Associations Between Measures of Social Distancing and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Seropositivity: A Nationwide Population-based Study in the Netherlands

  1. Eric R A Vos
  2. Michiel van Boven
  3. Gerco den Hartog
  4. Jantien A Backer
  5. Don Klinkenberg
  6. Cheyenne C E van Hagen
  7. Hendriek Boshuizen
  8. Robert S van Binnendijk
  9. Liesbeth Mollema
  10. Fiona R M van der Klis
  11. Hester E de Melker

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

This large, nationwide, population-based, seroepidemiological study provides evidence of the effectiveness of physical distancing (>1.5 m) and indoor group size reductions in reducing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Additionally, young adults may play an important role in viral spread, contrary to children up until age 12 years with whom close contact is permitted.

Clinical Trials Registration

NTR8473.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.02.10.21251477: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: The study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee MEC-U (Clinical Trial Registration NTR8473) and all participants provided written informed consent.
    Consent: The study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee MEC-U (Clinical Trial Registration NTR8473) and all participants provided written informed consent.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    RandomizationTo enhance countrywide geographical coverage, and given the low anticipated seroprevalence, this cohort was supplemented with an additional sample of 4,496 randomly sampled participants (ntotal=6,813) (Supplement–p3-4).
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Quantitative measures of serum IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Spike-S1 antigen were derived via a validated multiplex-immunoassay [5].
    SARS-CoV-2 Spike-S1
    suggested: None
    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., USA).
    SAS Institute
    suggested: (Statistical Analysis System, RRID:SCR_008567)

    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: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our study has strengths and limitations. Strength is that our study provides a large population sample covering a full age-range from young to old, combining a sound indicator of prior infection, i.e., seropositivity, to extensive questionnaire data. Also, samples could be classified accurately since antibodies were measured with a highly specific and sensitive immunoassay. Limitations include the relatively low response rate, which might have introduced potential selection bias, e.g., of relatively more health-conscious individuals adhering to social distancing measures. Further, some variables might be proxies of risk of viral exposure, e.g., on contacts, thus associations should be interpreted with care as they may not reflect causal effects. In conclusion, these results underscore the effectiveness of the social distancing-related measures to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission in an era of limited availability of vaccines. Additionally, our data suggest a diminished role of young children in viral spread, which may justify decisions to keep primary schools open, while young adults seem to play a more substantial role.

    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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1093/cid/ciab264
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.02.10.21251477v1 on medRxiv