Brief Report: High-Quality Masks Can Reduce Infections and Deaths in the US

  1. Erik Rosenstrom
  2. Buse Eylul Oruc
  3. Julie Ivy
  4. Pinar Keskinocak
  5. Maria E. Mayorga
  6. Julie L. Swann

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the effectiveness of widespread adoption of masks or face coverings to reduce community transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19.

Methods

We employed an agent-based stochastic network simulation model, where Covid-19 progresses across census tracts according to a variant of SEIR. We considered a mask order that was initiated 3.5 months after the first confirmed Covid-19 case. We evaluated scenarios where wearing a mask reduces transmission and susceptibility by 50% or 80%; an individual wears a mask with a probability of 0%, 20%, 40%, 60%, 80%, or 100%.

Results

If 60% of the population wears masks that are 50% effective, this decreases the cumulative infection attack rate (CAR) by 25%, the peak prevalence by 51%, and the population mortality by 25%. If 100% of people wear masks (or 60% wear masks that are 80% effective), this decreases the CAR by 38%, the peak prevalence by 67%, and the population mortality by 40%.

Conclusions

After community transmission is present, masks can significantly reduce infections.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1101/2020.09.27.20199737v2 on medRxiv
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.09.27.20199737: (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
    The model captures the likelihood an adult agent stays home over time using SafeGraph data [12] (see supplement for details) aggregated by month and census tract.
    SafeGraph
    suggested: None

    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:
    Limitations of this modeling study include potential mischaracterization of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and illness-causing mechanisms, as well lingering data deficits regarding age-based hospitalizations and mortality rates. Some of the key assumptions that are critical include the efficacy of masks and the adherence in the population. The survey data used captures whether people report wearing masks “most or all of the time”, which is insufficient as a true measure of adherence. We do not account for bias in who is wearing a mask, in terms of their social networks or their mobility patterns. We do not incorporate behavioral changes with respect to rising infections; our review of the recent mobility and infection data did not support this consistently across all areas and time periods (unlike earlier analysis by [19]). If this assumption is wrong then we overestimate the impact of masks. If crowded hospitals lead to an increased fatality rate then we underestimate the value of masks in reducing COVID-19-related mortality. The results do not account for vaccination, which we study in a companion paper [7]. In future research, it may be useful to examine the impact of potential covariance of of likelihood of vaccine uptake and likelihood of mask use, and consequent implications for health equity across diverse affected populations.

    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 10.1101/2020.09.27.20199737v1 on medRxiv