ArticlePloS one2025
Environmental health management in local community isolation facilities during COVID-19 pandemic: A case study in Nakhon Si Thammarat, Thailand.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- The CI plus model: a qualitative study of innovative community isolation and enhanced resilience in urban Thailand during the COVID-19 crisis.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Community isolation facilities (CIFs) were adopted as a containment strategy in many countries during the COVID-19 pandemic, but information on environmental health management in CIFs is unknown. This retrospective research aimed to study the preparedness and implementation of CIFs from an environmental health perspective. The study was conducted in Nakhon Si Thammarat Province, Thailand. A total number of 114 staff working during the establishment and operation of 57 CIFs were enrolled. Two questionnaires were collected from the founding and operating staff from 27 May to 5 October 2022. One questionnaire, designed based on the guidelines for establishing of CIFs developed by the Department of Health, was used to examine the preparedness of the founding staff. Another questionnaire was developed to investigate the implementation by the operating staff. The data was presented as the levels of preparedness and implementation of CIFs and analyzed by descriptive statistics. Local government organizations played a major role in the establishment and cooperation with local public health offices in the operation of CIFs. Two-thirds of the founding and operating staff had no experience in environmental health. However, most of the CIFs showed preparedness for the establishment of CIFs and conducted environmental health implementation at a good level in all dimensions, except for infrastructure for wastewater treatment, disinfection, and system monitoring. The decentralized governance model in Thailand facilitated the operation of small CIFs to prevent COVID-19 transmission in local communities. However, qualified personnel and appropriate infrastructure were obstacles to full environmental health implementation. The guidelines by the Department of Health suggested as fundamental for environmental health management of CIFs in this study should be appropriately adopted based on the different contexts of each country to ensure preparedness for future infectious disease outbreaks.
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.