Assessing the impact of coordinated COVID-19 exit strategies across Europe

  1. N. W. Ruktanonchai
  2. J. R. Floyd
  3. S. Lai
  4. C. W. Ruktanonchai
  5. A. Sadilek
  6. P. Rente-Lourenco
  7. X. Ben
  8. A. Carioli
  9. J. Gwinn
  10. J. E. Steele
  11. O. Prosper
  12. A. Schneider
  13. A. Oplinger
  14. P. Eastham
  15. A. J. Tatem

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Even during a pandemic, all countries—even islands—are dependent in one way or another on their neighbors. Without coordinated relaxation of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) among the most closely connected countries, it is difficult to envisage maintaining control of infectious viruses such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Ruktanonchai et al. used mobility data from smartphones to estimate movements between administrative units across Europe before and after the implementation of NPIs for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Modeling disease dynamics under alternative scenarios of countries releasing NPIs, in particular stay-at-home orders, showed that if countries do not coordinate their NPIs when they relax lockdown, resurgence of disease occurs sooner. Coordination of on-off NPIs would significantly increase their effectiveness at reducing transmission across Europe.

Science , this issue p. 1465

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1126/science.abc5096
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.16.20132688: (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

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    The original population movement data obtained from Google and Vodafone for this study are not publicly available since this would compromise the agreement with the data provider, but data requests should be made to the corresponding authors.
    Google
    suggested: (Google, RRID:SCR_017097)

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.06.16.20132688v1 on medRxiv