Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35410924›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Effectiveness of different types and levels of social distancing measures: a scoping review of global evidence from earlier stage of COVID-19 pandemic.

Kai Sing Sun, Terence See Man Lau, Eng Kiong Yeoh, Vincent Chi Ho Chung, Yin Shan Leung, Carrie Ho Kwan Yam, Chi Tim Hung

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. SARS-CoV-2 in brief: from virus to prevention.Osong public health and research perspectives · 2022
    Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Kai Sing SunCentre for Health Systems and Policy Research, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0631-9699
Terence See Man LauCentre for Health Systems and Policy Research, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Eng Kiong YeohCentre for Health Systems and Policy Research, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China yeoh_ek@cuhk.edu.hk.
Vincent Chi Ho ChungCentre for Health Systems and Policy Research, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Yin Shan LeungCentre for Health Systems and Policy Research, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Carrie Ho Kwan YamCentre for Health Systems and Policy Research, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Chi Tim HungCentre for Health Systems and Policy Research, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSocial distancing is one of the main non-pharmaceutical interventions used in the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. This scoping review aims to synthesise research findings on the effectiveness of different types and levels of social distancing measures in the earlier stage of COVID-19 pandemic without the confounding effect of mass vaccination.

designScoping review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health and four other databases were searched for eligible studies on social distancing for COVID-19 published from inception of the databases to 30 September 2020. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Effectiveness studies on social distancing between individuals, school closures, workplace/business closures, public transport restrictions and partial/full lockdown were included. Non-English articles, studies in healthcare settings or not based on empirical data were excluded.

resultsAfter screening 1638 abstracts and 8 additional articles from other sources, 41 studies were included for synthesis of findings. The review found that the outcomes of social distancing measures were mainly indicated by changes in

conclusionsIn the community setting, there was stronger evidence for the combined effect of different social distancing interventions than for a single intervention. As fatigue of preventive behaviours is an issue in public health agenda, future studies should analyse the risks in specific settings such as eateries and entertainment to implement and evaluate measures which are proportionate to the risk.

Indexed as

COVID-19Communicable Disease ControlHumansPandemicsPhysical DistancingQuarantineSARS-CoV-2COVID-19EPIDEMIOLOGYInfection controlPublic health

Identifiers

PMID35410924
PMCPMC9002256

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.