Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30657730›Full record

ArticlePublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)

Local Decision Making for Implementing Social Distancing in Response to Outbreaks.

Rebecca Katz, Andrea Vaught, Samuel J Simmens

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Rebecca Katz1 Center for Global Health Science and Security, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7596-431X
Andrea Vaught2 Department of Health Policy and Management, Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.
Samuel J Simmens3 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.

Funding

Decision Making for Social DistancingR15AI105738 · NIAID · GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI SIMMENS, SAMUEL J · 2014 to 2014
$473k
NIAID NIH HHS R15 AI105738
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesSocial distancing is the practice of restricting contact among persons to prevent the spread of infection. This study sought to (1) identify key features of preparedness and the primary concerns of local public health officials in deciding to implement social distancing measures and (2) determine whether any particular factor could explain the widespread variation among health departments in responses to past outbreaks.

methodsWe conducted an online survey of health departments in the United States in 2015 to understand factors influencing health departments' decision making when choosing whether to implement social distancing measures. We paired survey results with data on area population demographic characteristics and analyzed them with a focus on broad trends.

resultsOf 600 health departments contacted, 150 (25%) responded. Of these 150 health departments, 63 (42%) indicated that they had implemented social distancing in the past 10 years. Only 10 (7%) health departments had a line-item budget for isolation or quarantine. The most common concern about social distancing was public health impact (n = 62, 41%). Concerns about law, politics, finances, vulnerable populations, and sociocultural issues were each identified by 7% to 10% of health departments. We were unable to clearly predict which factors would influence these decisions.

conclusionsVariations in the decision to implement social distancing are likely the result of differences in organizational authority and resources and in the primary concerns about implementing social distancing. Research and current social distancing guidelines for health departments should address these factors.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDisease OutbreaksHospitals, IsolationHumansPatient IsolationPoliticsPublic Health AdministrationQuarantineSocioeconomic FactorsUnited Statesisolationpreparednessquarantinesocial distancing

Identifiers

PMID30657730
PMCPMC6410485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.