Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33614069›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2021

Disparate patterns of movements and visits to points of interest located in urban hotspots across US metropolitan cities during COVID-19.

Qingchun Li, Liam Bessell, Xin Xiao, Chao Fan, Xinyu Gao, Ali Mostafavi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. POIFormer: A Transformer-Based Framework for Accurate Point-of-Interest Attribution.Proceedings of the ... ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems : ACM GIS. ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Qingchun LiZachry Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Texas A&M University, 199 Spence Street, College Station, TX 77843-3112, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0769-0238
Liam BessellDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Texas A&M University, 199 Spence Street, College Station, TX 77843-3112, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1777-7812
Xin XiaoDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Texas A&M University, 199 Spence Street, College Station, TX 77843-3112, USA.
Chao FanZachry Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Texas A&M University, 199 Spence Street, College Station, TX 77843-3112, USA.
Xinyu GaoZachry Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Texas A&M University, 199 Spence Street, College Station, TX 77843-3112, USA.
Ali MostafaviZachry Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Texas A&M University, 199 Spence Street, College Station, TX 77843-3112, USA.
Texas A&M University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We examined the effect of social distancing on changes in visits to urban hotspot points of interest. In a pandemic situation, urban hotspots could be potential superspreader areas as visits to urban hotspots can increase the risk of contact and transmission of a disease among a population. We mapped census-block-group to point-of-interest (POI) movement networks in 16 cities in the United States. We adopted a modified coarse-grain approach to examine patterns of visits to POIs among hotspots and non-hotspots from January to May 2020. Also, we conducted chi-square tests to identify POIs with significant flux-in changes during the analysis period. The results showed disparate patterns across cities in terms of reduction in hotspot POI visitors. Sixteen cities were divided into two categories using a time series clustering method. In one category, which includes the cities of San Francisco, Seattle and Chicago, we observed a considerable decrease in hotspot POI visitors, while in another category, including the cities of Austin, Houston and San Diego, the visitors to hotspots did not greatly decrease. While all the cities exhibited overall decreased visitors to POIs, one category maintained the proportion of visitors to hotspot POIs. The proportion of visitors to some POIs (e.g. restaurants) remained stable during the social distancing period, while some POIs had an increased proportion of visitors (e.g. grocery stores). We also identified POIs with significant flux-in changes, indicating that related businesses were greatly affected by social distancing. The study was limited to 16 metropolitan cities in the United States. The proposed methodology could be applied to digital trace data in other cities and countries to study the patterns of movements to POIs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Indexed as

census-block-group to point-of-interest movement networkCOVID-19epidemical controlmovement patternsorigin–destination networkurban hotspots

Identifiers

PMID33614069
PMCPMC7890478
OpenAlexW3118813884

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.