Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34722775›Full record

ArticleBioMed research international2021

The Impact of China's Lockdown Policy on the Incidence of COVID-19: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis.

Mooketsi Molefi, John T Tlhakanelo, Thabo Phologolo, Shimeles G Hamda, Tiny Masupe, Billy Tsima, Vincent Setlhare, Yohana Mashalla, Douglas J Wiebe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioMed research international, 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Effectiveness of social distancing measures and lockdowns for reducing transmission of COVID-19 in non-healthcare, community-based settings.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Spatial and Temporal Analysis of COVID-19 Cases in West Java, Indonesia and Its Influencing Factors.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors.

Mooketsi MolefiPublic Health Medicine Unit, Department of Family Medicine & Public Health, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6921-1186
John T TlhakaneloPublic Health Medicine Unit, Department of Family Medicine & Public Health, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7365-1603
Thabo PhologoloPublic Health Medicine Unit, Department of Family Medicine & Public Health, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9061-3510
Shimeles G HamdaPublic Health Medicine Unit, Department of Family Medicine & Public Health, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1740-2762
Tiny MasupePublic Health Medicine Unit, Department of Family Medicine & Public Health, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8366-6585
Billy TsimaFamily Medicine Unit, Department of Family Medicine & Public Health, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8534-7198
Vincent SetlhareFamily Medicine Unit, Department of Family Medicine & Public Health, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2935-2897
Yohana MashallaBiomedical Science Department, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2031-3672
Douglas J WiebeDepartment of Biostatistics, Epidemiology & Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6434-8693

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPolicy changes are often necessary to contain the detrimental impact of epidemics such as those brought about by coronavirus disease (COVID-19). In the earlier phases of the emergence of COVID-19, China was the first to impose strict restrictions on movement (lockdown) on January 23rd, 2020. A strategy whose effectiveness in curtailing COVID-19 was yet to be determined. We, therefore, sought to study the impact of the lockdown in reducing the incidence of COVID-19.

methodsDaily cases of COVID-19 that occurred in China which were registered between January 12th and March 30th, 2020, were extracted from the Johns Hopkins CSSE team COVID-19 ArcGIS® dashboards. Daily cases reported were used as data points in the series. Two interrupted series models were run: one with an interruption point of 23 January 2020 (model 1) and the other with a 14-day deferred interruption point of 6th February (model 2). For both models, the magnitude of change (before and after) and linear trend analyses were measured, and

resultsSeventy-eight data points were used in the analysis. There was an 11% versus a 163% increase in daily cases in models 1 and 2, respectively, in the preintervention periods (

conclusionThere was a significant decrease the COVID-19 daily cases reported in China following the institution of a lockdown, and therefore, lockdown may be used to curtail the burden of COVID-19.

Indexed as

EpidemicsPolicyChinaCOVID-19HumansIncidenceInterrupted Time Series AnalysisModels, StatisticalPandemicsSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID34722775
PMCPMC8553467

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.