ArticlePloS one2022
A causal inference approach for estimating effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions during Covid-19 pandemic.
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 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effect of face-covering use on adherence to other COVID-19 protective behaviours: A systematic review.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Effectiveness of social distancing measures and lockdowns for reducing transmission of COVID-19 in non-healthcare, community-based settings.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2023Pooled it
- Robust uncertainty quantification in popular estimators of the instantaneous reproduction number.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Estimating the causal impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 spread in seven EU countries via machine learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Estimating the impact of school closures on the COVID-19 dynamics in 74 countries: A modelling analysis.PLoS medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Epidemiological impact of revoking mask-wearing recommendation on COVID-19 transmission in Tokyo, Japan.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2024Article
- Lessons from SARS-CoV-2 in India: A data-driven framework for pandemic resilience.Science advances · 2022Article
- Modeling approaches for early warning and monitoring of pandemic situations as well as decision support.Frontiers in public health · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In response to the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), governments worldwide have introduced multiple restriction policies, known as non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). However, the relative impact of control measures and the long-term causal contribution of each NPI are still a topic of debate. We present a method to rigorously study the effectiveness of interventions on the rate of the time-varying reproduction number Rt and on human mobility, considered here as a proxy measure of policy adherence and social distancing. We frame our model using a causal inference approach to quantify the impact of five governmental interventions introduced until June 2020 to control the outbreak in 113 countries: confinement, school closure, mask wearing, cultural closure, and work restrictions. Our results indicate that mobility changes are more accurately predicted when compared to reproduction number. All NPIs, except for mask wearing, significantly affected human mobility trends. From these, schools and cultural closure mandates showed the largest effect on social distancing. We also found that closing schools, issuing face mask usage, and work-from-home mandates also caused a persistent reduction on Rt after their initiation, which was not observed with the other social distancing measures. Our results are robust and consistent across different model specifications and can shed more light on the impact of individual NPIs.
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.