-
#[[references]]
- Title: Face Masks Against COVID-19: An Evidence Review
-
Meta:
-
Content
-
Abstract
- The science around the use of masks by the general public to impede COVID-19 transmission is advancing rapidly. Policymakers need guidance on how masks should be used by the general population to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. In this narrative review, we develop an analytical framework to examine mask usage, considering and synthesizing the relevant literature to inform multiple areas: population impact; transmission characteristics; source control; PPE; sociological considerations; and implementation considerations. A primary route of transmission of COVID-19 is via respiratory droplets, and is known to be transmissible from presymptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. Reducing disease spread requires two things: first, limit contacts of infected individuals via physical distancing and other measures, and second, reduce the transmission probability per contact. The preponderance of evidence indicates that mask wearing reduces the transmissibility per contact by reducing transmission of infected droplets in both laboratory and clinical contexts. Public mask wearing is most effective at reducing spread of the virus when compliance is high. The decreased transmissibility could substantially reduce the death toll and economic impact while the cost of the intervention is low. Given the current shortages of medical masks we recommend the adoption of public cloth mask wearing, as an effective form of source control, in conjunction with existing hygiene, distancing, and contact tracing strategies. Because many respiratory droplets become smaller due to evaporation, we recommend increasing focus on a previously overlooked aspect of mask usage: mask-wearing by infectious people ("source control") with benefits at the population-level, rather than mask-wearing by susceptible people, such as health-care workers, with focus on individual outcomes. We recommend that public officials and governments strongly encourage the use of widespread face masks in public, including the use of appropriate regulation.
-
#quotes
- The standard RCT paradigm is well-suited to medical interventions in which a treatment has a measurable effect at the individual level and furthermore, interventions and their outcomes are independent across persons comprising a target population.
- By contrast, the effect of masks on a pandemic is a population-level outcome where individual-level interventions have an aggregate effect on their community as a system. Consider, for instance, the impact of source control — its effect occurs to other individuals in the population, not the individual who implements the intervention by wearing a mask. This also underlies a common source of confusion — most RCT studies in the field examine masks as personal protective equipment (PPE) because efficacy can be measured in individuals to whom treatment is applied, i.e. “did the mask protect the person who wore it?” Even then, ethical issues prevent the availability of an unmasked control arm (27). The lack of direct causal identifiability requires a more integrative systems view of efficacy.
- We need to consider first principles — transmission properties of the disease, controlled biophysical characterizations alongside observational data, partially informative RCTs (primarily with respect to PPE), natural experiments (28), and policy implementation considerations — a discursive synthesis of interdisciplinary lines of evidence which are disparate by necessity (9, 29). (p. 3)
- #[[📝 lit-notes]]