Effectiveness of public health measures in reducing the incidence of covid-19, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and covid-19 mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ, Journal Year: 2021, Volume and Issue: unknown, P. e068302 - e068302

Published: Nov. 17, 2021

To review the evidence on effectiveness of public health measures in reducing incidence covid-19, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and covid-19 mortality.

Language: Английский

---

The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic

The Lancet, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 400(10359), P. 1224 - 1280

Published: Sept. 14, 2022

Language: Английский

---

Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses

Cochrane library, Journal Year: 2023, Volume and Issue: 2023(4)

Published: Jan. 30, 2023

Language: Английский

---

Mask wearing in community settings reduces SARS-CoV-2 transmission

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 119(23)

Published: May 31, 2022

Significance We resolve conflicting results regarding mask wearing against COVID-19. Most previous work focused on mandates; we study the effect of directly. find that population notably reduced SARS-CoV-2 transmission (mean mask-wearing levels corresponding to a 19% decrease in R). use largest survey (n = 20 million) and obtain our estimates from regions across six continents. account for nonpharmaceutical interventions time spent public, quantify uncertainty. Factors additional mandates influenced worldwide early uptake wearing. Our analysis goes further than past quality data–100 times size with random sampling–geographical scope, semimechanistic infection model, validation results.

Language: Английский

---

Adapt or die: how the pandemic made the shift from EBM to EBM+ more urgent

BMJ evidence-based medicine, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 27(5), P. 253 - 260

Published: July 19, 2022

Evidence-based medicine (EBM’s) traditional methods, especially randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses, along with risk-of-bias tools checklists, have contributed significantly to the science of COVID-19. But these methods were designed primarily answer simple, focused questions in a stable context where yesterday’s research can be mapped more or less unproblematically onto today’s clinical policy questions. They significant limitations when extended complex about novel pathogen causing chaos across multiple sectors fast-changing global context. Non-pharmaceutical interventions which combine material artefacts, human behaviour, organisational directives, occupational health safety, built environment are case point: EBM’s experimental, intervention-focused, checklist-driven, effect-size-oriented deductive approach has sometimes confused rather than informed debate. While RCTs important, exclusion other study designs evidence sources been particularly problematic rapid decision making is needed order save lives protect health. It time bring wider range pluralist defining what counts as ‘high-quality’ evidence. We introduce some conceptual quality frameworks from various fields involving known mechanistic research, including complexity science, engineering social sciences. propose that evidence, ‘EBM+’ combined EBM, might used develop evaluate interdisciplinary base take us out this protracted pandemic. Further articles series will apply pluralistic specific

Language: Английский

---

Excess Death Rates for Republican and Democratic Registered Voters in Florida and Ohio During the COVID-19 Pandemic

JAMA Internal Medicine, Journal Year: 2023, Volume and Issue: 183(9), P. 916 - 916

Published: July 24, 2023

There is evidence that Republican-leaning counties have had higher COVID-19 death rates than Democratic-leaning and similar of an association between political party affiliation attitudes regarding vaccination; further data on these may be useful.

Language: Английский

---

A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Lockdowns on COVID-19 Mortality II

medRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), Journal Year: 2023, Volume and Issue: unknown

Published: Sept. 5, 2023

Abstract The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the effect lockdowns on COVID-19 mortality based available empirical evidence. Lockdowns are defined as imposition at least one compulsory, non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI). We employ a search screening procedure in which 19,646 studies identified that could potentially address our study. After three levels screening, 32 qualified. Of those, estimates from 22 be converted standardized measures for inclusion meta-analysis. They separated into groups: lockdown stringency index studies, shelter-in-place-order (SIPO) specific NPI studies. Stringency find average Europe United States spring 2020 only reduced by 3.2%. This translates approximately 6,000 avoided deaths 4,000 States. SIPOs were also relatively ineffective 2020, reducing 2.0%. 3,000 Based NPIs, we estimate 10.7%. 23,000 16,000 In comparison, there 72,000 flu 38,000 each year. When checked potential biases, results robust. Our supported natural experiments have been able identify. support conclusion had little no mortality. result consistent with view voluntary changes behavior, such social distancing, did play an important role mitigating pandemic.

