Measuring the impact of nonpharmaceutical interventions on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic at a city level: An agent-based computational modelling study of the City of Natal

  1. Paulo Henrique Lopes
  2. Liam Wellacott
  3. Leandro de Almeida
  4. Lourdes Milagros Mendoza Villavicencio
  5. André Luiz de Lucena Moreira
  6. Dhiego Souto Andrade
  7. Alyson Matheus de Carvalho Souza
  8. Rislene Katia Ramos de Sousa
  9. Priscila de Souza Silva
  10. Luciana Lima
  11. Michael Lones
  12. José-Dias do Nascimento
  13. Patricia A. Vargas
  14. Renan Cipriano Moioli
  15. Wilfredo Blanco Figuerola
  16. César Rennó-Costa

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic hit almost all cities in Brazil in early 2020 and lasted for several months. Despite the effort of local state and municipal governments, an inhomogeneous nationwide response resulted in a death toll amongst the highest recorded globally. To evaluate the impact of the nonpharmaceutical governmental interventions applied by different cities—such as the closure of schools and businesses in general—in the evolution and epidemic spread of SARS-CoV-2, we constructed a full-sized agent-based epidemiological model adjusted to the singularities of particular cities. The model incorporates detailed demographic information, mobility networks segregated by economic segments, and restricting bills enacted during the pandemic period. As a case study, we analyzed the early response of the City of Natal—a midsized state capital—to the pandemic. Although our results indicate that the government response could be improved, the restrictive mobility acts saved many lives. The simulations show that a detailed analysis of alternative scenarios can inform policymakers about the most relevant measures for similar pandemic surges and help develop future response protocols.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000540
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.05.05.22274749: (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.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2022.05.05.22274749v1 on medRxiv