Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33820846›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2021

Measuring voluntary and policy-induced social distancing behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Youpei Yan, Amyn A Malik, Jude Bayham, Eli P Fenichel, Chandra Couzens, Saad B Omer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

76 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Understanding Nash epidemics.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  12. Breastfeeding and workplace support in Nepal.PLOS global public health · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Youpei YanSchool of the Environment, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511.ORCID 0000-0002-1892-4936
Amyn A MalikYale Institute for Global Health, New Haven, CT 06510.ORCID 0000-0003-4875-9916
Jude BayhamDepartment of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523.ORCID 0000-0001-5383-2714
Eli P FenichelSchool of the Environment, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511; Eli.Fenichel@yale.edu.
Chandra CouzensDepartment of Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT 06510.ORCID 0000-0003-1057-0392
Saad B OmerYale Institute for Global Health, New Haven, CT 06510.ORCID 0000-0002-5383-3474

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Staying home and avoiding unnecessary contact is an important part of the effort to contain COVID-19 and limit deaths. Every state in the United States enacted policies to encourage distancing and some mandated staying home. Understanding how these policies interact with individuals' voluntary responses to the COVID-19 epidemic is a critical initial step in understanding the role of these nonpharmaceutical interventions in transmission dynamics and assessing policy impacts. We use variation in policy responses along with smart device data that measures the amount of time Americans stayed home to disentangle the extent that observed shifts in staying home behavior are induced by policy. We find evidence that stay-at-home orders and voluntary response to locally reported COVID-19 cases and deaths led to behavioral change. For the median county, which implemented a stay-at-home order with about two cases, we find that the response to stay-at-home orders increased time at home as if the county had experienced 29 additional local cases. However, the relative effect of stay-at-home orders was much greater in select counties. On the one hand, the mandate can be viewed as displacing a voluntary response to this rise in cases. On the other hand, policy accelerated the response, which likely helped reduce spread in the early phase of the pandemic. It is important to be able to attribute the relative role of self-interested behavior or policy mandates to understand the limits and opportunities for relying on voluntary behavior as opposed to imposing stay-at-home orders.

Indexed as

BehaviorHealth PolicyPandemicsPhysical DistancingCOVID-19HumansRegression AnalysisSARS-CoV-2United Statesavoidance behaviorCOVID-19nonpharmaceutical interventionssocial distancingstay-at-home order

Identifiers

PMID33820846
PMCPMC8076999

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.