Search

Background: Guidelines and recommendations from public health authorities related to face masks have been essential in containing the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed the prevalence and correlates of mask usage during the pandemic. Methods: We examined a total of 13,723,810 responses to a daily cross-sectional representative online survey in 38 countries who completed from April 23, 2020 to October 31, 2020 and reported having been in public at least once during the last seven days. The outcome was individual face mask usage in public settings, and the predictors were country fixed effects, country-level mask policy stringency, calendar time, individual sociodemographic factors, and health prevention behaviors. Associations were modelled using survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression. Findings: Mask-wearing varied over time and across the 38 countries. While some countries consistently showed high prevalence throughout, in other countries mask usage increased gradually, and a few other countries remained at low prevalence. Controlling for time and country fixed effects, sociodemographic factors (older age, female gender, education, urbanicity) and stricter mask-related policies were significantly associated with higher mask usage in public settings, while social behaviors considered risky in the context of the pandemic (going out to large events, restaurants, shopping centers, and socializing outside of the household) were associated with lower mask use. Interpretation: The decision to wear a face mask in public settings is significantly associated with sociodemographic factors, risky social behaviors, and mask policies. This has important implications for health prevention policies and messaging, including the potential need for more targeted policy and messaging design., Comment: 39 pages, 2 mian figures, Appendix

Facebook is partnering with academic institutions to support COVID-19 research. Currently, we are inviting Facebook app users in the United States to take a survey collected by faculty at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) Delphi Research Center, and we are inviting Facebook app users in more than 200 countries or territories globally to take a survey collected by faculty at the University of Maryland (UMD) Joint Program in Survey Methodology (JPSM). As part of this initiative, we are applying best practices from survey statistics to design and execute two components: (1) sampling design and (2) survey weights, which make the sample more representative of the general population. This paper describes the methods we used in these efforts in order to allow data users to execute their analyses using the weights.

Power-law networks such as the Internet, terrorist cells, species relationships, and cellular metabolic interactions are susceptible to node failures, yet maintaining network connectivity is essential for network functionality. Disconnection of the network leads to fragmentation and, in some cases, collapse of the underlying system. However, the influences of the topology of networks on their ability to withstand node failures are poorly understood. Based on a study of the response of 2,000 power-law networks to node failures, we find that networks with higher nodal degree and clustering coefficient, lower betweenness centrality, and lower variability in path length and clustering coefficient maintain their cohesion better during such events. We also find that network robustness, i.e., the ability to withstand node failures, can be accurately predicted a priori for power-law networks across many fields. These results provide a basis for designing new, more robust networks, improving the robustness of existing networks such as the Internet and cellular metabolic pathways, and efficiently degrading networks such as terrorist cells.

Critical infrastructure systems must be both robust and resilient in order to ensure the functioning of society. To improve the performance of such systems, we often use risk and vulnerability analysis to find and address system weaknesses. A critical component of such analyses is the ability to accurately determine the negative consequences of various types of failures in the system. Numerous mathematical and simulation models exist which can be used to this end. However, there are relatively few studies comparing the implications of using different modeling approaches in the context of comprehensive risk analysis of critical infrastructures. Thus in this paper, we suggest a classification of these models, which span from simple topologically-oriented models to advanced physical flow-based models. Here, we focus on electric power systems and present a study aimed at understanding the tradeoffs between simplicity and fidelity in models used in the context of risk analysis. Specifically, the purpose of this paper is to compare performances measures achieved with a spectrum of approaches typically used for risk and vulnerability analysis of electric power systems and evaluate if more simplified topological measures can be combined using statistical methods to be used as a surrogate for physical flow models. The results of our work provide guidance as to appropriate models or combination of models to use when analyzing large-scale critical infrastructure systems, where simulation times quickly become insurmountable when using more advanced models, severely limiting the extent of analyses that can be performed.