Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36187605›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

The effect of non-pharmaceutical policy interventions on COVID-19 transmission across three cities in Colombia.

Adriana Poppe, Dina Maskileyson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

2 authors.

Adriana PoppeFaculty of Management, Economics and Social Sciences, The Institute of Sociology and Social Psychology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Dina MaskileysonFaculty of Management, Economics and Social Sciences, The Institute of Sociology and Social Psychology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Governments across the globe have implemented different strategies to handle the COVID-19 pandemic. A national mandatory quarantine was the most applied policy tool. While there are studies that tested the effectiveness of a national mandatory quarantine, the question about the effectiveness of additional quarantine policies is not yet answered. In this study we focus on three large cities in Colombia (Bogota, Medellin and Cali) with similar socio-economic conditions but made use of different COVID-19 prevention measures. We examine whether different non-pharmaceutical policy interventions (NPIs) conducted in these three cities are effective against the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. We inspect the effect of the quarantine policies restricting exit from home by sex, ID number, whereby only Bogota implemented the restriction to leave the home according to sex followed by a restriction according to ID number, and Medellin and Cali implemented a restriction by ID number only. Data for the analysis are obtained from the National Administrative Department of Statistics of Colombia [Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística (DANE)]. The data on pandemic severity is measured by the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases per city. We conduct single-group interrupted time series analysis (ITSA) to examine differences in the extent of the pandemic severity in Bogota, Medellin and Cali. We found that NPIs in all three Colombian cities had a positive effect on slowing the spread of the pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19CitiesColombiaHumansPandemicsPolicyColombiaCOVID-19non-pharmaceutical policy interventions (NPIs)policy evaluationsingle-group interrupted time series analysis (ITSA)

Identifiers

PMID36187605
PMCPMC9521598

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.