Abstract
Governments issue “stay-at-home” orders to reduce the spread of contagious diseases, but the magnitude of such orders’ effectiveness remains uncertain. In the United States these orders were not coordinated at the national level during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which creates an opportunity to use spatial and temporal variation to measure the policies’ effect. Here, we combine data on the timing of stay-at-home orders with daily confirmed COVID-19 cases and fatalities at the county level during the first seven weeks of the outbreak in the United States. We estimate the association between stay-at-home orders and alterations in COVID-19 cases and fatalities using a difference-in-differences design that accounts for unmeasured local variation in factors like health systems and demographics and for unmeasured temporal variation in factors like national mitigation actions and access to tests. Compared to counties that did not implement stay-at-home orders, the results show that the orders are associated with a 30.2 percent (11.0 to 45.2) average reduction in weekly incident cases after one week, a 40.0 percent (23.4 to 53.0) reduction after two weeks, and a 48.6 percent (31.1 to 61.7) reduction after three weeks. Stay-at-home orders are also associated with a 59.8 percent (18.3 to 80.2) average reduction in weekly fatalities after three weeks. These results suggest that stay-at-home orders might have reduced confirmed cases by 390,000 (170,000 to 680,000) and fatalities by 41,000 (27,000 to 59,000) within the first three weeks in localities that implemented stay-at-home orders.
Highlights
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) first appeared as a cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China on December 31, 2019 [1] and was declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020 [2]
Identifying the effect of orders using over-time changes in counties that issued stay-athome orders could induce the kind of bias we described in the previous paragraph
Our method identifies the causal effects of stay-at-home orders only under the assumption that the disease would have progressed in implementing counties in the same way as it did progress in non-implementing counties, had counties with stay-at-home orders never issued the orders
Summary
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) first appeared as a cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China on December 31, 2019 [1] and was declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020 [2]. Existing work aimed at estimating the causal effects of stay-at-home orders attempts to overcome this challenge by employing an event-study design, comparing the progression of the disease over time in counties that implemented stay-at-home orders before and after the order was implemented [24]. Even if these designs include never-order units in their sample, the inclusion of unit fixed effects means that units that never change policy do not contribute to the estimated effects of that policy To overcome this identification challenge, we implement a difference-in-differences approach that uses the hundreds of counties that do not issue a stay-at-home order during our time period of study as explicit controls. Given our grouping strategy, such spillovers would not influence our estimated effects if adjacent counties issued orders on different calendar dates, which is a benefit of our design relative to a standard difference-in-differences approach
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: 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.