Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34675016›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Differential impact of physical distancing strategies on social contacts relevant for the spread of SARS-CoV-2: evidence from a cross-national online survey, March-April 2020.

Emanuele Del Fava, Jorge Cimentada, Daniela Perrotta, André Grow, Francesco Rampazzo, Sofia Gil-Clavel, Emilio Zagheni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  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. Article
  18. Effectiveness of Face Masks in Reducing the Spread of COVID-19: A Model-Based Analysis.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Emanuele Del FavaLaboratory of Digital and Computational Demography, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany delfava@demogr.mpg.de.ORCID 0000-0001-7352-8525
Jorge CimentadaLaboratory of Digital and Computational Demography, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
Daniela PerrottaLaboratory of Digital and Computational Demography, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
André GrowLaboratory of Digital and Computational Demography, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
Francesco RampazzoSaïd Business School, Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science, and Nuffield College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sofia Gil-ClavelLaboratory of Digital and Computational Demography, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
Emilio ZagheniLaboratory of Digital and Computational Demography, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe investigate changes in social contact patterns following the gradual introduction of non-pharmaceutical interventions and their implications for infection transmission in the early phase of the pandemic. DESIGN, SETTING AND

participantsWe conducted an online survey based on targeted Facebook advertising campaigns across eight countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, UK and USA), achieving a sample of 51 233 questionnaires in the period 13 March-12 April 2020. Poststratification weights based on census information were produced to correct for selection bias. OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants provided data on social contact numbers, adoption of protective behaviours and perceived level of threat. These data were combined to derive a weekly index of infection transmission, the net reproduction number [Formula: see text] .

resultsEvidence from the USA and UK showed that the number of daily contacts mainly decreased after governments issued the first physical distancing guidelines. In mid-April, daily social contact numbers had decreased between 61% in Germany and 87% in Italy with respect to pre-COVID-19 levels, mostly due to a contraction in contacts outside the home. Such reductions, which were uniform across age groups, were compatible with an [Formula: see text] equal or smaller than one in all countries, except Germany. This indicates lower levels of infection transmission, especially in a period of gradual increase in the adoption rate of the face mask outside the home.

conclusionsWe provided a comparable set of statistics on social contact patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic for eight high-income countries, disaggregated by week and other demographic factors, which could be leveraged by the scientific community for developing more realistic epidemic models of COVID-19.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2HumansMasksPandemicsPhysical DistancingCOVID-19epidemiologypublic healthworld wide web technology

Identifiers

PMID34675016
PMCPMC8532142

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.