ReviewThe Lancet regional health. Europe2022
The benefits, costs and feasibility of a low incidence COVID-19 strategy.
Review in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuity or Change: Occupational Health Policies of Key Organizations in Great Britain After the Major COVID Waves 2020-2022.New solutions : a journal of environmental and occupational health policy : NS · 2026Article
- European countries policy responses against SARS-Cov-2 in the context of vaccinations.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Measuring influencing factors affecting mortality rates during the COVID-19 pandemic.Global health action · 2024Article
- A novel mathematical model for prioritization of individuals to receive vaccine considering governmental health protocols.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2023Article
- COVID-19 Pandemic: Hard lessons to learn.African health sciences · 2023Article
- Proactive Contact Tracing.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
- Policy Disparities Between Singapore and Israel in Response to the First Omicron Wave.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2023Article
- Vaccine hesitancy, misinformation in the era of Covid-19: Lessons from the past.Ethics, medicine, and public health · 2022Review
- Age-related cognitive effects of the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions and associated mental health changes in Germans.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Green Transformation of Anti-Epidemic Supplies in the Post-Pandemic Era: An Evolutionary Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the summer of 2021, European governments removed most NPIs after experiencing prolonged second and third waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Most countries failed to achieve immunization rates high enough to avoid resurgence of the virus. Public health strategies for autumn and winter 2021 have ranged from countries aiming at low incidence by re-introducing NPIs to accepting high incidence levels. However, such high incidence strategies almost certainly lead to the very consequences that they seek to avoid: restrictions that harm people and economies. At high incidence, the important pandemic containment measure 'test-trace-isolate-support' becomes inefficient. At that point, the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and its numerous harmful consequences can likely only be controlled through restrictions. We argue that all European countries need to pursue a low incidence strategy in a coordinated manner. Such an endeavour can only be successful if it is built on open communication and trust.
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.