Paper detail

Mathematical assessment of the impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on curtailing the 2019 novel Coronavirus

A novel Coronavirus pandemic emerged in December of 2019, causing devastating public health impact across the world. In the absence of a safe and effective vaccine or antiviral, strategies for mitigating the burden of the pandemic are focused on non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as social-distancing, contact-tracing, quarantine, isolation and the use of face-masks in public. We develop a new mathematical model for assessing the population-level impact of these mitigation strategies. Simulations of the model, using data relevant to COVID-19 transmission in New York state and the entire US, show that the pandemic will peak in mid and late April, respectively. The worst-case scenario projections for cumulative mortality (based on the baseline levels of anti-COVID non-pharmaceutical interventions considered in the study) in New York State and the entire US decrease dramatically by 80% and 64%, respectively, if the strict social-distancing measures implemented are maintained until the end of May or June, 2020. This study shows that early termination of strict social-distancing could trigger a devastating second wave with burden similar to that projected before the onset of strict social-distance. The use of efficacious face-masks (efficacy greater than 70%) could lead to the elimination of the pandemic if at least 70% of the residents of New York state use such masks consistently (nationwide, a compliance of at least 80% will be required using such masks). The use of low efficacy masks, such as cloth masks (of efficacy less than 30%), could also lead to significant reduction of COVID-19 burden (albeit, they are not able to lead to elimination). Combining low efficacy masks with improved levels of other anti-COVID-19 intervention measures can lead to elimination of the pandemic. The mask coverage needed to eliminate COVID-19 decreases if mask-use is combined with strict social-distancing.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.