Integrated vaccination and non-pharmaceutical interventions based strategies in Ontario, Canada, as a case study: a mathematical modelling study

  1. Matthew Betti
  2. Nicola Luigi Bragazzi
  3. Jane M. Heffernan
  4. Jude Kong
  5. Angie Raad

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Recently, two coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine products have been authorized in Canada. It is of crucial importance to model an integrated/combined package of non-pharmaceutical (physical/social distancing) and pharmaceutical (immunization) public health control measures. A modified epidemiological, compartmental SIR model was used and fit to the cumulative COVID-19 case data for the province of Ontario, Canada, from 8 September 2020 to 8 December 2020. Different vaccine roll-out strategies were simulated until 75% of the population was vaccinated, including a no-vaccination scenario. We compete these vaccination strategies with relaxation of non-pharmaceutical interventions. Non-pharmaceutical interventions were supposed to remain enforced and began to be relaxed on 31 January, 31 March or 1 May 2021. Based on projections from the data and long-term extrapolation of scenarios, relaxing the public health measures implemented by re-opening too early would cause any benefits of vaccination to be lost by increasing case numbers, increasing the effective reproduction number above 1 and thus increasing the risk of localized outbreaks. If relaxation is, instead, delayed and 75% of the Ontarian population gets vaccinated by the end of the year, re-opening can occur with very little risk. Relaxing non-pharmaceutical interventions by re-opening and vaccine deployment is a careful balancing act. Our combination of model projections from data and simulation of different strategies and scenarios, can equip local public health decision- and policy-makers with projections concerning the COVID-19 epidemiological trend, helping them in the decision-making process.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1098/rsif.2021.0009
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.01.06.21249272: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    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.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.01.06.21249272v1 on medRxiv