Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35134215›Full record

ArticleJournal of travel medicine2022

Navigating travel in Europe during the pandemic: from mobile apps, certificates and quarantine to traffic-light system.

Justine I Blanford, Nienke Beerlage-de Jong, Stephanie E Schouten, Alex W Friedrich, Vera Araújo-Soares

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of travel medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Non-pharmaceutical interventions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 30 European countries: the ECDC-JRC Response Measures Database.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2022
    Article
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

5 authors.

Justine I BlanfordFaculty of Geoinformation Science and Earth Observation, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands.
Nienke Beerlage-de JongSection of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands.
Stephanie E SchoutenSection of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands.
Alex W FriedrichDepartment of Medical Microbiology and Infection Prevention, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Vera Araújo-SoaresSection of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEver since 2020, travelling has become complex, and increasingly so as the COVID-19 pandemic continues. To reopen Europe safely, a consensus of travel measures has been agreed between countries to enable movement between countries with as few restrictions as possible. However, communication of these travel measures and requirements for entry are not always clear and easily available. The aim of this study was to assess the availability, accessibility and harmonization of current travel information available in Europe.

methodsWe performed a systematic documental analysis of online publicly available information and synthesized travel entry requirements for all countries in the European Union and Schengen Area (N = 31). For each country we assessed entry requirements, actions after entry, how risk was assessed, and how accessible the information was.

resultsWe found varying measures implemented across Europe for entry and a range of exemptions and restrictions, some of which were consistent between countries. Information was not always easy to find taking on average 10 clicks to locate. Twenty-one countries required pre-travel forms to be completed. Forty apps were in use, 11 serving as digital certification checkers. All countries required some form of COVID-19 certification for entry with some exemptions (e.g. children). Nineteen percent (n = 6) of countries used the ECDC risk assessment system; 80% (n = 25) defined their own. Forty-eight percent (n = 15) of countries used a traffic-light system with 2-5 risk classifications.

conclusionA comprehensive set of measures has been developed to enable continued safe travel in Europe. However further refinements and coordination is needed to align travel measures throughout the EU to minimize confusion and maximize adherence to requested measures. We recommend that, along with developing travel measures based on a common set of rules, a standard approach is taken to communicate what these measures are.

Indexed as

COVID-19Mobile ApplicationsChildEuropeHumansPandemicsQuarantineTraveladherencecross-borderGeographical spreadhealth riskmobilitypublic healthvaccination

Identifiers

PMID35134215
PMCPMC9155998

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.