What Can We Learn from the Time Evolution of COVID‐19 Epidemic in Slovenia?
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
A recent work indicates that temporarily splitting larger populations into smaller groups can efficiently mitigate the spread of SARS‐CoV‐2 virus. The fact that, soon afterward, the two million people Slovenia was the first European country proclaiming the end of COVID‐19 epidemic within national borders may be relevant from this perspective. Motivated by this evolution, in this paper the time dynamics of coronavirus cases in Slovenia is investigated with emphasis on how efficient various containment measures act to diminish the number of COVID‐19 infections. Noteworthily, the present analysis does not rely on any speculative theoretical assumption; it is solely based on raw epidemiological data. Out of the results presented here, the most important one is perhaps the finding that, while imposing drastic curfews and travel restrictions reduce the infection rate κ by a factor of four with respect to the unrestricted state, they only improve the κ‐value by ≈15% as compared to the much bearable state of social and economic life wherein wearing face masks and social distancing rules are enforced/followed. Significantly for behavioral and social science, our analysis may reveal an interesting self‐protection instinct of the population, which became manifest even before the official lockdown enforcement.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.25.20112938: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.25.20112938: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
