RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Stay-at-home policy: is it a case of exception fallacy? An internet-based ecological study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.10.13.20211284
DO 10.1101/2020.10.13.20211284
A1 Savaris, Ricardo F.
A1 Pumi, Guilherme
A1 Dalzochio, Jovani
A1 Kunst, Rafael
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/15/2020.10.13.20211284.abstract
AB Background Countries with strict lockdown had a spike on the number of deaths. A recent mathematical model has suggested that staying at home did not play a dominant role in reducing COVID-19 transmission. Comparison between number of deaths and social mobility is difficult due to the non-stationary nature of the COVID-19 data.Objective To propose a novel approach to assess the association between staying at home values and the reduction/increase in the number of deaths due to COVID-19 in several regions around the world.Methods In this ecological study, data from www.google.com/covid19/mobility/, ourworldindata.org and covid.saude.gov.br were combined. Countries with >100 deaths and with a Healthcare Access and Quality Index of ≥67 were included. Data were preprocessed and analyzed using the difference between number of deaths/million between 2 regions and the difference between the percentage of staying at home. Analysis was performed using linear regression and residual analysisResults After preprocessing the data, 87 regions around the world were included, yielding 3,741 pairwise comparisons for linear regression analysis. Only 63 (1.6%) comparisons were significant.Discussion With our results, we were not able to explain if COVID-19 mortality is reduced by staying as home in ∼98% of the comparisons after epidemiological weeks 9 to 34.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding Statementno fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:no IRB necessaryAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesSupplemental Material: The Python and R scripts, raw data, supplemental Tables are available. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1239llmxz9YenWweWXA1wgdf07WFYDrYG https://gist.github.com/rsavaris66/eccfc6caf4c9578d676c134fac74d3fe