Supporting COVID-19 policy response with large-scale mobility-based modeling

  1. Serina Chang
  2. Mandy L. Wilson
  3. Bryan Lewis
  4. Zakaria Mehrab
  5. Komal K. Dudakiya
  6. Emma Pierson
  7. Pang Wei Koh
  8. Jaline Gerardin
  9. Beth Redbird
  10. David Grusky
  11. Madhav Marathe
  12. Jure Leskovec

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Social distancing measures, such as restricting occupancy at venues, have been a primary intervention for controlling the spread of COVID-19. However, these mobility restrictions place a significant economic burden on individuals and businesses. To balance these competing demands, policymakers need analytical tools to assess the costs and benefits of different mobility reduction measures.In this paper, we present our work motivated by our interactions with the Virginia Department of Health on a decision-support tool that utilizes large-scale data and epidemiological modeling to quantify the impact of changes in mobility on infection rates. Our model captures the spread of COVID-19 by using a fine-grained, dynamic mobility network that encodes the hourly movements of people from neighborhoods to individual places, with over 3 billion hourly edges. By perturbing the mobility network, we can simulate a wide variety of reopening plans and forecast their impact in terms of new infections and the loss in visits per sector. To deploy this model in practice, we built a robust computational infrastructure to support running millions of model realizations, and we worked with policymakers to develop an intuitive dashboard interface that communicates our model’s predictions for thousands of potential policies, tailored to their jurisdiction. The resulting decision-support environment provides policymakers with much-needed analytical machinery to assess the tradeoffs between future infections and mobility restrictions.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.20.21254022: (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 10.1101/2021.03.20.21254022v1 on medRxiv