ArticleBMC public health2021
How did governmental interventions affect the spread of COVID-19 in European countries?
Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- A scoping review of COVID-19 modelling studies in Belgium 2020-2024: incorporation of behaviour and lessons learned.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Pooled it
- Effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions as implemented in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: a rapid review.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Systematic review of empirical studies comparing the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19.The Journal of infection · 2021Pooled it
- Transferable learning from pandemic experiences: impacts, adaptations and capacity for resilience within households, communities and organisations.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Non-pharmaceutical interventions to reduce COVID-19 transmission in the UK: a rapid mapping review and interactive evidence gap map.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2024Review
- Socio-economic analysis of short-term trends of COVID-19: modeling and data analytics.BMC public health · 2022Article
- The role of inter-regional mobility in forecasting SARS-CoV-2 transmission.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2022Article
- SARS-CoV-2 suppression and early closure of bars and restaurants: a longitudinal natural experiment.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Compartmental structures used in modeling COVID-19: a scoping review.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2022Article
- The relationship between new PCR positive cases and going out in public during the COVID-19 epidemic in Japan.PloS one · 2022Article
- Assessing Public Health and Social Measures Against COVID-19 in Japan From March to June 2021.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Sustained Effects of Government Response on the COVID-19 Infection Rate in China: A Multiple Mediation Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- A model based on cellular automata for investigating the impact of lockdown, migration and vaccination on COVID-19 dynamics.Computer methods and programs in biomedicine · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo reduce the transmission of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in its first wave, European governments have implemented successive measures to encourage social distancing. However, it remained unclear how effectively measures reduced the spread of the virus. We examined how the effective-contact rate (ECR), the mean number of daily contacts for an infectious individual to transmit the virus, among European citizens evolved during this wave over the period with implemented measures, disregarding a priori information on governmental measures.
methodsWe developed a data-oriented approach that is based on an extended Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Removed (SEIR) model. Using the available data on the confirmed numbers of infections and hospitalizations, we first estimated the daily total number of infectious-, exposed- and susceptible individuals and subsequently estimated the ECR with an iterative Poisson regression model. We then compared change points in the daily ECRs to the moments of the governmental measures.
resultsThe change points in the daily ECRs were found to align with the implementation of governmental interventions. At the end of the considered time-window, we found similar ECRs for Italy (0.29), Spain (0.24), and Germany (0.27), while the ECR in the Netherlands (0.34), Belgium (0.35) and the UK (0.37) were somewhat higher. The highest ECR was found for Sweden (0.45).
conclusionsThere seemed to be an immediate effect of banning events and closing schools, typically among the first measures taken by the governments. The effect of additionally closing bars and restaurants seemed limited. For most countries a somewhat delayed effect of the full lockdown was observed, and the ECR after a full lockdown was not necessarily lower than an ECR after (only) a gathering ban.
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.