ArticlePLOS global public health2025
The use of quarantine as an international travel measure during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparative analysis of implementation and equity impacts in five "exemplar" countries.
Article in PLOS global public health, 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.
- Evaluating adherence to COVID-19 quarantine protocols at two international ground crossings in Savannakhet Province, Lao PDR.Tropical medicine and health · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During the COVID-19 pandemic, virtually all countries used a range of measures to mitigate the risks of virus introduction and onward transmission via international travel. Quarantine was a key international travel measure (ITM) used by governments to achieve public health goals. However, the highly varied ways in which quarantine was implemented makes lesson learning for future pandemics challenging. Moreover, most studies overlook the secondary impacts of ITMs on individuals and populations including potential inequities in their distribution. This paper comparatively analyses five countries deemed exemplary in their implementation of quarantine during COVID-19. Building on Damschroder's Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we apply eight variables to identify similarities and differences in quarantine use. We drew on our standardized coding of ITMs in the WHO Public Health and Social Measures dataset, and additional on-line searches, to compile data on each variable. Findings show that the five countries were early adopters of quarantine, applied them relatively stringently, and maintained them throughout the emergency phase of the pandemic to effectively advance public health goals. However, the countries differed in how secondary impacts were managed, resulting in the inequitable distribution of opportunity and burden for some individuals and populations. We conclude that exemplary implementation of quarantine during future public health emergencies should consider both public health goals and the equity of secondary impacts.
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.