@article{fdi:010090685,
  title = {{R}oyal {S}ociety report : what would a comprehensive evaluation suggest about non-pharmaceutical interventions during {COVID}-19 ?},
  author = {{P}aul, {E}. and {B}rown, {G}. {W}. and {B}ell, {D}. and von {A}gris, {J}. {M}. and {R}idde, {V}al{\'e}ry},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{A} recent report by the {R}oyal {S}ociety examined the literature on the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions ({NPI}s) aimed at reducing the transmission of {SARS}-{C}o{V}-2 during the {COVID}-19 pandemic. {I}t emphatically concluded that they were 'effective', which we argue may be misleading to policymakers. {T}his paper performs a critical analysis of the {R}oyal {S}ociety report and explains what a proper evaluation of {NPI}s would mean, arguing that theory-based evaluations are required to approach complex issues and nurture democratic debates on societal choices. {W}e argue that, first, testing the relationship between {NPI} interventions and their effectiveness in reducing {SARS}-{C}o{V}-2 transmission over a bounded period (a single outcome) is irrelevant for policymaking, because several criteria must be balanced to evaluate any intervention, including efficiency, equity, acceptability, long-term impacts, and sustainability. {S}econd, ignoring the disruptive and unintended effects of {NPI}s leads to wrong conclusions regarding their overall value. {T}hird, we question the mere objective of {NPI}s, that is, reducing viral transmission. {F}inally, we question the methodology used by the {R}oyal {S}ociety {R}eport regarding the literature selection and quality. {T}o conclude, we argue that the {R}oyal {S}ociety report is not only irrelevant and weak from a methodological point of view but also dangerously misleading in terms of policymaking. {F}our years after the start of the {COVID}-19 pandemic, it is high time for researchers, journals, and policymakers to stop debating over {NPI}s' mere effectiveness against a parameter that requires a {PCR} test to determine, but engage in public health-based evaluations that weigh all criteria of interest.},
  keywords = {{H}ealth policies ; non-pharmaceutical interventions ; {COVID}-19 ; evaluation ; realism ; {MONDE}},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{C}ritical {P}ublic {H}ealth},
  volume = {34},
  numero = {1},
  pages = {1--10},
  ISSN = {0958-1596},
  year = {2024},
  DOI = {10.1080/09581596.2024.2349894},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010090685},
}