Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37719729›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in public health2023

Impacts of public health and social measures on COVID-19 in Europe: a review and modified Delphi technique.

Marília Silva Paulo, Mariana Peyroteo, Mélanie R Maia, Cara Pries, Claudia Habl, Luís Velez Lapão

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. WHO'Frontiers in public health · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors.

Marília Silva PauloCHRC, NOVA Medical School, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, NMS, FCM, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Mariana PeyroteoCHRC, NOVA Medical School, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, NMS, FCM, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Mélanie R MaiaUNIDEMI, Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, NOVA School of Science and Technology, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Caparica, Portugal.
Cara PriesGesundheit Österreich GmbH (Austrian National Public Health Institute), Vienna, Austria.
Claudia HablGesundheit Österreich GmbH (Austrian National Public Health Institute), Vienna, Austria.
Luís Velez LapãoCHRC, NOVA Medical School, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, NMS, FCM, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020 led countries to implement a set of public health and social measures (PHSMs) attempting to contain the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This study aims to review the existing literature regarding key results of the PHSMs that were implemented, and to identify the PHSMs considered to have most impacted the epidemiological curve of COVID-19 over the last years during different stages of the pandemic. Methods: The PHSM under study were selected from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT), supplemented by topics presented during the Rapid Exchange Forum (REF) meetings in the scope of the Population Health Information Research Infrastructure (PHIRI) project (H2020). The evidence- based review was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines to identify which reviews have already been published about each PHSMs and their results. In addition, two modified Delphi panel surveys were conducted among subject matter experts from 30 European countries to uphold the results found. Results: There were 3,212 studies retrieved from PubMed, 162 full texts assessed for eligibility and 35 included in this PHSMs summary. The measures with clearest evidence on their positive impact from the evidence-based review include social distancing, hygiene measures, mask measures and testing policies. From the modified Delphi panel, the PHSMs considered most significant in the four periods analyzed were case isolation at home, face coverings, testing policy, and social distancing, respectively. Discussion: The evidence found has significant implications for both researchers and policymakers. The study of PHSMs' impact on COVID-19 illustrates lessons learned for future pan- and epidemics, serving as a contribution to the health systems resilience discussion. These lessons, drawn from both the available scientific evidence and the perspectives of relevant subject matter experts, should also be considered in educational and preparedness programs and activities in the public health space.

Indexed as

COVID-19Public HealthDelphi TechniqueEuropeHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2COVID-19health policymodified Delphi expert consensus processnon-pharmaceutical interventionspublic health and social measures

Identifiers

PMID37719729
PMCPMC10501783

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.