Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35615062›Full record

ArticleThe Annals of regional science2022

A modeling study of the effect of social distancing policies on the early spread of coronavirus disease 2019: a case of South Korea.

Moon-Hyun Kim, Jiwon Lee, Hee-Jin Oh, Tsolmon Bayarsaikhan, Tae-Hyoung Tommy Gim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Annals of regional science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors.

Moon-Hyun KimGraduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Building 82, Room 214, Seoul, 08826 South Korea.
Jiwon LeeGraduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Building 82, Room 214, Seoul, 08826 South Korea.
Hee-Jin OhGraduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Building 82, Room 214, Seoul, 08826 South Korea.
Tsolmon BayarsaikhanGraduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Building 82, Room 214, Seoul, 08826 South Korea.
Tae-Hyoung Tommy GimGraduate School of Environmental Studies, Interdisciplinary Program in Landscape Architecture, and Environmental Planning Institute, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Building 82, Room 222, Seoul, 08826 South Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-6623-1042

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The social distancing policy is an effective way to prevent the spread of infectious diseases in the initial phase of their outbreak when medical evidence to support a particular course of treatment is deficient. While studies on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have mainly focused on the effects of specific measures (e.g., school and workplace closures and restrictions on movement), few investigated the characteristics of epidemic trends in response to the intensity of the policy and the amount of time required for policy measures to take effect. This study employs the SIRD (susceptible, infected, recovered, and deceased) model to analyze the COVID-19 epidemic trend according to the intensity of the social distancing policy in South Korea. The model reveals that the reproduction number began at 5.58 and fluctuated between 0.14 and 1.72 during the study period in accordance with different policy intensities. At the beginning of the social distancing policy, restrictions on public facility use were likely to have been effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19. When the intervention was relaxed, the transmission potential increased significantly. According to the reproduction number, social distancing policies prove to be effective after 13-19 days of implementation; however, as the pandemic progressed, this period extended from 13-14 to 18-19 days for the same effect. This suggests that governments need to consider not only the intensity of the social distancing policy, but also people's low responsiveness as the pandemic remains prevalent over time. It is also recommended they take preemptive action to ensure sufficient time for the policy to achieve its stated goal.

Indexed as

C63I18Z18

Identifiers

PMID35615062
PMCPMC9123615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.