ReviewGesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))2024
[Management Of Covid-19 Pandemic In Shelters For Asylum Seekers: Results From A Mixed Methods Study.]
Review in Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRefugees in Germany are often housed in shelters, where their influence on the organization of everyday life is severely limited. During the COVID-19 pandemic, these shelters therefore had a special responsibility to take measures to protect the health of their residents. The aim of this research project was to examine how this task was managed and how the pandemic affected daily life in refugee shelters, with the aim to formulate recommendations for practice.
methodsUsing a mixed-methods study, the first step was a scoping review of the literature on the management of infectious disease outbreaks in refugee shelters. Building on the findings of the review, management of the pandemic was then explored in an online survey and in interviews with experts and residents of shelters. In a third step, the results of the preceding steps were summarized and discussed with a panel of experts. Recommendations for practice were developed with the expert panel in two discussion rounds two months apart.
resultsThe refugee shelters included in the study were inadequately prepared for the pandemic and often did not develop contingency plans until the pandemic was underway. In many cases, the contingency plans included the establishment of crisis teams, but the interests and perspectives of facility residents were generally not represented by these teams. This subsequently led to problems: Pandemic measures were often not communicated in a timely or sufficiently understandable manner, gaps in care resulting from measures were not identified or addressed, and psychosocial stresses associated with the pandemic and quarantine measures were not adequately mitigated.
conclusion• Refugee shelters should establish mechanisms to integrate residents' interests and perspectives into decision-making processes in a structured manner, regardless of the pandemic.• Depending on the type of shelter, this should be realized through resident involvement in decision-making bodies or other appropriate representation of interests. • Measures introduced during the pandemic that may have a negative impact on the psychosocial situation of residents should be terminated as soon as the epidemic justification for the measures no longer applies.
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.