The importance of timing of a population level intervention on COVID-19 mortality

  1. Jasper S. Johnston
  2. Eloïse S. Johnston
  3. Sebastian L. Johnston

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

COVID-19 poses an immense and immediate threat to global public health. Population level interventions (PLIs) impact this threat, with estimable large effects on reducing mortality. Many countries worldwide have currently zero/low mortality and many have yet to implement such PLIs. The importance of timing of PLI implementation on mortality outcomes is poorly understood. We extracted cumulative daily country-specific COVID-19 mortality for France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK to examine country-specific mortality trends and found that all five countries experienced COVID-19 mortality epidemics initially of exponential nature. We estimated the magnitude of effect on mortality of the nationwide PLI implemented on day 18 of Italy’s mortality epidemic and assessed the importance of timing of PLI implementation by computing the effect of implementation of a PLI of this magnitude at various times on subsequent mortality. The nationwide PLI in Italy saved an estimated 6,170 lives by day 30 of the Italian epidemic. Implementing a PLI with this effect magnitude in a country of 60 million people on the day of the first death, and on days 7, 10, 14 and 17 thereafter, compared to implementation on day 18, resulted in substantially greater numbers of lives saved. Implementation on day 1 resulted in an additional 3,477 lives saved, 6,955 intensive care unit admissions and 52,162 hospital admissions prevented, beyond that achieved by implementation on day 18. PLI implementation earlier than day 18 substantially enhances benefit. Intervention on the day of the first mortality event in a country achieves the greatest benefit.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.19.20071845: (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

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analyses were performed using Prism 7.04 (GraphPad Software).
    Prism
    suggested: (PRISM, RRID:SCR_005375)
    GraphPad
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)

    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.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.04.19.20071845 on medRxiv