ReviewTropical medicine and health2020
"Staying at home" to tackle COVID-19 pandemic: rhetoric or reality? Cross-cutting analysis of nine population groups vulnerable to homelessness in Japan.
Review in Tropical medicine and health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of the international evidence on the effectiveness of COVID-19 mitigation measures in communal rough sleeping accommodation.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2023Pooled it
- Migrants' access to COVID-19 vaccination in Japan: Progress and challenges.Journal of migration and health · 2023Article
- Changes in health-related quality of life scores among low-income patients on social welfare programs in Japan during the COVID-19 pandemic: a single-center repeated cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Japanese WHO Collaborating Centres (WHO CCs) fight against COVID-19.Global health & medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although the "stay-at-home" order is advocated against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the lives of individuals lacking adequate housing are threatened. We developed a framework to assess various populations with unstable housing in terms of socio-economic consequences of COVID-19, risk of COVID-19 infection and progression, existing/urgent measures, and remaining challenges. Within the framework, nine groups vulnerable to homelessness in Japan were classified into (i) "people without accommodation," (ii) "people living in temporary or crisis accommodation," and (iii) populations that include "people living in severely inadequate and insecure accommodation." The assessment revealed that "staying at home" was physically and practically unattainable across groups. The study identified specific institutional, social, and cultural challenges apart from the common economic crisis, whereas the utilization of social welfare was low. Findings suggest that the rapid increase of groups classified as "(i)" and "(ii)" should be addressed by engaging stakeholders to enhance the availability and accessibility of social welfare and rescue measures, and to ensure safe and private accommodations for all groups. It is critical to enhance multi-sectoral collaboration in responding to the common and specific vulnerabilities of these population groups from health, socio-economic, and humanitarian perspectives. Under the pandemic, homelessness should be regarded less as a peculiar problem for specific populations but an extension of daily life. The framework can be a reference when planning the comprehensive yet concise assessment of populations with unstable housing in other countries to inform responses to the pandemic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.