 infections, healthcare resource needs, and severe outcomes.

Indexed as

QuarantineSocial IsolationAdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19FemaleGeorgiaHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID33045008
PMCPMC7549801
OpenAlexW3091899539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.