6/n So what did the paper find? Here's the main results. The further to the right an intervention is, the better it was at reducing Reff (and thus reducing the spread of COVID-19pic.twitter.com/58PFaenMpy
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
17/n I should also note that I am not an expert in Bayesian statistical methods, so I might've missed something important in terms of limitations of the models used
18/n Another worthwhile point is that I think that this paper is pretty good, but as with everything I could be wrong Point out any errors I've missed!
19/n Thread worth reading on some more limitations of the studyhttps://twitter.com/DiseaseEcology/status/1290364813755863041?s=20 …
Yes. Stay at home most probably has worsening effects. Schools have to be differentiated from universities, totally different SSE potential and hardly related. Also problematic: preselection of countries.
Would be nice to disentangle schools and unis, but in principle the approaches used can not distinguish between NPIs if they almost perfectly coincide everywhere. Needs further models based on different data
I don't get how stay at home can be neglegtable.? It's total isolation.
Think marginal benefit here. So stay-at-home ON TOP OF everything else is small. No place mandated stay-at-home without lots of other measures first
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.