Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39090727›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2024

Understanding the secondary outcomes of international travel measures during the covid-19 pandemic: a scoping review of social impact evidence.

Kelley Lee, Salta Zhumatova, Catherine Z Worsnop, Ying Liu Bazak

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Kelley LeeFaculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Blusson Hall, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC, V5A 1S6, Canada. kelley_lee@sfu.ca.
Salta ZhumatovaPandemics and Borders Project, Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Blusson Hall 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC, V5A 1S6, Canada.
Catherine Z WorsnopSchool of Public Policy, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742, USA.
Ying Liu BazakPandemics and Borders Project, Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Blusson Hall 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC, V5A 1S6, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAssessment of the effective use of international travel measures during the COVID-19 pandemic has focused on public health goals, namely limiting virus introduction and onward transmission. However, risk-based approaches includes the weighing of public health goals against potential social, economic and other secondary impacts. Advancing risk-based approaches thus requires fuller understanding of available evidence on such impacts.

methodsWe conducted a scoping review of existing studies of the social impacts of international travel measures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Applying a standardized typology of travel measures, and five categories of social impact, we searched 9 databases across multiple disciplines spanning public health and the social sciences. We identified 26 studies for inclusion and reviewed their scope, methods, type of travel measure, and social impacts analysed.

resultsThe studies cover a diverse range of national settings with a strong focus on high-income countries. A broad range of populations are studied, hindered in their outbound or inbound travel. Most studies focus on 2020 when travel restrictions were widely introduced, but limited attention is given to the broader effects of their prolonged use. Studies primarily used qualitative or mixed methods, with adaptations to comply with public health measures. Most studies focused on travel restrictions, as one type of travel measure, often combined with domestic public health measures, making it difficult to determine their specific social impacts. All five categories of social impacts were observed although there was a strong emphasis on negative social impacts including family separation, decreased work opportunities, reduced quality of life, and inability to meet cultural needs. A small number of countries identified positive social impacts such as restored work-life balance and an increase in perceptions of safety and security.

conclusionsWhile international travel measures were among the most controversial interventions applied during the COVID-19 pandemic, given their prolonged use and widespread impacts on individuals and populations, there remains limited study of their secondary impacts. If risk-based approaches are to be advanced, involving informed choices between public health and other policy goals, there is a need to better understand such impacts, including their differential impacts across diverse populations and settings.

Indexed as

COVID-19TravelHumansInternationalityPandemicsPublic HealthCOVID-19 pandemicInternational health regulationsNon-pharmaceutical interventionsPandemic preparedness and responseScoping reviewSecondary outcomesSocial impactsTravel measures

Identifiers

PMID39090727
PMCPMC11295557

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.