Dataset Information

Comparing the responses of the UK, Sweden and Denmark to COVID-19 using counterfactual modelling.

ABSTRACT: The UK and Sweden have among the worst per-capita COVID-19 mortality in Europe. Sweden stands out for its greater reliance on voluntary, rather than mandatory, control measures. We explore how the timing and effectiveness of control measures in the UK, Sweden and Denmark shaped COVID-19 mortality in each country, using a counterfactual assessment: what would the impact have been, had each country adopted the others' policies? Using a Bayesian semi-mechanistic model without prior assumptions on the mechanism or effectiveness of interventions, we estimate the time-varying reproduction number for the UK, Sweden and Denmark from daily mortality data. We use two approaches to evaluate counterfactuals which transpose the transmission profile from one country onto another, in each country's first wave from 13th March (when stringent interventions began) until 1st July 2020. UK mortality would have approximately doubled had Swedish policy been adopted, while Swedish mortality would have more than halved had Sweden adopted UK or Danish strategies. Danish policies were most effective, although differences between the UK and Denmark were significant for one counterfactual approach only. Our analysis shows that small changes in the timing or effectiveness of interventions have disproportionately large effects on total mortality within a rapidly growing epidemic.

SUBMITTER: Mishra S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8358009 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparing the responses of the UK, Sweden and Denmark to COVID-19 using counterfactual modelling.

Mishra Swapnil S Scott James A JA Laydon Daniel J DJ Flaxman Seth S Gandy Axel A Mellan Thomas A TA Unwin H Juliette T HJT Vollmer Michaela M Coupland Helen H Ratmann Oliver O Monod Melodie M Zhu Harrison H HH Cori Anne A Gaythorpe Katy A M KAM Whittles Lilith K LK Whittaker Charles C Donnelly Christl A CA Ferguson Neil M NM Bhatt Samir S

Scientific reports 20210811 1

The UK and Sweden have among the worst per-capita COVID-19 mortality in Europe. Sweden stands out for its greater reliance on voluntary, rather than mandatory, control measures. We explore how the timing and effectiveness of control measures in the UK, Sweden and Denmark shaped COVID-19 mortality in each country, using a counterfactual assessment: what would the impact have been, had each country adopted the others' policies? Using a Bayesian semi-mechanistic model without prior assumptions on t ...[more]

PMID: 34381102

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPregnancy is a risk factor for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and adverse pregnancy outcomes. We aimed to explore maternal characteristics, pregnancy outcomes, vaccination status, and virus variants among pregnant women admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with severe COVID-19.Material and methodsWe identified pregnant women admitted to ICU in Sweden (n = 96), Norway (n = 31), and Denmark (n = 16) because of severe COVID-19, from national registers and clinical databases between March 2020 and February 2022 (Denmark), August 2022 (Sweden), or December 2022 (Norway). Their background characteristics, pregnancy outcome, and vaccination status were compared with all birthing women and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test-positive pregnant women during the same time period. We calculated the number admitted to ICU per 10 000 birthing and per 1000 SARS-CoV-2 test-positive women during the Index, Alpha, Delta, and Omicron periods.ResultsWomen admitted to ICU had a higher mean body mass index, were more often of non-Scandinavian origin, had on average lower education and income levels, had a higher proportion of chronic and pregnancy-related conditions, delivered preterm, had neonates with low Apgar scores, and had more infants admitted to neonatal care, compared with all birthing and test-positive pregnant women. Of those admitted to ICU, only 7% had been vaccinated before admission. Overall, the highest proportion of women admitted to ICU per birthing was during the Delta period (4.1 per 10 000 birthing women). In Norway, the highest proportion admitted to ICU per test-positive pregnant women was during the Delta period (17.8 per 1000 test-positive), whereas the highest proportion of admitted per test-positive in Sweden and Denmark was seen during the Index period (15.4 and 8.9 per 1000 test-positive, respectively).ConclusionsAdmission to ICU because of COVID-19 in pregnancy was a rare event in the Scandinavian countries, but women who were unvaccinated, of non-Scandinavian origin, and with lower socio-economic status were at higher risk of admission to ICU. In addition, women admitted to ICU for COVID-19 had higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Project description:IntroductionDenmark and Sweden initially adopted different responses to the COVID-19 pandemic although the two countries share many characteristics. Denmark responded swiftly with many mandatory restrictions. In contrast, Sweden relied on voluntary restrictions and a more "relaxed" response during the first wave of the pandemic. However, increased rates of COVID-19 cases led to a new approach that involved many more mandatory restrictions, thus making Sweden's response similar to Denmark's in the second wave of the pandemic.AimThe aim was to investigate and compare the extent to which the populations in Denmark and Sweden considered the COVID-19 restrictions to be acceptable during the first two waves of the pandemic. The study also aimed to identify the characteristics of those who were least accepting of the restrictions in the two countries.Materials and methodsCross-sectional surveys were conducted in Denmark and Sweden in 2021. The study population was sampled from nationally representative web panels in the two countries, consisting of 2,619 individuals from Denmark and 2,633 from Sweden. The questionnaire captured key socio-demographic characteristics. Acceptability was operationalized based on a theoretical framework consisting of seven constructs and one overarching construct.ResultsThe respondents' age and gender patterns were similar in the two countries. The proportion of respondents in Denmark who agreed with the statements ("agree" alternative) that captured various acceptability constructs was generally higher for the first wave than the second wave of the pandemic. The opposite pattern was seen for Sweden. In Denmark, 66% in the first wave and 50% in the second wave were accepting of the restrictions. The corresponding figures for Sweden was 42% (first wave) and 47% (second wave). Low acceptance of the restrictions, defined as the 25% with the lowest total score on the seven acceptability statements, was associated with younger age, male gender and lower education levels.ConclusionRespondents in Sweden were more accepting of the restrictions in the second wave, when the country used many mandatory restrictions. In contrast, respondents in Denmark were more accepting of the restrictions in the first wave than in the second wave, implying an increased weariness to comply with the restrictions over time. There were considerable socio-demographic differences between those who expressed low acceptance of the restrictions and the others in both countries, suggesting the importance of tailoring communication about the pandemic to different segments of the population.

Dataset Information

Comparing the responses of the UK, Sweden and Denmark to COVID-19 using counterfactual modelling.

Publications

Comparing the responses of the UK, Sweden and Denmark to COVID-19 using counterfactual modelling.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets