Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40496153›Full record

ArticlePublic health challenges2024

Informing future quarantine practices through the experiences of COVID-19 quarantine facility staff.

Angela Sheedy, Dianne Stephens, Lisa Vermeulen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health challenges, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Angela SheedyCDU Menzies School of Medicine Charles Darwin University Darwin Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9979-5389
Dianne StephensCDU Menzies School of Medicine Charles Darwin University Darwin Australia.
Lisa VermeulenCDU Menzies School of Medicine Charles Darwin University Darwin Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the rapid development of quarantine sites, prompting the need for new staff models and scopes of practice. This project surveyed health and non-health staff at a large outdoor quarantine facility in regional Australia to gather insights for future quarantine facility guidelines based on their experiences and perceptions. Methods: This translational research project implemented a mixed-methods approach to analyse staff perceptions of working at a quarantine facility to inform the development of a policy and practice guide. An anonymous online survey utilising purposive sampling was distributed to 410 multidisciplinary survey participants over an 8-week period. Survey questions focussed on site processes, challenges and recommendations for future implementation of quarantine services. Qualitative data was thematically analysed with the aid of Leximancer, and a descriptive statistical method was used for quantitative data analysis. Results: There were 92 survey respondents from health and non-health roles; of these, 85% indicated they would work at the quarantine facility again, and 90% agreed residents were well cared for. There was a lack of anxiety of acquiring COVID-19, with 95% feeling safe from COVID-19 transmission onsite. Challenges staff identified highlighted future investment areas, including leadership communication models, information technology (IT) management systems specific for quarantine services and site processes to better accommodate weather elements. Conclusion: Overall, staff validated the primary health model of quarantine care with key challenges highlighting the importance of leadership and investment in communication and IT. The results were aligned with site functions and operations and will inform the development of a pandemic quarantine facility guide.

Indexed as

COVID‐19health care workerspandemicquarantinesurvey

Identifiers

PMID40496153
PMCPMC12039748

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.