• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

政策干预、社交距离和美国的 SARS-CoV-2 传播:回顾性州级分析。

Policy Interventions, Social Distancing, and SARS-CoV-2 Transmission in the United States: A Retrospective State-level Analysis.

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States.

Department of Neurosurgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States.

出版信息

Am J Med Sci. 2021 May;361(5):575-584. doi: 10.1016/j.amjms.2021.01.007. Epub 2021 Jan 11.

DOI:10.1016/j.amjms.2021.01.007
PMID:33775425
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7833753/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Various non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as stay-at-home orders and school closures have been employed to limit the spread of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). This study measures the impact of social distancing policies on COVID-19 transmission in US states during the early outbreak phase to assess which policies were most effective.

METHODS

To measure transmissibility, we analyze the average effective reproductive number (R) in each state the week following its 500th case and doubling time from 500 to 1000 cases. Linear and logistic regressions were performed to assess the impact of various NPIs while controlling for population density, GDP, and certain health metrics. This analysis was repeated for deaths with doubling time to 100 deaths with several healthcare infrastructure control variables.

RESULTS

States with stay-at-home orders in place at the time of their 500th case were associated with lower average R the following week compared to states without them (p<0.001) and significantly less likely to have an R>1 (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01-0.37, p = 0.004). These states also experienced longer doubling time from 500 to 1000 cases (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17-0.72, p = 0.004). States in the highest quartile of average time spent at home were also slower to reach 1000 cases than those in the lowest quartile (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.06-0.53, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Stay-at-home orders had the largest effect of any policy analyzed. Multivariate analyses with cellphone tracking data suggest social distancing adherence drives these effects. States that plan to scale back such measures should carefully monitor transmission metrics.

摘要

背景

为了限制新型冠状病毒疾病(COVID-19)的传播,已采取各种非药物干预措施(NPIs),如居家令和学校关闭。本研究旨在衡量社交距离政策对美国各州 COVID-19 传播的早期暴发阶段的影响,以评估哪些政策最有效。

方法

为了衡量传染性,我们分析了各州在第 500 例病例后一周的平均有效繁殖数(R)以及从第 500 例到第 1000 例病例的倍增时间。进行线性和逻辑回归分析,以评估在控制人口密度、国内生产总值和某些健康指标的情况下,各种 NPI 的影响。对死亡病例也进行了类似的分析,在考虑到一些医疗保健基础设施控制变量的情况下,将死亡病例倍增时间延长至 100 例。

结果

在第 500 例病例时实施居家令的州,与未实施该政策的州相比,下一周的平均 R 值较低(p<0.001),R 值大于 1 的可能性显著降低(OR 0.07,95%CI 0.01-0.37,p=0.004)。这些州从第 500 例到第 1000 例病例的倍增时间也更长(HR 0.35,95%CI 0.17-0.72,p=0.004)。平均居家时间最长的州达到 1000 例病例的速度也比居家时间最短的州慢(HR 0.18,95%CI 0.06-0.53,p=0.002)。

结论

居家令是分析的所有政策中影响最大的政策。与手机追踪数据相关的多变量分析表明,社交距离的遵守程度推动了这些影响。计划放宽这些措施的州应仔细监测传播指标。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2df9/7833753/b0aa886b2ade/gr4_lrg.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2df9/7833753/79da38e02f4c/gr1_lrg.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2df9/7833753/564d3e866953/gr2_lrg.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2df9/7833753/edee72505614/gr3_lrg.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2df9/7833753/b0aa886b2ade/gr4_lrg.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2df9/7833753/79da38e02f4c/gr1_lrg.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2df9/7833753/564d3e866953/gr2_lrg.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2df9/7833753/edee72505614/gr3_lrg.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2df9/7833753/b0aa886b2ade/gr4_lrg.jpg

