Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35661759›Full record

ArticleNature communications2022

Untangling the changing impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination on European COVID-19 trajectories.

Yong Ge, Wen-Bin Zhang, Xilin Wu, Corrine W Ruktanonchai, Haiyan Liu, Jianghao Wang, Yongze Song, Mengxiao Liu, Wei Yan, Juan Yang and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
15.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. A risk science perspective on vaccines.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

16 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Yong Ge *State Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information System, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China. gey@lreis.ac.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-5175-5812
Wen-Bin Zhang *State Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information System, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9295-1019
Xilin Wu *State Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information System, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0003-4288-7853
Corrine W Ruktanonchai *Population Health Sciences, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7889-3473
Haiyan LiuMarine Data Center, South Marine Science and Engineering Guangdong Laboratory (Zhuhai), Zhuhai, China.
Jianghao WangState Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information System, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0001-5333-3827
Yongze SongSchool of Design and the Built Environment, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3420-9622
Mengxiao LiuState Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information System, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
Wei Yan *Respiratory Medicine Department, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Juan YangSchool of Public Health, Fudan University, Key Laboratory of Public Health Safety, Ministry of Education, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0001-5028-2227
Eimear ClearyWorldPop, School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Sarchil H QaderWorldPop, School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Fatumah AtuhaireWorldPop, School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Nick W RuktanonchaiPopulation Health Sciences, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA.
Andrew J TatemWorldPop, School of Geography and Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. A.J.Tatem@soton.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-7270-941X
Shengjie LaiShanghai Institute of Infectious Disease and Biosecurity, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. shengjie.lai@soton.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-9781-8148
Chinese Academy of Sciences · CNUniversity of Southampton · GBFudan University · CNVirginia Tech · USCurtin University · AUPeking University · CNSouthern Marine Science and Engineering Guangdong Laboratory (Guangzhou) · CN

Funding

Human mobility models to forecast disease dynamics and the effectiveness of public health interventionsR01AI160780 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI CUMMINGS, DEREK A, WESOLOWSKI, AMY · 2021 to 2025
$3.3M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI160780Wellcome Trust 106866/Z/15/ZWellcome Trust 204613/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and vaccination are two fundamental approaches for mitigating the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, the real-world impact of NPIs versus vaccination, or a combination of both, on COVID-19 remains uncertain. To address this, we built a Bayesian inference model to assess the changing effect of NPIs and vaccination on reducing COVID-19 transmission, based on a large-scale dataset including epidemiological parameters, virus variants, vaccines, and climate factors in Europe from August 2020 to October 2021. We found that (1) the combined effect of NPIs and vaccination resulted in a 53% (95% confidence interval: 42-62%) reduction in reproduction number by October 2021, whereas NPIs and vaccination reduced the transmission by 35% and 38%, respectively; (2) compared with vaccination, the change of NPI effect was less sensitive to emerging variants; (3) the relative effect of NPIs declined 12% from May 2021 due to a lower stringency and the introduction of vaccination strategies. Our results demonstrate that NPIs were complementary to vaccination in an effort to reduce COVID-19 transmission, and the relaxation of NPIs might depend on vaccination rates, control targets, and vaccine effectiveness concerning extant and emerging variants.

Indexed as

COVID-19Bayes TheoremHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Vaccination

Identifiers

PMID35661759
PMCPMC9166696
OpenAlexW4282024458

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.