ArticlePloS one2021
Does the data tell the true story? A modelling assessment of early COVID-19 pandemic suppression and mitigation strategies in Ghana.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Excess mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic in low-and lower-middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on number of deaths in Ghana: an application of ARIMA with intervention analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Population-based cross-sectional seroprevalence study of SARS-CoV-2 infection in urban residential areas in Ghana.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Decreased influenza activity during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ghana, 2020.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- High seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in Burkina-Faso, Ghana and Madagascar in 2021: a population-based study.BMC public health · 2022Article
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper uses publicly available data and various statistical models to estimate the basic reproduction number (R0) and other disease parameters for Ghana's early COVID-19 pandemic outbreak. We also test the effectiveness of government imposition of public health measures to reduce the risk of transmission and impact of the pandemic, especially in the early phase. R0 is estimated from the statistical model as 3.21 using a 0.147 estimated growth rate [95% C.I.: 0.137-0.157] and a 15-day time to recovery after COVID-19 infection. This estimate of the initial R0 is consistent with others reported in the literature from other parts of Africa, China and Europe. Our results also indicate that COVID-19 transmission reduced consistently in Ghana after the imposition of public health interventions-such as border restrictions, intra-city movement, quarantine and isolation-during the first phase of the pandemic from March to May 2020. However, the time-dependent reproduction number (Rt) beyond mid-May 2020 does not represent the true situation, given that there was not a consistent testing regime in place. This is also confirmed by our Jack-knife bootstrap estimates which show that the positivity rate over-estimates the true incidence rate from mid-May 2020. Given concerns about virus mutations, delays in vaccination and a possible new wave of the pandemic, there is a need for systematic testing of a representative sample of the population to monitor the reproduction number. There is also an urgent need to increase the availability of testing for the general population to enable early detection, isolation and treatment of infected individuals to reduce progression to severe disease and mortality.
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.