ArticleBMC public health2024
The effects of visitor restrictions on inpatients and family visitors during the COVID-19 pandemic: insights from a cross-sectional survey in China.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Variation in Hospital Visiting Hour Policies in Acute Care Facilities in Four U.S. States: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- 'Those Were Smiling Eyes': Patients' Experiences and Perceptions of ICU Health Care During Pandemics.Nursing open · 2025Article
- The Legal and Ethical Dimensions of Hospital Visitation Bans in the COVID-19 Era.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, hospitals implemented visitor restrictions to curtail the spread of the virus. The study aims to understand the perspectives of hospitalized patients and their family visitors on visitation restrictions and the factors influencing their willingness to adhere to these restrictions.
methodsThis cross-sectional survey invited 1,200 participants, with 1,032 valid responses received, including 460 hospitalized patients and 572 family visitors.
resultsThe survey indicated that 88.91% of hospitalized patients and 93.00% of family visitors complied and adhered to the visitor restrictions. The predominant mode of communication was via phone (77.62%), with emotional support (56.40%) recognized as the primary purpose of visitation. Visitor restrictions significantly affected hospitalized patients, with 51.65% reporting feelings of loneliness and 42.44% reporting anxiety. After adjusting for age, gender, and other factors, hospitalized patients' willingness to follow visitation restrictions was linked to their awareness of the restrictions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.20, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.09-0.44) and their desire to protect (OR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.14-0.76). Family members' willingness to follow the restrictions was related to their awareness of them (OR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.12-0.95) and how well they communicated (OR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.09-0.58).
conclusionsParticipants generally followed visitation restrictions, but these measures negatively impacted the psychological and social well-being of patients and their families, leading to increased feelings of loneliness and anxiety. Healthcare providers, hospital administrators, and policymakers should acknowledge the complex effects of these restrictions and focus on improving patient experiences in the future.
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.