MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415079934 · doi:10.1093/ve/veaf077

Phylogeographic evaluation of the effectiveness of Canadian travel restrictions in reducing SARS-CoV-2 variant importations and burden

2025· article· en· W4415079934 on OpenAlexaffabout
Angela McLaughlin, Vincent Montoya, Rachel Miller, Blyth Fiona, Anwar Zohaib, Côté Marceline, Fiume Marc, GG Laura, G Wessling Erin, Joly Yann, Moreira Sandrine, M. Samira, Prystajecky Natalie, Tanner Jennifer, Domselaar Gary Van, Zahariadis Phot, Michael Worobey, Jeffrey B. Joy

Bibliographic record

VenueVirus Evolution · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsAIDS VancouverUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicPhylogeographySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Observational studyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Evaluating travel restriction effectiveness in mitigating infectious disease burden, exemplified by COVID-19, is critical for informing pandemic response policy, yet methodologies and results evaluating their effectiveness vary considerably. We hypothesized Canadian COVID-19 travel restrictions, including flight bans and enhanced screening, targeting focal source countries where SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, and Omicron were first identified, were variably effective towards averting introductions and case burden. We conducted a retrospective observational study using all the publicly available SARS-CoV-2 sequences and COVID-19 diagnoses up to March 2022, after which polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing and surveillance sequencing decreased. Average daily variant cases were estimated across global regions and Canadian provinces, which informed subsampling probabilities for sequences for up to 50 000 sequences for VOCs and variants of interest from late 2020 to early 2022. Maximum likelihood phylogeographic methods were used to infer Canadian SARS-CoV-2 sublineages and singletons, representing international viral introductions with and without domestically sampled descendants. Reduction of sublineage and singleton introduction rates and proportional contributions from focal sources were quantified following interventions’ introductions. Sublineages and cases averted via VOC travel restrictions were estimated based on sublineages’ introduction rates and growth characteristics prior to restrictions. Our results suggest that across VOCs subject to targeted travel restrictions, approximately 995 (841–1151) introductions may have been prevented, accounting for an averted burden of 971 371 (321 204–1 004 575) cases, 10 685 (3533–11 050) hospitalizations, and 561 (185–580) deaths, largely accounted for by the Delta-related India flight ban. However, these estimates represent an upper bound of effectiveness if any assumptions were violated, including that introductions can be treated as independent when susceptibility is high, averted introductions mirror characteristics of observed introductions, and that travel restrictions caused sustained changes in travel behaviour. Travel restrictions were most effective when implemented rapidly following variant emergence, during exponential case growth in the focal source country, and concurrent with limited domestic and global circulation. Our analyses suggest that COVID-19 travel restrictions, particularly flight suspensions, mitigated variant case burden when global circulation was limited and case burden was high in the focal source, and highlight their value in future pandemic response, although public health benefits must be weighed against socioeconomic costs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.248 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirus EvolutionSame topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesFrench-language works237,207