skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Modeling COVID-19 scenarios for the United States
Abstract We use COVID-19 case and mortality data from 1 February 2020 to 21 September 2020 and a deterministic SEIR (susceptible, exposed, infectious and recovered) compartmental framework to model possible trajectories of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections and the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions in the United States at the state level from 22 September 2020 through 28 February 2021. Using this SEIR model, and projections of critical driving covariates (pneumonia seasonality, mobility, testing rates and mask use per capita), we assessed scenarios of social distancing mandates and levels of mask use. Projections of current non-pharmaceutical intervention strategies by state—with social distancing mandates reinstated when a threshold of 8 deaths per million population is exceeded (reference scenario)—suggest that, cumulatively, 511,373 (469,578–578,347) lives could be lost to COVID-19 across the United States by 28 February 2021. We find that achieving universal mask use (95% mask use in public) could be sufficient to ameliorate the worst effects of epidemic resurgences in many states. Universal mask use could save an additional 129,574 (85,284–170,867) lives from September 22, 2020 through the end of February 2021, or an additional 95,814 (60,731–133,077) lives assuming a lesser adoption of mask wearing (85%), when compared to the reference scenario.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2031096
PAR ID:
10227893
Author(s) / Creator(s):
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Nature Medicine
Volume:
27
Issue:
1
ISSN:
1078-8956
Page Range / eLocation ID:
94 to 105
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. (, Medical Anthropology Quarterly)
    Abstract The United States approached the COVID‐19 pandemic with inconsistent responses that varied by state. In Florida, legislators passed laws contrary to mitigating the pandemic. These laws included banning county and municipal efforts to control the spread of COVID‐19 through mask mandates, social distancing, and prohibiting vaccination mandates during infectious disease epidemics. Moreover, the Legislature simultaneously prioritized policies of social exclusion, passing bills that constrained the rights of transgender individuals, Black Lives Matter protestors, and educators. In this article, I use the perspectives of critical medical anthropology and “governing through contagion” to examine Florida's COVID‐19 response. I argue the COVID‐19 pandemic provided an opportunity for legislators to obfuscate their political power and advance a politics of social division while simultaneously passing policies that undermined human health. I refer to this process as governingwithcontagion: Using a pandemic as a politically expedient backdrop to conceal power and simultaneously harm human health. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, International Journal of Infection Control)
    The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused devastating public health, economic, political, and societal crises. We performed a comparison study of COVID-19 outbreaks in states with Republican governors versus states with Democratic governors in the United States between April 2020 and February 2021. This research study shows that 1) states with Democratic governors had tested more people for COVID-19 and have higher testing rates than those with Republican governors; 2) states with Democratic governors had more confirmed cases for COVID-19 from April 12 until the end of July 2020, as well as from early December 2020 to February 22 2021, and had higher test positivity rates from April 12 until late June 2020, and the states with Republican governors had more confirmed cases from August to early December 2020 and had higher test positivity rates since late June 2020; 3) states with Democratic governors had more deaths for COVID-19 and higher mortality rates than those with Republican governors; 4) more people recovered in states with Democratic governors until early July 2020, while the recovery rate of states with Republican governors is similar to that of states with Democratic governors in May 2020 and higher than that of states with Democratic governors in April 2020 and between June 2020 to February 22 2021. We conclude that our data suggest that states with Republican governors controlled COVID-19 better as they had lower mortality rates and similar or higher recovery rates. States with Democratic governors first had higher test positivity rates until late June 2020 but had lower test positivity rates after July 2020. As of February 2021, the pandemic was still spreading as the daily numbers of confirmed cases and deaths were still high, although the test positivity and mortality rates started to stabilize in spring 2021. This study provides a direct description for the status and performance of handling COVID-19 in the states with Republican governors versus states with Democratic governors, and provides insights for future research, policy making, resource distribution, and administration. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; (, Frontiers in Public Health)
    A novel coronavirus emerged in December of 2019 (COVID-19), causing a pandemic that inflicted unprecedented public health and economic burden in all nooks and corners of the world. Although the control of COVID-19 largely focused on the use of basic public health measures (primarily based on using non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as quarantine, isolation, social-distancing, face mask usage, and community lockdowns) initially, three safe and highly-effective vaccines (by AstraZeneca Inc., Moderna Inc., and Pfizer Inc.), were approved for use in humans in December 2020. We present a new mathematical model for assessing the population-level impact of these vaccines on curtailing the burden of COVID-19. The model stratifies the total population into two subgroups, based on whether or not they habitually wear face mask in public. The resulting multigroup model, which takes the form of a deterministic system of nonlinear differential equations, is fitted and parameterized using COVID-19 cumulative mortality data for the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Conditions for the asymptotic stability of the associated disease-free equilibrium, as well as an expression for the vaccine-derived herd immunity threshold, are rigorously derived. Numerical simulations of the model show that the size of the initial proportion of individuals in the mask-wearing group, together with positive change in behavior from the non-mask wearing group (as well as those in the mask-wearing group, who do not abandon their mask-wearing habit) play a crucial role in effectively curtailing the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. This study further shows that the prospect of achieving vaccine-derived herd immunity (required for COVID-19 elimination) in the U.S., using the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, is quite promising. In particular, our study shows that herd immunity can be achieved in the U.S. if at least 60% of the population are fully vaccinated. Furthermore, the prospect of eliminating the pandemic in the U.S. in the year 2021 is significantly enhanced if the vaccination program is complemented with non-pharmaceutical interventions at moderate increased levels of compliance (in relation to their baseline compliance). The study further suggests that, while the waning of natural and vaccine-derived immunity against COVID-19 induces only a marginal increase in the burden and projected time-to-elimination of the pandemic, adding the impacts of therapeutic benefits of the vaccines into the model resulted in a dramatic reduction in the burden and time-to-elimination of the pandemic. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; (, Scientific Reports)
    Abstract Wearing masks reduces the spread of COVID-19, but compliance with mask mandates varies across individuals, time, and space. Accurate and continuous measures of mask wearing, as well as other health-related behaviors, are important for public health policies. This article presents a novel approach to estimate mask wearing using geotagged Twitter image data from March through September, 2020 in the United States. We validate our measure using public opinion survey data and extend the analysis to investigate county-level differences in mask wearing. We find a strong association between mask mandates and mask wearing—an average increase of 20%. Moreover, this association is greatest in Republican-leaning counties. The findings have important implications for understanding how governmental policies shape and monitor citizen responses to public health crises. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; (, Journal of Health Psychology)
    The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted millions of lives, with life stress and daily hassles having a potential impact on parent mental health. This study examined whether preventive health behaviors (e.g. social distancing, mask wearing) and social support relate to parent mental health. In a cross-sectional analysis of parents ( N = 176, May–September 2020), life events and daily hassles were positively associated with depressive and anxiety symptoms. Preventive health behaviors moderated the association between daily hassles and depressive symptoms. Preventive health behaviors may protect those with high levels of daily hassles from moderate levels of depression. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email