Local lockdowns outperform global lockdown on the far side of the COVID-19 epidemic curve
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the late stages of an epidemic, infections are often sporadic and geographically distributed. Spatially structured stochastic models can capture these important features of disease dynamics, thereby allowing a broader exploration of interventions. Here we develop a stochastic model of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission among an interconnected group of population centers representing counties, municipalities, and districts (collectively, "counties"). The model is parameterized with demographic, epidemiological, testing, and travel data from Ontario, Canada. We explore the effects of different control strategies after the epidemic curve has been flattened. We compare a local strategy of reopening (and reclosing, as needed) schools and workplaces county by county, according to triggers for county-specific infection prevalence, to a global strategy of province-wide reopening and reclosing, according to triggers for province-wide infection prevalence. For trigger levels that result in the same number of COVID-19 cases between the two strategies, the local strategy causes significantly fewer person-days of closure, even under high intercounty travel scenarios. However, both cases and person-days lost to closure rise when county triggers are not coordinated and when testing rates vary among counties. Finally, we show that local strategies can also do better in the early epidemic stage, but only if testing rates are high and the trigger prevalence is low. Our results suggest that pandemic planning for the far side of the COVID-19 epidemic curve should consider local strategies for reopening and reclosing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".