ArticleEpidemiology and infection2021
Effect of non-pharmacological interventions on the COVID-19 epidemic in Saudi Arabia.
Article in Epidemiology and infection, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Theoretical Epidemiology Needs Urgent Attention in China.China CDC weekly · 2024Article
- Assessing the Impact of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions on Consumer Mobility Patterns and COVID-19 Transmission in the US.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We quantified the potential impact of different social distancing and self-isolation scenarios on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic trajectory in Saudi Arabia and compared the modelling results to the confirmed epidemic trajectory. Using the susceptible, exposed, infected, quarantined and self-isolated, requiring hospitalisation, recovered/immune individuals, fatalities model, we assessed the impact of a non-pharmacological interventions' subset. An unmitigated scenario (baseline), mitigation scenarios (25% reduction in social contact/twofold increase in self-isolation) and enhanced mitigation scenarios (50% reduction in social contact/twofold increase in self-isolation) were assessed and compared to the actual epidemic trajectory. For the unmitigated scenario, mitigation scenarios, enhanced mitigation scenarios and actual observed epidemic, the peak daily incidence rates (per 10 000 population) were 77.00, 16.00, 9.00 and 1.14 on days 71, 54, 35 and 136, respectively. The peak fatality rates were 35.00, 13.00, 5.00 and 0.016 on days 150, 125, 60 and 155, respectively. The R0 was 1.15, 1.14, 1.22 and 2.50, respectively. Aggressive implementation of social distancing and self-isolation contributed to the downward trend of the disease. We recommend using extensive models that comprehensively consider the natural history of COVID-19, social and behavioural patterns, age-specific data, actual network topology and population to elucidate the epidemic's magnitude and trajectory.
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.