Comparing COVID-19 in the antipodes: Insights from pandemic containment strategies on both sides of the Pacific.

That the COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented in terms of its scale, spread and shocks can be evinced by the myriad of ever-changing responses cities all around the world have rolled out throughout the different waves of outbreaks. Although the threat is similar across the world, it took some time before its reach became global and the waves of outbreak are experienced by cities at different times. While this staggered spread imply that some cities might manage the virus better as they learn from the experiences of cities which had been amongst the earliest to face the virus, the reality is more complicated. In the early stages of the pandemic, the global consensus on the best way to contain the virus swiftly converged in the interlinked strategies of restricting the movement of people and minimizing their social contact. However, the effectiveness of these strategies differ greatly between cities. To that end, this study focuses on COVID-19 responses in two regions (Latin America and Southeast Asia) and examines the evolution of the first wave of COVID-19 outbreaks during 2020 in Singapore, Jakarta (Indonesia), Bogotá (Colombia) and Santiago (Chile). The study is based on a comparative approach and uses a variety of data sources, namely morphology, density, housing concentration, mobility, and governance in the four analyzed cities. The goal is to shed light on the response of city governments in these two different regions in terms of mobility restrictions in order to reduce the cases of new infections. The results show the relevance of urban policies and their territorial approaches, particularly in terms of mobility and public transport networks in the four cities.

The path towards herd immunity: Predicting COVID-19 vaccination uptake through results from a stated choice study across six continents.

Despite unprecedented progress in developing COVID-19 vaccines, global vaccination levels needed to reach herd immunity remain a distant target, while new variants keep emerging. Obtaining near universal vaccine uptake relies on understanding and addressing vaccine resistance. Simple questions about vaccine acceptance however ignore that the vaccines being offered vary across countries and even population subgroups, and differ in terms of efficacy and side effects. By using advanced discrete choice models estimated on stated choice data collected in 18 countries/territories across six continents, we show a substantial influence of vaccine characteristics. Uptake increases if more efficacious vaccines (95% vs 60%) are offered (mean across study areas = 3.9%, range of 0.6%-8.1%) or if vaccines offer at least 12 months of protection (mean across study areas = 2.4%, range of 0.2%-5.8%), while an increase in severe side effects (from 0.001% to 0.01%) leads to reduced uptake (mean = -1.3%, range of -0.2% to -3.9%). Additionally, a large share of individuals (mean = 55.2%, range of 28%-75.8%) would delay vaccination by 3 months to obtain a more efficacious (95% vs 60%) vaccine, where this increases further if the low efficacy vaccine has a higher risk (0.01% instead of 0.001%) of severe side effects (mean = 65.9%, range of 41.4%-86.5%). Our work highlights that careful consideration of which vaccines to offer can be beneficial. In support of this, we provide an interactive tool to predict uptake in a country as a function of the vaccines being deployed, and also depending on the levels of infectiousness and severity of circulating variants of COVID-19.

The path towards herd immunity: Predicting COVID-19 vaccination uptake through results from a stated choice study across six continents

Despite unprecedented progress in developing COVID-19 vaccines, global vaccination levels needed to reach herd immunity remain a distant target, while new variants keep emerging. Obtaining near universal vaccine uptake relies on understanding and addressing vaccine resistance. Simple questions about vaccine acceptance however ignore that the vaccines being offered vary across countries and even population subgroups, and differ in terms of efficacy and side effects. By using advanced discrete choice models estimated on stated choice data collected in 18 countries/territories across six continents, we show a substantial influence of vaccine characteristics. Uptake increases if more efficacious vaccines (95% vs 60%) are offered (mean across study areas = 3.9%, range of 0.6%–8.1%) or if vaccines offer at least 12 months of protection (mean across study areas = 2.4%, range of 0.2%–5.8%), while an increase in severe side effects (from 0.001% to 0.01%) leads to reduced uptake (mean = −1.3%, range of −0.2% to −3.9%). Additionally, a large share of individuals (mean = 55.2%, range of 28%–75.8%) would delay vaccination by 3 months to obtain a more efficacious (95% vs 60%) vaccine, where this increases further if the low efficacy vaccine has a higher risk (0.01% instead of 0.001%) of severe side effects (mean = 65.9%, range of 41.4%–86.5%). Our work highlights that careful consideration of which vaccines to offer can be beneficial. In support of this, we provide an interactive tool to predict uptake in a country as a function of the vaccines being deployed, and also depending on the levels of infectiousness and severity of circulating variants of COVID-19.