COVID-19 大流行第一年期间采取的国际旅行措施:描述性分析。

IF 5.9 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Globalization and Health Pub Date : 2024-10-04 DOI:10.1186/s12992-024-01071-7
Karen A Grépin, Mingqi Song, Julianne Piper, Catherine Z Worsnop, Kelley Lee
{"title":"COVID-19 大流行第一年期间采取的国际旅行措施:描述性分析。","authors":"Karen A Grépin, Mingqi Song, Julianne Piper, Catherine Z Worsnop, Kelley Lee","doi":"10.1186/s12992-024-01071-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To describe the adoption of international travel measures during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To comprehensively analyze the measures adopted, we constructed a dataset based on the WHO's Public Health and Social Measures (PHSM) database, which covered 252 countries, territories, or other areas (CTAs), including all 194 WHO Member States, from December 31, 2019, to December 31, 2020. We examined the adoption of measures by type, over time, and by the implementing and targeted CTA, including their levels of income.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We identified 11,431 international travel measures implemented during the first year of the pandemic. The adoption of measures was rapid and widespread: over 60% of Member States had adopted a travel measure before the WHO declared COVID-19 a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on January 30, 2020. Initially, health screening and travel restrictions were the most adopted measures; however, quarantine and testing became more widely adopted over time. Although only a small portion of the total measures adopted constituted full border closure, approximately half of all Member States implemented this measure. Many travel measures targeted all CTAs but were unlikely to have been adopted universally enough to provide public health benefits. Low-income countries relied more on more universal measures, including full border closure, and were slower in scaling up testing compared to higher-income countries.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The adoption of international travel measures during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic varied across jurisdictions and over time. Lower-income countries used a different mix and scaled-up measures slower than higher-income countries. Understanding what measures were used is crucial for assessing their effectiveness in controlling the spread of COVID-19, reviewing the usefulness of the International Health Regulations, and informing future pandemic preparedness and response activities.</p>","PeriodicalId":12747,"journal":{"name":"Globalization and Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The adoption of international travel measures during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: a descriptive analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Karen A Grépin, Mingqi Song, Julianne Piper, Catherine Z Worsnop, Kelley Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12992-024-01071-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To describe the adoption of international travel measures during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To comprehensively analyze the measures adopted, we constructed a dataset based on the WHO's Public Health and Social Measures (PHSM) database, which covered 252 countries, territories, or other areas (CTAs), including all 194 WHO Member States, from December 31, 2019, to December 31, 2020. We examined the adoption of measures by type, over time, and by the implementing and targeted CTA, including their levels of income.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We identified 11,431 international travel measures implemented during the first year of the pandemic. The adoption of measures was rapid and widespread: over 60% of Member States had adopted a travel measure before the WHO declared COVID-19 a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on January 30, 2020. Initially, health screening and travel restrictions were the most adopted measures; however, quarantine and testing became more widely adopted over time. Although only a small portion of the total measures adopted constituted full border closure, approximately half of all Member States implemented this measure. Many travel measures targeted all CTAs but were unlikely to have been adopted universally enough to provide public health benefits. Low-income countries relied more on more universal measures, including full border closure, and were slower in scaling up testing compared to higher-income countries.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The adoption of international travel measures during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic varied across jurisdictions and over time. Lower-income countries used a different mix and scaled-up measures slower than higher-income countries. Understanding what measures were used is crucial for assessing their effectiveness in controlling the spread of COVID-19, reviewing the usefulness of the International Health Regulations, and informing future pandemic preparedness and response activities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12747,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Globalization and Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Globalization and Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-024-01071-7\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Globalization and Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-024-01071-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:描述 COVID-19 大流行第一年期间采取的国际旅行措施:描述 COVID-19 大流行第一年期间采取的国际旅行措施:为全面分析所采取的措施,我们以世界卫生组织公共卫生和社会措施(PHSM)数据库为基础构建了一个数据集,该数据集涵盖2019年12月31日至2020年12月31日期间的252个国家、地区或其他地区(CTA),包括世界卫生组织的所有194个成员国。我们按类型、时间、执行方和目标 CTA(包括其收入水平)审查了所采取的措施:我们确定了大流行病第一年期间实施的 11,431 项国际旅行措施。采取措施的速度很快,范围很广:在世卫组织于 2020 年 1 月 30 日宣布 COVID-19 为国际关注的公共卫生紧急事件之前,60% 以上的会员国已采取了旅行措施。最初,健康检查和旅行限制是采用最多的措施;然而,随着时间的推移,检疫和检测的采用越来越广泛。虽然所采取的全部措施中只有一小部分构成完全关闭边境,但所有会员国中约有一半实施了这一措施。许多旅行措施针对的是所有核心贸易协定,但不太可能被普遍采用,从而带来公共卫生效益。与高收入国家相比,低收入国家更依赖于更普遍的措施,包括全面关闭边境,并且在扩大测试规模方面较为缓慢:结论:在 COVID-19 大流行的第一年,不同辖区和不同时期采取的国际旅行措施各不相同。与高收入国家相比,低收入国家采用了不同的措施组合,扩大措施规模的速度也较慢。了解使用了哪些措施对于评估这些措施在控制 COVID-19 传播方面的有效性、审查《国际卫生条例》的实用性以及为未来的大流行病防备和应对活动提供信息至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The adoption of international travel measures during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: a descriptive analysis.

