Impacts of regional lockdown policies on COVID-19 transmission in India in 2020

  1. Aarushi Kalra
  2. Paul Novosad

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objective

To assess the impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) on the first wave of COVID transmission and fatalities in India.

Methods

We collected data on NPIs, using government notifications and news reports, in six major Indian states from March to August 2020, and we matched these with district-level data on COVID related deaths and Google Mobility reports. We used a district fixed effect regression approach to measure the extent to which district-level lockdowns and mobility restrictions helped reduce deaths in 2020.

Results

In most states, COVID deaths grew most rapidly only after the initial lockdown was lifted. District-level NPIs were associated with a statistically significantly lower COVID death count in three out of five sample states (district analysis was not possible in Delhi) and in the aggregate. Interventions that were most associated with slowing fatalities were temple closures, retail closures, and curfews.

Discussion

Outside of Maharashtra (the first state struck) the first fatality wave appears to have been delayed by the national lockdown. India’s NPIs, however incomplete, were successful in delaying or limiting COVID-19 deaths. Even with incomplete compliance, limiting mass gatherings in face of incipient viral waves may save lives.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.08.09.21261277: (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: 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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    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 10.1101/2021.08.09.21261277v1 on medRxiv