MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410851070 · doi:10.71000/xjp2m056

EFFECTIVENESS OF PUBLIC HEALTH INTERVENTIONS IN CONTROLLING THE SPREAD OF COVID-19: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

2025· review· en· W4410851070 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aamna Jawed, Bheesham Kingrani, Hafsa Tahir, Usama Ahmad Khan, A. M. Siddiq

Bibliographic record

VenueInsights-Journal of Life and Social Sciences · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCOVID-19 Prevention and Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Psychological intervention2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Public healthSystematic reviewPublic health interventionsPsychologyMedicineMEDLINEPolitical scienceVirologyNursingDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic prompted the widespread use of public health interventions to reduce transmission and mitigate health system burdens. Despite extensive implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as lockdowns, mask mandates, and social distancing, the evidence regarding their effectiveness remains scattered and inconsistent across settings. A consolidated synthesis of current research is needed to guide future public health strategies and pandemic preparedness. Objective: This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of public health interventions in controlling the spread of COVID-19, with a focus on non-pharmaceutical strategies implemented across diverse populations and geographical regions. Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Literature was searched across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from December 2019 to April 2024. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental designs, cohort studies, and systematic reviews examining NPIs targeting COVID-19 transmission. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were independently performed using standardized forms and validated tools (Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale). A qualitative synthesis was used due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcomes. Results: Eight studies were included in the final analysis, encompassing a range of NPIs such as lockdowns, quarantine, contact tracing, mask-wearing, and public health communication. Interventions were associated with significant reductions in case growth rate, mortality, and transmission (e.g., daily case growth reduced by 4.68%, reproduction number dropped by up to 1.90). Effectiveness varied by implementation timing, public compliance, and local contextual factors. Conclusion: Non-pharmaceutical public health interventions played a pivotal role in mitigating COVID-19 spread. The evidence supports their continued inclusion in pandemic response frameworks. However, variations in context and compliance highlight the need for adaptable, evidence-based strategies. Future research should explore optimal combinations of NPIs and assess long-term health and socio-economic impacts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.265
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsights-Journal of Life and Social SciencesSame topicCOVID-19 Prevention and ImpactFrench-language works237,207