Estimating the Effects of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions and Population Mobility on Daily COVID-19 Cases: Evidence from Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study uses coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case counts and Google mobility data for 12 of Ontario's largest Public Health Units from Spring 2020 until the end of January 2021 to evaluate the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs; policy restrictions on business operations and social gatherings) and population mobility on daily cases. Instrumental variables (IV) estimation is used to account for potential simultaneity bias, because both daily COVID-19 cases and NPIs are dependent on lagged case numbers. IV estimates based on differences in lag lengths to infer causal estimates imply that the implementation of stricter NPIs and indoor mask mandates are associated with reductions in COVID-19 cases. Moreover, estimates based on Google mobility data suggest that increases in workplace attendance are correlated with higher case counts. Finally, from October 2020 to January 2021, daily Ontario forecasts from Box-Jenkins time-series models are more accurate than official forecasts and forecasts from a susceptible-infected-removed epidemiology model.
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 | 0.006 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".