Justin M Calabrese, Lennart Schüler, Xiaoming Fu, Erik Gawel, Heinrich Zozmann, Jan Bumberger, Martin Quaas, Gerome Wolf, Sabine Attinger
{"title":"A novel, scenario-based approach to comparing non-pharmaceutical intervention strategies across nations.","authors":"Justin M Calabrese, Lennart Schüler, Xiaoming Fu, Erik Gawel, Heinrich Zozmann, Jan Bumberger, Martin Quaas, Gerome Wolf, Sabine Attinger","doi":"10.1098/rsif.2024.0301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Comparing COVID-19 response strategies across nations is a key step in preparing for future pandemics. Conventional comparisons, which rank individual non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI) effects, are limited by: (i) a focus on epidemiological outcomes; (ii) NPIs typically being applied as packages of interventions; and (iii) different political, economic and social conditions among nations. Here, we develop a coupled epidemiological-behavioural-macroeconomic model that can transfer NPI effects from a reference nation to a focal nation. This approach quantifies epidemiological, behavioural and economic outcomes while accounting for both packaged NPIs and differing conditions among nations. As a first proof of concept, we take Germany as our focal nation during Spring 2020, and New Zealand and Switzerland as reference nations with contrasting NPI strategies. Our results suggest that, while New Zealand's more aggressive strategy would have yielded modest epidemiological gains in Germany, it would have resulted in substantially higher economic costs while dramatically reducing social contacts. In contrast, Switzerland's more lenient strategy would have prolonged the first wave in Germany, but would also have increased relative costs. More generally, these findings indicate that our approach can provide novel, multifaceted insights on the efficacy of pandemic response strategies, and therefore merits further exploration and development.</p>","PeriodicalId":17488,"journal":{"name":"Journal of The Royal Society Interface","volume":"21 218","pages":"20240301"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11463227/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of The Royal Society Interface","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2024.0301","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Comparing COVID-19 response strategies across nations is a key step in preparing for future pandemics. Conventional comparisons, which rank individual non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI) effects, are limited by: (i) a focus on epidemiological outcomes; (ii) NPIs typically being applied as packages of interventions; and (iii) different political, economic and social conditions among nations. Here, we develop a coupled epidemiological-behavioural-macroeconomic model that can transfer NPI effects from a reference nation to a focal nation. This approach quantifies epidemiological, behavioural and economic outcomes while accounting for both packaged NPIs and differing conditions among nations. As a first proof of concept, we take Germany as our focal nation during Spring 2020, and New Zealand and Switzerland as reference nations with contrasting NPI strategies. Our results suggest that, while New Zealand's more aggressive strategy would have yielded modest epidemiological gains in Germany, it would have resulted in substantially higher economic costs while dramatically reducing social contacts. In contrast, Switzerland's more lenient strategy would have prolonged the first wave in Germany, but would also have increased relative costs. More generally, these findings indicate that our approach can provide novel, multifaceted insights on the efficacy of pandemic response strategies, and therefore merits further exploration and development.
期刊介绍:
J. R. Soc. Interface welcomes articles of high quality research at the interface of the physical and life sciences. It provides a high-quality forum to publish rapidly and interact across this boundary in two main ways: J. R. Soc. Interface publishes research applying chemistry, engineering, materials science, mathematics and physics to the biological and medical sciences; it also highlights discoveries in the life sciences of relevance to the physical sciences. Both sides of the interface are considered equally and it is one of the only journals to cover this exciting new territory. J. R. Soc. Interface welcomes contributions on a diverse range of topics, including but not limited to; biocomplexity, bioengineering, bioinformatics, biomaterials, biomechanics, bionanoscience, biophysics, chemical biology, computer science (as applied to the life sciences), medical physics, synthetic biology, systems biology, theoretical biology and tissue engineering.