Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35995764›Full record

ArticleNature communications2022

Comparison of the 2021 COVID-19 roadmap projections against public health data in England.

Matt J Keeling, Louise Dyson, Michael J Tildesley, Edward M Hill, Samuel Moore

Abstract 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 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Understanding Nash epidemics.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Wastewater-based reproduction numbers and projections of COVID-19 cases in three areas in Japan, November 2021 to December 2022.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

5 authors.

Matt J KeelingThe Zeeman Institute for Systems Biology & Infectious Disease Epidemiology Research, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK. M.J.Keeling@warwick.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-4639-4765
Louise DysonThe Zeeman Institute for Systems Biology & Infectious Disease Epidemiology Research, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Michael J TildesleyThe Zeeman Institute for Systems Biology & Infectious Disease Epidemiology Research, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6875-7232
Edward M HillThe Zeeman Institute for Systems Biology & Infectious Disease Epidemiology Research, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2992-2004
Samuel MooreThe Zeeman Institute for Systems Biology & Infectious Disease Epidemiology Research, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Funding

Department of Health NIHR200411Medical Research Council MR/V009761/1Medical Research Council MR/V038613/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Control and mitigation of the COVID-19 pandemic in England has relied on a combination of vaccination and non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). Some of these NPIs are extremely costly (economically and socially), so it was important to relax these promptly without overwhelming already burdened health services. The eventual policy was a Roadmap of four relaxation steps throughout 2021, taking England from lock-down to the cessation of all restrictions on social interaction. In a series of six Roadmap documents generated throughout 2021, models assessed the potential risk of each relaxation step. Here we show that the model projections generated a reliable estimation of medium-term hospital admission trends, with the data points up to September 2021 generally lying within our 95% prediction intervals. The greatest uncertainties in the modelled scenarios came from vaccine efficacy estimates against novel variants, and from assumptions about human behaviour in the face of changing restrictions and risk.

Indexed as

COVID-19Communicable Disease ControlEnglandHumansPandemicsPublic Health

Identifiers

PMID35995764
PMCPMC9395530

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.