But one expert cautioned that the findings, however “politically convenient” they may be, are based on flawed data and should not be considered conclusive, but rather suggestive.
With almost 13.5 million confirmed cases worldwide and the lack of effective treatment or a vaccine, “the most pragmatic recommendation has been to advise physical distancing (known to some as social distancing) to minimize person-to-person transmission with you are looking to flatten the epidemic curve, “wrote the study authors, led by Dr. Nazrul Islam, a physician-epidemiologist and medical statistician at the University of Oxford.
But there hasn’t been much data to show if it works or not.
Therefore, the researchers gathered and analyzed information on daily reported cases from 149 countries or regions, both before and after five different measures of physical or social distancing were implemented.
The measures were: school closings, workplace closings, public transport closings, restrictions on mass gatherings, and closure restrictions on the movement of people within countries or regions.
Real-world data: pros and cons
On the other hand, closing public transport was not associated with any additional benefits when the other four measures were already in force, suggesting that public transport could remain open “especially for those working in vital services, including health roles, attention and emergency response. ”
The order in which these measures were implemented did not seem to matter, but when estimates from all countries were pooled, the researchers found that a greater reduction in the incidence of Covid-19 was associated with earlier than later implementation. of confinement.
“Unfortunately, the use of such results is also the study’s greatest weakness, as the analysis depends on the quality of the evidence data. Specifically, the authors relied on ‘daily reported cases’ compiled from 149 independent countries; data subject to variable quality, precision and inconsistent testing practices, “wrote May.
“As a result, caution must be exercised in interpreting the findings,” he added.
As an example, he notes that the United States data is “less than ideal” due to variation in testing practices from one location to another, lack of previous evidence in the pandemic, and accumulation of antibody evidence from testing. active detection. disease: all of which weakens the associations that can be established.
Although the study provides support for physical distancing, “it cannot be definitive for the reasons described.” But, he added, the measures are likely to be effective.
.
