Evidence mapPaperPMID 40476261Full record

ReviewCochrane evidence synthesis and methods2024

The effects of public health and social measures (PHSM) implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic: An overview of systematic reviews.

Racha Fadlallah, Fadi El-Jardali, Lama Bou Karroum, Nour Kalach, Reem Hoteit, Andrew Aoun, Lara Al-Hakim, Francisca Verdugo-Paiva, Gabriel Rada, Atle Fretheim and 3 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. WHO'Frontiers in public health · 2025
    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

13 authors.

Racha FadlallahCenter for Systematic Reviews for Health Policy and Systems Research American University of Beirut Beirut Lebanon.ORCID 0009-0006-1315-2822
Fadi El-JardaliCenter for Systematic Reviews for Health Policy and Systems Research American University of Beirut Beirut Lebanon.
Lama Bou KarroumCenter for Systematic Reviews for Health Policy and Systems Research American University of Beirut Beirut Lebanon.
Nour KalachKnowledge to Policy (K2P) Center American University of Beirut Beirut Lebanon.
Reem HoteitClinical Research Institute American University of Beirut Beirut Lebanon.ORCID 0000-0001-8139-9321
Andrew AounKnowledge to Policy (K2P) Center American University of Beirut Beirut Lebanon.
Lara Al-HakimClinical Research Institute American University of Beirut Beirut Lebanon.
Francisca Verdugo-PaivaEpistemonikos Foundation Santiago Chile.
Gabriel RadaEpistemonikos Foundation Santiago Chile.
Atle FretheimCentre for Epidemic Interventions Research Norwegian Institute of Public Health Oslo Norway.
Simon LewinCentre for Epidemic Interventions Research Norwegian Institute of Public Health Oslo Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-7521-9515
Ramona LudolphDepartment of Epidemic and Pandemic Preparedness and Prevention, WHO Health Emergencies Programme World Health Organization Geneva Switzerland.
Elie A AklCenter for Systematic Reviews for Health Policy and Systems Research American University of Beirut Beirut Lebanon.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: To systematically review the effectiveness and unintended health and socioeconomic consequences of public health and social measures (PHSM) aimed at reducing the scale and risk of transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: This review followed guidance about overviews of reviews in the Results: A total of 94 reviews were included, of which eight (9%) had "moderate" to "high" confidence ratings on the AMSTAR 2. Of 16 reviews (17%) reporting applying the GRADE framework, none found high certainty evidence for any of our outcomes of interest. Across the 94 reviews, the most frequently examined PHSM were personal protection ( Conclusion: We found predominantly low- to very low-certainty evidence regarding the effectiveness and unintended consequences of PHSM in controlling the risk and scale of COVID-19 transmission. There is a need to improve the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews.

Indexed as

COVID‐19 pandemiceffectivenessnonpharmaceutical interventionsoverview of systematic reviewspublic health and social measuresreviewsunintended consequences

Identifiers

PMID40476261
PMCPMC11795948

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.