相似文献

1
Policy Interventions, Social Distancing, and SARS-CoV-2 Transmission in the United States: A Retrospective State-level Analysis.政策干预、社交距离和美国的 SARS-CoV-2 传播:回顾性州级分析。
Am J Med Sci. 2021 May;361(5):575-584. doi: 10.1016/j.amjms.2021.01.007. Epub 2021 Jan 11.
2
Association of Social Distancing, Population Density, and Temperature With the Instantaneous Reproduction Number of SARS-CoV-2 in Counties Across the United States.社交距离、人口密度和温度与美国各县 SARS-CoV-2 瞬时繁殖数的关系。
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Jul 1;3(7):e2016099. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.16099.
3
The temporal association of introducing and lifting non-pharmaceutical interventions with the time-varying reproduction number (R) of SARS-CoV-2: a modelling study across 131 countries.引入和取消非药物干预措施与 SARS-CoV-2 时变繁殖数(R)之间的时间关联:131 个国家的建模研究。
Lancet Infect Dis. 2021 Feb;21(2):193-202. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30785-4. Epub 2020 Oct 22.
4
The impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on SARS-CoV-2 transmission across 130 countries and territories.非药物干预措施对 130 个国家和地区的 SARS-CoV-2 传播的影响。
BMC Med. 2021 Feb 5;19(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s12916-020-01872-8.
5
Social distancing policies in 22 African countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: a desk review.22 个非洲国家在 COVID-19 大流行期间的社交距离政策:桌面审查。
Pan Afr Med J. 2020 Dec 14;37(Suppl 1):46. doi: 10.11604/pamj.supp.2020.37.46.27026. eCollection 2020.
6
Chance elections, social distancing restrictions, and KENTUCKY's early COVID-19 experience.偶然的选举、社交距离限制和肯塔基州的早期 COVID-19 经历。
PLoS One. 2021 Jul 1;16(7):e0250152. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250152. eCollection 2021.
7
Early public adherence with and support for stay-at-home COVID-19 mitigation strategies despite adverse life impact: a transnational cross-sectional survey study in the United States and Australia.尽管对生活产生了不利影响,公众仍早期坚持并支持 COVID-19 居家缓解策略:一项针对美国和澳大利亚的跨国横断面调查研究。
BMC Public Health. 2021 Mar 15;21(1):503. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10410-x.
8
Measuring voluntary and policy-induced social distancing behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic.测量 COVID-19 大流行期间自愿和政策诱导的社会隔离行为。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Apr 20;118(16). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2008814118.
9
Early social distancing policies in Europe, changes in mobility & COVID-19 case trajectories: Insights from Spring 2020.欧洲早期的社交隔离政策、流动性变化与 COVID-19 病例轨迹:来自 2020 年春季的洞察。
PLoS One. 2021 Jun 30;16(6):e0253071. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253071. eCollection 2021.
10
Predictors of State-Level Stay-at-Home Orders in the United States and Their Association With Mobility of Residents.美国各州居家令出台的预测因素及其与居民流动性的关系。
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2020 Nov/Dec;26(6):622-631. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000001236.

引用本文的文献

1
Latent social distancing: Identification, causes and consequences.潜在的社交距离:识别、成因及后果
Econ Syst. 2022 Mar;46(1):100944. doi: 10.1016/j.ecosys.2022.100944. Epub 2022 Feb 3.
2
The effectiveness of the states' crisis response policies: Survival analysis on the COVID-19 transmission suppression in the United States.各州危机应对政策的有效性:美国新冠病毒传播抑制的生存分析
Health Policy Open. 2025 Mar 20;8:100140. doi: 10.1016/j.hpopen.2025.100140. eCollection 2025 Jun.
3
Effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 transmission: rapid review of evidence from Italy, the United States, the United Kingdom, and China.
非药物干预措施对 COVID-19 传播的影响:来自意大利、美国、英国和中国的证据快速审查。
Front Public Health. 2024 Oct 17;12:1426992. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1426992. eCollection 2024.
4
Effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions for COVID-19 in USA.美国非药物干预措施对 COVID-19 的有效性。
Sci Rep. 2024 Sep 13;14(1):21387. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-71984-1.
5
Epidemic outcomes following government responses to COVID-19: Insights from nearly 100,000 models.政府对 COVID-19 响应后的疫情结果:近 10 万模型的洞察。
Sci Adv. 2024 Jun 7;10(23):eadn0671. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adn0671. Epub 2024 Jun 5.
6
Systematic review of empiric studies on lockdowns, workplace closures, and other non-pharmaceutical interventions in non-healthcare workplaces during the initial year of the COVID-19 pandemic: benefits and selected unintended consequences.COVID-19 大流行初始阶段非医疗工作场所实施封锁、关闭工作场所和其他非药物干预措施的经验性研究的系统评价:效益和一些意外的后果。
BMC Public Health. 2024 Mar 22;24(1):884. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-18377-1.
7
The impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on the spread of COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia: Simulation approach.非药物干预措施对沙特阿拉伯新冠病毒传播的影响:模拟方法
Saudi Pharm J. 2024 Jan;32(1):101886. doi: 10.1016/j.jsps.2023.101886. Epub 2023 Nov 30.
8
Effectiveness of social distancing measures and lockdowns for reducing transmission of COVID-19 in non-healthcare, community-based settings.社交距离措施和封锁措施在减少非医疗、社区环境中的 COVID-19 传播方面的效果。
Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2023 Oct 9;381(2257):20230132. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2023.0132. Epub 2023 Aug 23.
9
Genomic epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 variants during the first two years of the pandemic in Colombia.哥伦比亚疫情头两年期间新冠病毒变异株的基因组流行病学
Commun Med (Lond). 2023 Jul 13;3(1):97. doi: 10.1038/s43856-023-00328-3.
10
Nonpharmaceutical Interventions in Georgia: Public Health Implications.乔治亚州的非药物干预措施:公共卫生影响。
South Med J. 2023 May;116(5):383-389. doi: 10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001552.