Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33051660›Full record

SynthesisJournal of travel medicine2020

Social consequences of mass quarantine during epidemics: a systematic review with implications for the COVID-19 response.

Isaac Yen-Hao Chu, Prima Alam, Heidi J Larson, Leesa Lin

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of travel medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 97 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
97citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
16.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

97 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 251 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Acute SARS-CoV-2 infection.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Good Ethical and Laboratory Practices for Wastewater Surveillance.Water environment research : a research publication of the Water Environment Federation · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

37 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Isaac Yen-Hao ChuDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Prima AlamDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Heidi J LarsonDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Leesa LinDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Four billion people worldwide have experienced coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) confinement. Such unprecedented extent of mobility restriction to curb the COVID-19 pandemic may have profound impacts on how individuals live, travel and retain well-being. This systematic review aims to identify (i) the social consequences of mass quarantine-community-wide movement restrictions-during previous and current infectious disease outbreaks and (ii) recommended strategies to mitigate the negative social implications of COVID-19 lockdowns. Considering social determinants of health, we conducted a systematic review by searching five databases (Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and the World Health Organization COVID-19 database) for publications from inception to 9 April 2020. No limitation was set on language, location or study type. Studies that (i) contained peer-reviewed original empirical evidence and (ii) focussed on non-epidemiological implications of mass quarantine were included. We thematically synthesized and reported data due to heterogeneous disease and country context. Of 3067 publications found, 15 original peer-reviewed articles were selected for full-text extraction. Psychological distress, heightened communication inequalities, food insecurity, economic challenges, diminished access to health care, alternative delivery of education and gender-based violence were identified as negative social consequences of community-based quarantine in six infectious disease epidemics, including the current COVID-19 pandemic. In contrast, altruistic attitudes were identified as a positive consequence during previous quarantines. Diverse psychological and social consequences of mass quarantine in previous and current epidemics were evident, but individual country policies had been highly varied in how well they addressed the needs of affected individuals, especially those who are socially marginalized. Policymakers should balance the pros and cons of movement restrictions, facilitate multisectoral action to tackle social inequalities, provide clear and coherent guidance to the public and undertake time-bound policy evaluations to mitigate the negative impact of COVID-19 lockdowns and to establish preparedness strategies for future epidemics.

Indexed as

Communicable Disease ControlCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19Disease OutbreaksFemaleHumansMaleMental HealthPandemicsPneumonia, ViralPublic HealthQuarantineRisk AssessmentSocial IsolationSocioeconomic FactorsTravelCOVID-19epidemicslockdownMass quarantinepandemicspsychological impactsocial consequences

Identifiers

PMID33051660
PMCPMC7649384
OpenAlexW3091974420

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.