Language: Английский

---

Masks and respirators for prevention of respiratory infections: a state of the science review

Clinical Microbiology Reviews, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 37(2)

Published: May 22, 2024

SUMMARYThis narrative review and meta-analysis summarizes a broad evidence base on the benefits-and also practicalities, disbenefits, harms personal, sociocultural environmental impacts-of masks masking. Our synthesis of from over 100 published reviews selected primary studies, including re-analyzing contested meta-analyses key clinical trials, produced seven findings. First, there is strong consistent for airborne transmission severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) other pathogens. Second, are, if correctly consistently worn, effective in reducing diseases show dose-response effect. Third, respirators are significantly more than medical or cloth masks. Fourth, mask mandates overall, community Fifth, important symbols; non-adherence to masking sometimes linked political ideological beliefs widely circulated mis- disinformation. Sixth, while much that not generally harmful general population, may be relatively contraindicated individuals with certain conditions, who require exemption. Furthermore, groups (notably D/deaf people) disadvantaged when others masked. Finally, risks environment single-use respirators. We propose an agenda future research, improved characterization situations which should recommended mandated; attention comfort acceptability; generalized disability-focused communication support settings where worn; development testing novel materials designs filtration, breathability, impact.

Language: Английский

---

Medical Masks Versus N95 Respirators for Preventing COVID-19 Among Health Care Workers

Annals of Internal Medicine, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 175(12), P. 1629 - 1638

Published: Nov. 28, 2022

Background: It is uncertain if medical masks offer similar protection against COVID-19 compared with N95 respirators. Objective: To determine whether are noninferior to respirators prevent in health care workers providing routine care. Design: Multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04296643). Setting: 29 facilities Canada, Israel, Pakistan, and Egypt from 4 May 2020 March 2022. Participants: 1009 who provided direct patients suspected or confirmed COVID-19. Intervention: Use of versus fit-tested for 10 weeks, plus universal masking, which was the policy implemented at each site. Measurements: The primary outcome on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. Results: In intention-to-treat analysis, RT-PCR–confirmed occurred 52 497 (10.46%) participants mask group 47 507 (9.27%) respirator (hazard ratio [HR], 1.14 [95% CI, 0.77 1.69]). An unplanned subgroup analysis by country found that 8 131 (6.11%) 3 135 (2.22%) Canada (HR, 2.83 [CI, 0.75 10.72]), 6 17 (35.29%) (23.53%) Israel 1.54 0.43 5.49]), 92 (3.26%) 2 94 (2.13%) Pakistan 1.50 0.25 8.98]), 35 257 (13.62%) 38 261 (14.56%) 0.95 0.60 1.50]). There were (10.8%) adverse events related intervention reported 59 (13.6%) group. Limitation: Potential acquisition SARS-CoV-2 through household community exposure, heterogeneity between countries, uncertainty estimates effect, differences self-reported adherence, baseline antibodies, between-country circulating variants vaccination. Conclusion: Among COVID-19, overall rule out a doubling hazard when HRs results varied country, may not be applicable individual countries because treatment effect heterogeneity. Primary Funding Source: Canadian Institutes Health Research, World Organization, Juravinski Research Institute.

Language: Английский

---

Canada’s response to the initial 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic: a comparison with peer countries

Canadian Medical Association Journal, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 194(25), P. E870 - E877

Published: June 26, 2022

KEY POINTS The first known diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Canada was a patient hospital Toronto on Jan. 25, 2020.[1][1] At the time, few anticipated intensity and duration COVID-19 pandemic, which has presented health systems governments globally with challenges not

Language: Английский

---