Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Front Public Health ; 10: 820642, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1809612

ABSTRACT

Importance: Governments have introduced non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) in response to the pandemic outbreak of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). While NPIs aim at preventing fatalities related to COVID-19, the previous literature on their efficacy has focused on infections and on data of the first half of 2020. Still, findings of early NPI studies may be subject to underreporting and missing timeliness of reporting of cases. Moreover, the low variation in treatment timing during the first wave makes identification of robust treatment effects difficult. Objective: We enhance the literature on the effectiveness of NPIs with respect to the period, the number of countries, and the analytical approach. Design Setting and Participants: To circumvent problems of reporting and treatment variation, we analyse data on daily confirmed COVID-19-related deaths per capita from Our World in Data, and on 10 different NPIs from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT) for 169 countries from 1st July 2020 to 1st September 2021. To identify the causal effects of introducing NPIs on COVID-19-related fatalities, we apply the generalized synthetic control (GSC) method to each NPI, while controlling for the remaining NPIs, weather conditions, vaccinations, and NPI-residualized COVID-19 cases. This mitigates the influence of selection into treatment and allows to model flexible post-treatment trajectories. Results: We do not find substantial and consistent COVID-19-related fatality-reducing effects of any NPI under investigation. We see a tentative change in the trend of COVID-19-related deaths around 30 days after strict stay-at-home rules and to a slighter extent after workplace closings have been implemented. As a proof of concept, our model is able to identify a fatality-reducing effect of COVID-19 vaccinations. Furthermore, our results are robust with respect to various crucial sensitivity checks. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that many implemented NPIs may not have exerted a significant COVID-19-related fatality-reducing effect. However, NPIs might have contributed to mitigate COVID-19-related fatalities by preventing exponential growth in deaths. Moreover, vaccinations were effective in reducing COVID-19-related deaths.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks , Government , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Lancet Public Health ; 7(1): e15-e22, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1586157

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Mandatory COVID-19 certification (showing vaccination, recent negative test, or proof of recovery) has been introduced in some countries. We aimed to investigate the effect of certification on vaccine uptake. METHODS: We designed a synthetic control model comparing six countries (Denmark, Israel, Italy, France, Germany, and Switzerland) that introduced certification (April-August, 2021), with 19 control countries. Using daily data on cases, deaths, vaccinations, and country-specific information, we produced a counterfactual trend estimating what might have happened in similar circumstances if certificates were not introduced. The main outcome was daily COVID-19 vaccine doses. FINDINGS: COVID-19 certification led to increased vaccinations 20 days before implementation in anticipation, with a lasting effect up to 40 days after. Countries with pre-intervention uptake that was below average had a more pronounced increase in daily vaccinations compared with those where uptake was already average or higher. In France, doses exceeded 55 672 (95% CI 49 668-73 707) vaccines per million population or, in absolute terms, 3 761 440 (3 355 761-4 979 952) doses before mandatory certification and 72 151 (37 940-114 140) per million population after certification (4 874 857 [2 563 396-7 711 769] doses). We found no effect in countries that already had average uptake (Germany), or an unclear effect when certificates were introduced during a period of limited vaccine supply (Denmark). Increase in uptake was highest for people younger than 30 years after the introduction of certification. Access restrictions linked to certain settings (nightclubs and events with >1000 people) were associated with increased uptake in those younger than 20 years. When certification was extended to broader settings, uptake remained high in the youngest group, but increases were also observed in those aged 30-49 years. INTERPRETATION: Mandatory COVID-19 certification could increase vaccine uptake, but interpretation and transferability of findings need to be considered in the context of pre-existing levels of vaccine uptake and hesitancy, eligibility changes, and the pandemic trajectory. FUNDING: Leverhulme Trust and European Research Council.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Certification , Mandatory Programs , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Coverage/trends , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Denmark , Empirical Research , France , Germany , Humans , Israel , Italy , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Switzerland , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL