Gutenberg Open Science: Is large-scale rapid CoV-2 testing a substitute for lockdowns?

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-8227

Full metadata record

DC Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Diederichs, Marc	-
dc.contributor.author	Glawion, René	-
dc.contributor.author	Kremsner, Peter G.	-
dc.contributor.author	Mitze, Timo	-
dc.contributor.author	Müller, Gernot J.	-
dc.contributor.author	Papies, Dominik	-
dc.contributor.author	Schulz, Felix	-
dc.contributor.author	Wälde, Klaus	-
dc.date.accessioned	2022-11-07T11:37:25Z	-
dc.date.available	2022-11-07T11:37:25Z	-
dc.date.issued	2022	-
dc.identifier.uri	https://openscience.ub.uni-mainz.de/handle/20.500.12030/8242	-
dc.description.abstract	Background Various forms of contact restrictions have been adopted in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Around February 2021, rapid testing appeared as a new policy instrument. Some claim it may serve as a substitute for contact restrictions. We study the strength of this argument by evaluating the effects of a unique policy experiment: In March and April 2021, the city of Tübingen set up a testing scheme while relaxing contact restrictions. Methods We compare case rates in Tübingen county to an appropriately identified control unit. We employ the synthetic control method. We base interpretations of our findings on an extended SEIR model. Findings The experiment led to an increase in the reported case rate. This increase is robust across alternative statistical specifications. This is also due to more testing leading initially to more reported cases. An epidemiological model that corrects for ‘more cases due to more testing’ and ‘reduced testing and reporting during the Easter holiday’ confirms that the overall effect of the experiment led to more infections. Interpretation The number of rapid tests were not sufficiently high in this experiment to compensate for more contacts and thereby infections caused by relaxing contact restrictions.	en_GB
dc.description.sponsorship	Gefördert durch die Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) - Projektnummer 491381577	de
dc.language.iso	eng	de
dc.rights	CC BY	*
dc.rights.uri	https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/	*
dc.subject.ddc	320 Politik	de_DE
dc.subject.ddc	320 Political science	en_GB
dc.subject.ddc	330 Wirtschaft	de_DE
dc.subject.ddc	330 Economics	en_GB
dc.subject.ddc	610 Medizin	de_DE
dc.subject.ddc	610 Medical sciences	en_GB
dc.title	Is large-scale rapid CoV-2 testing a substitute for lockdowns?	en_GB
dc.type	Zeitschriftenaufsatz	de
dc.identifier.doi	http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-8227	-
jgu.type.contenttype	Scientific article	de
jgu.type.dinitype	article	en_GB
jgu.type.version	Published version	de
jgu.type.resource	Text	de
jgu.organisation.department	FB 03 Rechts- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften	de
jgu.organisation.number	2300	-
jgu.organisation.name	Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz	-
jgu.rights.accessrights	openAccess	-
jgu.journal.title	PLOS ONE	de
jgu.journal.volume	17	de
jgu.journal.issue	3	de
jgu.pages.alternative	e0265207	de
jgu.publisher.year	2022	-
jgu.publisher.name	PLOS	de
jgu.publisher.place	San Francisco, California, US	de
jgu.publisher.issn	1932-6203	de
jgu.organisation.place	Mainz	-
jgu.subject.ddccode	320	de
jgu.subject.ddccode	330	de
jgu.subject.ddccode	610	de
jgu.publisher.doi	10.1371/journal.pone.0265207	de
jgu.organisation.ror	https://ror.org/023b0x485	-
jgu.subject.dfg	Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften	de
Appears in collections:	DFG-491381577-G

Files in This Item:

	File	Description	Size	Format
	is_largescale_rapid_cov2_test-20221104095026642.pdf		679.17 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Show simple item record