Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34802224›Full record

ArticleJournal of public health research2021

Progression of COVID-19 under the highly restrictive measures imposed in Argentina.

Jose-Luis Sagripanti, Daniel R Aquilano

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of public health research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors.

Jose-Luis SagripantiUS Food and Drug Administration and US Department of Defense (retired), Annapolis, MD. gripan889@gmail.com.
Daniel R AquilanoLaboratorio de Análisis Bioquímicos Dr. Daniel R. Aquilano, La Plata, Buenos Aires. daniel-aquilano@hotmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The variety and extent of non-pharmaceutical measures implemented by the government to control COVID-19 in Argentina were exceptional, making this country the best example to analyze the evolution of COVID-19 under the most stringent and longer-lasting restrictive policies- which included 119 days of strict nation-wide lock-down, 304 days of less restrictive lock-downs, and 35 days of curfews. Two of the three peaks of infection correlated with the germicidal solar flux received in Argentina, suggesting a seasonal component and a role for the virus persisting in the environment. A massive public gathering crowding the presidential square in Buenos Aires, during which nearly half of those present were without face masks, did not alter the infection curve in that city. Comparative epidemiological data (standardized per million inhabitants) shows that COVID-19 in Uruguay, a neighboring country whose capital is at a similar latitude than Buenos Aires and who did not mandate lock-downs or curfews, progressed much slower (until vaccination started) than in Argentina. The number of yearly deaths caused by respiratory diseases and influenza in Argentina before the pandemic was similar to the total number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 cumulated on April 25, 2021, more than a year after the pandemic started. The failure to detect any benefit on ameliorating COVID-19 by the long and strict nation-wide lock-downs in Argentina should raise world-wide concerns about mandating costly and ineffective restrictive measures during ongoing or future pandemics.

Identifiers

PMID34802224
PMCPMC8874870

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.