Objective: To describe the adoption of international travel measures during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: To comprehensively analyze the measures adopted, we constructed a dataset based on the WHO's Public Health and Social Measures (PHSM) database, which covered 252 countries, territories, or other areas (CTAs), including all 194 WHO Member States, from December 31, 2019, to December 31, 2020. We examined the adoption of measures by type, over time, and by the implementing and targeted CTA, including their levels of income.

Findings: We identified 11,431 international travel measures implemented during the first year of the pandemic. The adoption of measures was rapid and widespread: over 60% of Member States had adopted a travel measure before the WHO declared COVID-19 a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on January 30, 2020. Initially, health screening and travel restrictions were the most adopted measures; however, quarantine and testing became more widely adopted over time. Although only a small portion of the total measures adopted constituted full border closure, approximately half of all Member States implemented this measure. Many travel measures targeted all CTAs but were unlikely to have been adopted universally enough to provide public health benefits. Low-income countries relied more on more universal measures, including full border closure, and were slower in scaling up testing compared to higher-income countries.

Conclusion: The adoption of international travel measures during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic varied across jurisdictions and over time. Lower-income countries used a different mix and scaled-up measures slower than higher-income countries. Understanding what measures were used is crucial for assessing their effectiveness in controlling the spread of COVID-19, reviewing the usefulness of the International Health Regulations, and informing future pandemic preparedness and response activities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Globalization and Health
Globalization and Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
18.40
自引率
1.90%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: "Globalization and Health" is a pioneering transdisciplinary journal dedicated to situating public health and well-being within the dynamic forces of global development. The journal is committed to publishing high-quality, original research that explores the impact of globalization processes on global public health. This includes examining how globalization influences health systems and the social, economic, commercial, and political determinants of health. The journal welcomes contributions from various disciplines, including policy, health systems, political economy, international relations, and community perspectives. While single-country studies are accepted, they must emphasize global/globalization mechanisms and their relevance to global-level policy discourse and decision-making.
期刊最新文献
The adoption of international travel measures during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: a descriptive analysis. Capturing sources of health system legitimacy in fragmented conflict zones under different governance models: a case study of northwest Syria. Protecting whose welfare? A document analysis of competition regulatory decisions in four jurisdictions across three harmful consumer product industries. Assessing the health status of migrants upon arrival in Europe: a systematic review of the adverse impact of migration journeys. How can advocates leverage power to advance comprehensive regulation on ultra-processed foods? learning from advocate experience in Argentina
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1