Abstract
There is conflicting evidence on the influence of weather on COVID-19 transmission. Our aim is to estimate weather-dependent signatures in the early phase of the pandemic, while controlling for socio-economic factors and non-pharmaceutical interventions. We identify a modest non-linear association between mean temperature and the effective reproduction number (Re) in 409 cities in 26 countries, with a decrease of 0.087 (95% CI: 0.025; 0.148) for a 10 °C increase. Early interventions have a greater effect on Re with a decrease of 0.285 (95% CI 0.223; 0.347) for a 5th - 95th percentile increase in the government response index. The variation in the effective reproduction number explained by government interventions is 6 times greater than for mean temperature. We find little evidence of meteorological conditions having influenced the early stages of local epidemics and conclude that population behaviour and government interventions are more important drivers of transmission.
Highlights
There is conflicting evidence on the influence of weather on COVID-19 transmission
Focusing on the early phase of the pandemic allows us to minimise possible biases coming from factors impacting reproduction number (Re) (in particular non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs)), which developed as the pandemic progressed
When visualising the unadjusted association of Re with mean temperature, relative humidity (RH), absolute humidity (AH), solar radiation at the surface and stratified by climate zone, we found no clear pattern (Fig. 2)
Summary
There is conflicting evidence on the influence of weather on COVID-19 transmission. Our aim is to estimate weather-dependent signatures in the early phase of the pandemic, while controlling for socio-economic factors and non-pharmaceutical interventions. We overcome methodological issues of previous approaches by using a two-stage ecological modelling approach to examine the impact of meteorological variables on SARS-CoV-2 transmission by comparing cities located across the globe, while accounting for confounding of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and city-level covariates. Focusing on the early phase of the pandemic allows us to minimise possible biases coming from factors impacting Re (in particular non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs)), which developed as the pandemic progressed These include change of ascertainment methods and strategies, the implementation of strong NPIs (e.g. travel bans, school closures and lockdown), the appearance of new variants and vaccination campaigns. In a second ‘cross-sectional’ stage, we estimate the association of city-level Re, calculated for the city-specific window (allowing for standard errors), with each meteorological variable, controlling for confounding by total population, population density, gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, percentage of population >65 years, pollution levels (i.e. particulate matter, PM2.5) and the lagged Oxford COVID-19 Government. The fine spatial scale of the city-level data and the methodological design, accounting for confounding of NPIs and city-level covariates, allows us to accurately quantify the relationship between meteorological variables and Re
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
