ArticlePloS one2022
Lives saved and lost in the first six month of the US COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective cost-benefit analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- On campus dormitories as viral transmission sinks: Phylodynamic insights into student housing networks during the COVID-19 pandemic.PLoS pathogens · 2025Article
- Review
- Impact of SARS-CoV-2 on healthcare and essential workers: A longitudinal study of PROMIS-29 outcomes.PloS one · 2025Article
- Trust or money? Barriers to health and healthcare behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic.PloS one · 2025Article
- Exploring the Complexities of Long COVID.Viruses · 2024Review
- Epidemiological approaches to multivariable models of health inequity: A study of race, rurality, and occupation during the COVID-19 pandemic.Annals of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Policy analysis and data mining tools for controlling COVID-19 policies.Network modeling and analysis in health informatics and bioinformatics · 2023Article
- Sputnik V Effectiveness against Hospitalization with COVID-19 during Omicron Dominance.Vaccines · 2022Article
- The economic value of quarantine is higher at lower case prevalence, with quarantine justified at lower risk of infection.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2021Article
- Optimizing Missouri's Preparation for the Next Pandemic: Lessons Learned from COVID-19: Part 1.Missouri medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the beginning of the COVID-19 US epidemic in March 2020, sweeping lockdowns and other aggressive measures were put in place and retained in many states until end of August of 2020; the ensuing economic downturn has led many to question the wisdom of the early COVID-19 policy measures in the US. This study's objective was to evaluate the cost and benefit of the US COVID-19-mitigating policy intervention during the first six month of the pandemic in terms of COVID-19 mortality potentially averted, versus mortality potentially attributable to the economic downturn. We conducted a synthesis-based retrospective cost-benefit analysis of the full complex of US federal, state, and local COVID-19-mitigating measures, including lockdowns and all other COVID-19-mitigating measures, against the counterfactual scenario involving no public health intervention. We derived parameter estimates from a rapid review and synthesis of recent epidemiologic studies and economic literature on regulation-attributable mortality. According to our estimates, the policy intervention saved 866,350-1,711,150 lives (4,886,214-9,650,886 quality-adjusted life-years), while mortality attributable to the economic downturn was 57,922-245,055 lives (2,093,811-8,858,444 life-years). We conclude that the number of lives saved by the spring-summer lockdowns and other COVID-19-mitigation was greater than the number of lives potentially lost due to the economic downturn. However, the net impact on quality-adjusted life expectancy is ambiguous.
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.