Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Should contact bans be lifted in Germany? A quantitative prediction of its effects

Jean Roch Donsimoni, René Glawion, Bodo Plachter, Constantin Weiser, Klaus Wälde
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.10.20060301
Jean Roch Donsimoni
aJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz
cDepartment of Economics
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: waelde{at}uni-mainz.de
René Glawion
bHamburg University
cDepartment of Economics
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bodo Plachter
aJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz
dInstitute for Virology
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Constantin Weiser
aJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz
cDepartment of Economics
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Klaus Wälde
aJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz
cDepartment of Economics
eCESifo and IZA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: waelde{at}uni-mainz.de
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Many countries consider the lifting of restrictions of social contacts (RSC). We quantify the effects of RSC for Germany. We initially employ a purely statistical approach to predicting prevalence of COVID19 if RSC were upheld after April 20. We employ these findings and feed them into our theoretical model. We find that the peak of the number of sick individuals would be reached already mid April. The number of sick individuals would fall below 1,000 at the beginning of July. When restrictions are lifted completely on April 20, the number of sick should rise quickly again from around April 27. A balance between economic and individual costs of RSC and public health objectives consists in lifting RSC for activities that have high economic benefits but low health costs. In the absence of large-scale representative testing of CoV-2 infections, these activities can most easily be identified if federal states of Germany adopted exit strategies that differ across states.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

No external funding was received for this research project.

Author Declarations

All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.

Yes

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Constantin Weiser are at the Johannes Gutenberg Universität Mainz, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Jakob-Welder-Weg 4, D-55131 Mainz, Telefon + 49.6131.39-20143, jdonsimo{at}uni-mainz.de, waelde{at}uni-mainz.de, constantin.weiser{at}uni-mainz.de. René Glawion is at the Department of Economics of Hamburg University, rene.glawion{at}uni-hamburg.de. Bodo Plachter is at the Institute for Virology of the University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany, plachter{at}uni-mainz.de. We are grateful to Claudius Gros, Albrecht Ritschl, Hilmar Schneider, Hans-Werner Sinn, to many members of the “Makrorunde” and to seminar participants of the ‘Forecasting COVID19’ workshop at the Johannes Gutenberg University for comments and discussions.

Data Availability

Data used is publicly available.

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19/master/csse_covid_19_data/csse_covid_19_time_series/time_series_covid19_confirmed_global.csv

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted April 14, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Should contact bans be lifted in Germany? A quantitative prediction of its effects
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Should contact bans be lifted in Germany? A quantitative prediction of its effects
Jean Roch Donsimoni, René Glawion, Bodo Plachter, Constantin Weiser, Klaus Wälde
medRxiv 2020.04.10.20060301; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.10.20060301
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Should contact bans be lifted in Germany? A quantitative prediction of its effects
Jean Roch Donsimoni, René Glawion, Bodo Plachter, Constantin Weiser, Klaus Wälde
medRxiv 2020.04.10.20060301; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.10.20060301

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Health Economics
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (349)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Allergy and Immunology (668)
  • Anesthesia (181)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (2648)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (316)
  • Dermatology (223)
  • Emergency Medicine (399)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (942)
  • Epidemiology (12228)
  • Forensic Medicine (10)
  • Gastroenterology (759)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (4103)
  • Geriatric Medicine (387)
  • Health Economics (680)
  • Health Informatics (2657)
  • Health Policy (1005)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (985)
  • Hematology (363)
  • HIV/AIDS (851)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13695)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (797)
  • Medical Education (399)
  • Medical Ethics (109)
  • Nephrology (436)
  • Neurology (3882)
  • Nursing (209)
  • Nutrition (577)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (739)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (695)
  • Oncology (2030)
  • Ophthalmology (585)
  • Orthopedics (240)
  • Otolaryngology (306)
  • Pain Medicine (250)
  • Palliative Medicine (75)
  • Pathology (473)
  • Pediatrics (1115)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (466)
  • Primary Care Research (452)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3432)
  • Public and Global Health (6527)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1403)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (814)
  • Respiratory Medicine (871)
  • Rheumatology (409)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (410)
  • Sports Medicine (342)
  • Surgery (448)
  • Toxicology (53)
  • Transplantation (185)
  • Urology (165)