ArticleEpidemiology and psychiatric sciences2020
Preserving equipoise and performing randomised trials for COVID-19 social distancing interventions.
Article in Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effects of public health and social measures (PHSM) implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic: An overview of systematic reviews.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2024Review
- The Ethical Obligation for Research During Public Health Emergencies: Insights From the COVID-19 Pandemic.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2024Article
- Randomized trials on non-pharmaceutical interventions for COVID-19: a scoping review.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2022Article
- Pandemics, policy, and the power of paradigm: will COVID-19 lead to a new scientific revolution?Annals of epidemiology · 2022Article
- Aggressive measures, rising inequalities, and mass formation during the COVID-19 crisis: An overview and proposed way forward.Frontiers in public health · 2022Review
- Clinical trials during pandemic in primary care: Low number and low validity after one-year experience.The European journal of general practice · 2021Article
- Challenges and Lessons Learned From COVID-19 Trials: Should We Be Doing Clinical Trials Differently?The Canadian journal of cardiology · 2021Review
- Benefit of COVID-19 vaccination accounting for potential risk compensation.NPJ vaccines · 2021Article
- Effect estimates of COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions are non-robust and highly model-dependent.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2021Article
- Authors Response to Letters to the editor regarding: 'Assessing mandatory stay- At- Home and business closure effects on the spread of COVID- 19'.European journal of clinical investigation · 2021Article
- Precision shielding for COVID-19: metrics of assessment and feasibility of deployment.BMJ global health · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a large number of non-pharmaceutical measures that pertain to the wider group of social distancing interventions (e.g. public gathering bans, closures of schools, workplaces and all but essential business, mandatory stay-at-home policies, travel restrictions, border closures and others) have been deployed. Their urgent deployment was defended with modelling and observational data of spurious credibility. There is major debate on whether these measures are effective and there is also uncertainty about the magnitude of the harms that these measures might induce. Given that there is equipoise for how, when and if specific social distancing interventions for COVID-19 should be applied and removed/modified during reopening, we argue that informative randomised-controlled trials are needed. Only a few such randomised trials have already been conducted, but the ones done to-date demonstrate that a randomised trials agenda is feasible. We discuss here issues of study design choice, selection of comparators (intervention and controls), choice of outcomes and additional considerations for the conduct of such trials. We also discuss and refute common counter-arguments against the conduct of such trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.