Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34288910›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

The introduction of a mandatory mask policy was associated with significantly reduced COVID-19 cases in a major metropolitan city.

Nick Scott, Allan Saul, Tim Spelman, Mark Stoove, Alisa Pedrana, Alexander Saeri, Emily Grundy, Liam Smith, Michael Toole, Chandini Raina McIntyre and 2 more

RetractedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Nick ScottThe Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Allan SaulThe Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0665-4091
Tim SpelmanThe Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Mark StooveThe Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Alisa PedranaThe Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Alexander SaeriBehaviourWorks Australia, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Emily GrundyBehaviourWorks Australia, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Liam SmithBehaviourWorks Australia, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Michael TooleThe Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Chandini Raina McIntyreBiosecurity Program, The Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Brendan S CrabbThe Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Margaret HellardThe Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5055-3266

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhilst evidence of use of face masks in reducing COVID-19 cases is increasing, the impact of mandatory use across a large population has been difficult to assess. Introduction of mandatory mask use on July 22, 2020 during a resurgence of COVID-19 in Melbourne, Australia created a situation that facilitated an assessment of the impact of the policy on the epidemic growth rate as its introduction occurred in the absence of other changes to restrictions. METHODS AND

findingsExponential epidemic growth or decay rates in daily COVID-19 diagnoses were estimated using a non-weighted linear regression of the natural logarithm of the daily cases against time, using a linear spline model with one knot (lspline package in R v 3.6.3). The model's two linear segments pivot around the hinge day, on which the mask policy began to take effect, 8 days following the introduction of the policy. We used two forms of data to assess change in mask usage: images of people wearing masks in public places obtained from a major media outlet and population-based survey data. Potential confounding factors (including daily COVID-19 tests, number of COVID-19 cases among population subsets affected differentially by the mask policy-e.g., healthcare workers) were examined for their impact on the results. Daily cases fitted an exponential growth in the first log-linear segment (k = +0.042, s.e. = 0.007), and fitted an exponential decay in the second (k = -0.023, s.e. = 0.017) log-linear segment. Over a range of reported serial intervals for SARS-CoV-2 infection, these growth rates correspond to a 22-33% reduction in an effective reproduction ratio before and after mandatory mask use. Analysis of images of people in public spaces showed mask usage rose from approximately 43% to 97%. Analysis of survey data found that on the third day before policy introduction, 44% of participants reported "often" or "always" wearing a mask; on the fourth day after, 100% reported "always" doing so. No potentially confounding factors were associated with the observed change in growth rates.

conclusionsThe mandatory mask use policy substantially increased public use of masks and was associated with a significant decline in new COVID-19 cases after introduction of the policy. This study strongly supports the use of masks for controlling epidemics in the broader community.

Indexed as

PolicyAustraliaCitiesCOVID-19Health BehaviorHumansMasksMultivariate AnalysisPandemics

Identifiers

PMID34288910
PMCPMC8294480

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.