How Policies on Restaurants, Bars, Nightclubs, Masks, Schools, and Travel Influenced Swiss COVID-19 Reproduction Ratios

  1. C. K. Sruthi
  2. Malay Ranjan Biswal
  3. Brijesh Saraswat
  4. Himanshu Joshi
  5. Meher K. Prakash

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The role of complete lockdowns in reducing the reproduction ratios (R t ) of COVID-19 is now established. However, the persisting reality in many countries is no longer a complete lockdown, but restrictions of varying degrees using different choices of Non-pharmaceutical interaction (NPI) policies. A scientific basis for understanding the effectiveness of these graded NPI policies in reducing the R t is urgently needed to address the concerns on personal liberties and economic activities. In this work, we develop a systematic relation between the degrees of NPIs implemented by the 26 cantons in Switzerland during March 9 – September 13 and their respective contributions to the R t . Using a machine learning framework, we find that R t which should ideally be lower than 1.0, has significant contributions in the post-lockdown scenario from the different activities - restaurants (0.0523 (CI. 0.0517-0.0528)), bars (0.030 (CI. 0.029-0.030)), and nightclubs (0.154 (CI. 0.154-0.156)). Activities which keep the land-borders open (0.177 (CI. 0.175-0.178)), and tourism related activities contributed comparably 0.177 (CI. 0.175-0.178). However, international flights with a quarantine did not add further to the R t of the cantons. The requirement of masks in public transport and secondary schools contributed to an overall 0.025 (CI. 0.018-0.030) reduction in R t , compared to the baseline usage even when there are no mandates. Although causal relations are not guaranteed by the model framework, it nevertheless provides a fine-grained justification for the relative merits of choice and the degree of the NPIs and a data-driven strategy for mitigating R t .

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.11.20210641: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.

    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 10.1101/2020.10.11.20210641 on medRxiv