Publication: Assessing the impact of the phase-out measures during COVID-19 pandemic, using regression models: a longitudinal observational study
Loading...
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2022
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
Objective To assess the impact of different phase-out measures approved by several European governments.
Design This is a longitudinal observational study.
Settings European countries, from 20 February 2020 to 11 May 2020.
Participants All European countries that implemented at least one phase-out measure dictated by governments, during the follow-up period.
Main outcome New COVID-19 cases, analysed as daily rate by countries.
Methods We compared the observed versus the predicted rates of new confirmed cases, hospital admission, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and deaths by regions in Spain, to assess the accuracy of the proposed generalised estimating equations and hurdle models. Based on these models, we defined and calculated two indices to quantify the impact of the phase-out measures approved in several European countries.
Results After 2-month follow-up, we confirmed the good performance of these models for the prediction of the incidence of new confirmed cases, hospital admission, ICU admission and death in a 7-day window. We found that certain phase-out measures implemented in Italy, Spain and Denmark showed moderate impact in daily new confirmed cases. Due to these different phase-out measures, in Italy, the estimated increment of new confirmed cases per 100 000 inhabitants was 4.61, 95% CI (4.42 to 4.80), in Spain 2.58, 95% CI (2.54 to 2.62) and in Denmark 2.55, 95% CI (2.40 to 2.69). Other significant measures applied in other countries had no impact.
Conclusion The two indices proposed can be used to quantify the impact of the phase-out measures and to help other countries to make the best decision. Monitoring these phase-out measures over time can minimise the negative effects on citizens.
Description
UCM subjects
Unesco subjects
Keywords
Citation
1 Setti L, Passarini F, De Gennaro G, et al. Searching for SARSCOV-2 on particulate matter: a possible early indicator of COVID-19 epidemic recurrence. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17:2986
2 Kermack WO, McKendrick AG. A contribution to the mathematical theory of epidemics. Proceedings of the royal society of london Series A, Containing papers of a mathematical and physical character 1927;115:700–21.
3 Roda WC, Varughese MB, Han D, et al. Why is it difficult to accurately predict the COVID-19 epidemic? Infect Dis Model 2020;5:271–81.
4 Huang Y, Yang L, Dai H. Epidemic situation and forecasting of COVID-19 in and outside China: [Preprint]. Bull World Health Organ 2020.
5 Giordano G, Blanchini F, Bruno R, et al. Modelling the COVID-19 epidemic and implementation of population-wide interventions in Italy. Nat Med 2020;26:855–60.
6 et alFlaxman S, Mishra S, Gandy A. Estimating the number of infections and the impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in European countries: technical description update, 2020. Available: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200411342F [Accessed 01 Apr 2020].
7 Kharroubi SA. Modeling the spread of COVID-19 in Lebanon: a Bayesian perspective. Front Appl Math Stat 2020;6.
8 Kharroubi S, Saleh F. Are Lockdown measures effective against COVID-19? Front Public Health 2020;8:549692.
9 Johns Hopkins University CSSE team. COVID-19 data. Available: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/region [Accessed 31 May 2022].
10 Instituto de Salud Carlos III. Available: https://cnecovid.isciii.es/covid19/ [Accessed 31 May 2022].
11 COVID19 government measures dataset. Available: https://data. humdata.org/dataset/acaps-covid19-government-measures-dataset
[Accessed 31 May 2022].
12 Instituto Nacional de Estadística. Available: https://www.ine.es/[Accessed 30 Mar 2021].
13 Eurostat. Available: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat [Accessed 30 Mar 2021].
14 The word bank. Available: http://datatopics.worldbank.org/worlddevelopment-indicators/ [Accessed 30 Mar 2021].
15 Pérez T, McLellan J, Perera R. Extraction of unadjusted estimates of prognostic association for meta-analysis: simulation methods
as good alternatives to trend and direct method estimation. J Clin Epidemiol 2018;99:153–63.
16 Liang K-YEE, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika 1986;73:13–22.
17 Halekoh U, Højsgaard S, Yan J. The R package geepack for Generalized Estimating Equations. J Stat Softw 2006;15:1–11.
18 Mullahy J. Specification and testing of some modified count data models. J Econom 1986;33:341–65.
19 Cameron AC, Trivedi PK. Regression analysis of count data. Cambridge University Press, 2013.
20 Jackman S. pscl: Classes and methods for R. Developed in the Political Science Computational Laboratory, Stanford University.
Department of Political Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. R package version 1.03.5, 2010. Available: http://wwwpsclstanfordedu/
21 Pardo M, Pérez T. Analysis of housing prices by Gee and glmM methodologies: a longitudinal study. Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry 2013;29:552–63.
22 Pérez T, Makrestsov N, Garatt J, et al. Modeling Canadian quality control test program for steroid hormone receptors in breast cancer:
diagnostic accuracy study. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2016;24:679–87.
23 Institute for health metrics and evaluation, 2020. Available: https://www.linksmedicus.com/news/ihme-report-us-hospitalsoverwhelmed-second-week-april-demand-icu-beds-us-deaths-total81000-july/ [Accessed 30 Mar 2021].
24 Holmdahl I, Buckee C. Wrong but Useful - What Covid-19 Epidemiologic Models Can and Cannot Tell Us. N Engl J Med 2020;383:303–5.