Social Distancing with Movement Restrictions and the Effective Replication Number of COVID-19: Multi-Country Analysis Based on Phone Mobility Data

  1. Mounir Ould Setti
  2. Ari Voutilainen

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Linking phone mobility data to the effective replication number (Rt) could help evaluation of the impact of social distancing on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread and estimate the time lag (TL) needed for the effect of movement restrictions to appear. We used a time-series analysis to discover how patterns of five indicators of mobility data relate to changes in Rt of 125 countries distributed over three groups based on Rt-mobility correlation. Group 1 included 71 countries in which Rt correlates negatively with residential and positively with other mobility indicators. Group 2 included 25 countries showing an opposite correlation pattern to Group 1. Group 3 included the 29 remaining countries. We chose the best-fit TL based on forecast and linear regression models. We used linear mixed models to evaluate how mobility indicators and the stringency index (SI) relate with Rt. SI reflects the strictness of governmental responses to COVID-19. With a median of 14 days, TLs varied across countries as well as across groups of countries. There was a strong negative correlation between SI and Rt in most countries belonging to Group 1 as opposed to Group 2. SI (units of 10%) associated with decreasing Rt in Group 1 [β −0.15, 95% CI −0.15 – (−0.14)] and Group 3 [-0.05, −0.07 – (−0.03)], whereas, in Group 2, SI associated with increasing Rt (0.13, 0.11 – 0.16). Mobile phone mobility data could contribute evaluations of the impact of social distancing with movement restrictions on the spread of the COVID-19.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.08.20209064: (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: Thank you for sharing your code and data.

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Another limitation in our TL estimation is the lack of confidence intervals.

    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 10.1101/2020.10.08.20209064v1 on medRxiv