ABSTRACT
The efficacy of government interventions in epidemic has become a hot subject since the onset of COVID-19. There is however much variation in the results quantifying the effects of interventions, which is partly related to the varying modelling approaches employed by existing studies. Among the many factors affecting the modelling results, people's voluntary behavior change is less examined yet likely to be widespread. This paper therefore aims to analyze how the choice of modelling approach, in particular how voluntary behavior change is accounted for, would affect the intervention effect estimation. We conduct the analysis by experimenting different modelling methods on a same data set composed of the 500 most infected U.S. counties. We compare the most frequently used methods from the two classes of modelling approaches, which are Bayesian hierarchical model from the class of computational approach and difference-in-difference from the class of natural experimental approach. We find that computational methods that do not account for voluntary behavior changes are likely to produce larger estimates of intervention effects as assumed. In contrast, natural experimental methods are more likely to extract the true effect of interventions by ruling out simultaneous behavior change. Among different difference-in-difference estimators, the two-way fixed effect estimator seems to be an efficient one. Our work can inform the methodological choice of future research on this topic, as well as more robust re-interpretation of existing works, to facilitate both future epidemic response plans and the science of public health.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Epidemics , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Bayes Theorem , Forecasting , GovernmentABSTRACT
COVID-19 raises attention to epidemic transmission in various places. This study analyzes the transmission risks associated with human activity places at multiple scales, including different types of settlements and eleven types of specific establishments (restaurants, bars, etc.), using COVID-19 data in 906 urban areas across four continents. Through a difference-in-difference approach, we identify the causal effects of activities at various places on epidemic transmission. We find that at the micro-scale, though the transmission risks at different establishments differ across countries, sports, entertainment, and catering establishments are generally more infectious. At the macro-scale, contradicting common beliefs, it is consistent across countries that transmission does not increase with settlement size and density. It is also consistent that specific establishments play a lesser role in transmission in larger settlements, suggesting more transmission happening elsewhere. These findings contribute to building a system of knowledge on the linkage between places, human activities, and disease transmission.
ABSTRACT
As Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) have expanded their role in U.S. cities recently, their services (i.e. ridehailing) have been subject to scrutiny for displacing public transit (PT) ridership. Previous studies have attempted to classify the relationship between transit and TNCs, though analysis has been limited by a lack of granular TNC trip records, or has been conducted at aggregated scales. This study seeks to understand the TNC-PT relationship in Chicago at a spatially and temporally granular level by analyzing detailed individual trip records. An analysis framework is developed which enables TNC trips to be classified according to their potential relationship with transit: complementary (providing access to/from transit), substitutive (replacing a transit alternative), or independent (not desirably completable by transit). This framework is applied to both regular operating conditions and to early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, to identify the TNC-PT relationship in these two contexts. We find that complementary TNC trips make up a small fraction of trips taken (approximately 2%), while potential independent trips represent 48% to 53% and potential substitution trips represent 45% to 50%. The percentage of substitution trips drops substantially following COVID-19 shutdowns (to around 14%). This may be attributed to a reduction in work-based TNC trips from Chicago's north side, indicated by changes in spatial distributions and flattening of trips occurring during peak hours. Furthermore, using spatial regression, we find that an increased tendency of TNC trips to substitute transit is related to a lower proportion of elderly people, greater proportion of peak-period TNC travel, greater transit network availability, a higher percentage of white population, and increased crime rates. Our findings identify spatial and temporal trends in the tendency to use TNC services in place of public transit, and thus have potential policy implications for transit management, such as spatially targeted service improvements and safety measures to reduce the possibility of public transit being substituted by TNC services.