Quantifying the preventive effect of wearing face masks
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
An important task in combating the current Covid-19 pandemic lies in estimating the effect of different preventive measures. Here, we focus on the preventive effect of enforcing the use of face masks. Several publications study this effect, however, often using different measures such as: the relative attack rate in case-control studies, the effect on incidence growth/decline in a specific time frame and the effect on the number of infected in a given time frame. These measures all depend on community-specific features and are hence not easily transferred to other community settings. We argue that a more universal measure is the relative reduction in the reproduction number, which we call the face mask effect , E FM . It is shown how to convert the other measures to E FM . We also apply the methodology to four empirical studies using different effect-measures. When converted to estimates of E FM , all estimates lie between 15 and 40%, suggesting that mandatory face masks reduce the reproduction number by an amount in this range, when compared with no individuals wearing face masks.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.02.09.21251448: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis 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:…
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.02.09.21251448: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis 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.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
-
