Dataset Information

Risk stratification and assessment framework for international travel and border measures amidst the COVID-19 pandemic - A Malaysian perspective.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Guided by the best practices adapted from national and international bodies including the World Health Organization (WHO), the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), and the UK Joint Biosecurity Centre (JBC), this paper aims to develop and provide an empirical risk stratification and assessment framework for advancing the safe resumption of global travel during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Method

Variables included in our model are categorized into four pillars: (i) incidence of cases, (ii) reliability of case data, (iii) vaccination, and (iv) variant surveillance. These measures are combined based on weights that reflect their corresponding importance in risk assessment within the context of the pandemic to calculate the risk score for each country. As a validation step, the outcome of the risk stratification from our model is compared against four countries.

Results

Our model is found to have good agreement with these benchmarked risk designations for 27 out of the top 30 countries with the strongest travel ties to Malaysia (90%). Each factor within this model signifies its importance and can be adapted by governing bodies to address the changing needs of border control policies for the recommencement of international travel.

Conclusion

In practice, the proposed model provides a turnkey solution for nations to manage transmission risk by enabling stakeholders to make informed, evidence-based decisions to minimize fluctuations of imported cases and serves as a structure to support the improvement, planning, and activation of public health control measures.

SUBMITTER: Omar K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8949657 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May-Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Risk stratification and assessment framework for international travel and border measures amidst the COVID-19 pandemic - A Malaysian perspective.

Omar Khairul K Baha Raja Dhesi D Abdul Taib Nur Asheila NA Rajaram Nadia N Ahmed Jinat J Arvinder-Singh H S HS Mokhtar Siti Aisah SA Teo Alvin Kuo Jing AKJ Amir Lidwina Edwin LE Chan Michelle M Quek Yee Theng YT Ting Choo-Yee CY

Travel medicine and infectious disease 20220325

<h4>Background</h4>Guided by the best practices adapted from national and international bodies including the World Health Organization (WHO), the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), and the UK Joint Biosecurity Centre (JBC), this paper aims to develop and provide an empirical risk stratification and assessment framework for advancing the safe resumption of global travel during the COVID-19 pandemic.<h4>Method</h4>Variables included in our model are categorized into four pillars: (i) incidence of ...[more]

PMID: 35342008

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background/objectiveInternational travel measures to contain the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic represent a relatively intrusive form of non-pharmaceutical intervention. To inform decision-making on the (re)implementation, adaptation, relaxation or suspension of such measures, it is essential to not only assess their effectiveness but also their unintended effects.MethodsThis scoping review maps existing empirical studies on the unintended consequences, both predicted and unforeseen, and beneficial or harmful, of international travel measures. We searched multiple health, non-health and COVID-19-specific databases. The evidence was charted in a map in relation to the study design, intervention and outcome categories identified and discussed narratively.ResultsTwenty-three studies met our inclusion criteria-nine quasi-experimental, two observational, two mathematical modelling, six qualitative and four mixed-methods studies. Studies addressed different population groups across various countries worldwide. Seven studies provided information on unintended consequences of the closure of national borders, six looked at international travel restrictions and three investigated mandatory quarantine of international travellers. No studies looked at entry and/or exit screening at national borders exclusively, however six studies considered this intervention in combination with other international travel measures. In total, 11 studies assessed various combinations of the aforementioned interventions. The outcomes were mostly referred to by the authors as harmful. Fifteen studies identified a variety of economic consequences, six reported on aspects related to quality of life, well-being, and mental health and five on social consequences. One study each provided information on equity, equality, and the fair distribution of benefits and burdens, environmental consequences and health system consequences.ConclusionThis scoping review represents the first step towards a systematic assessment of the unintended benefits and harms of international travel measures during COVID-19. The key research gaps identified might be filled with targeted primary research, as well as the additional consideration of gray literature and non-empirical studies.

Project description:BackgroundPlanning for a possible influenza pandemic is an extremely high priority, as social and economic effects of an unmitigated pandemic would be devastating. Mathematical models can be used to explore different scenarios and provide insight into potential costs, benefits, and effectiveness of prevention and control strategies under consideration.Methods and findingsA stochastic, equation-based epidemic model is used to study global transmission of pandemic flu, including the effects of travel restrictions and vaccination. Economic costs of intervention are also considered. The distribution of First Passage Times (FPT) to the United States and the numbers of infected persons in metropolitan areas worldwide are studied assuming various times and locations of the initial outbreak. International air travel restrictions alone provide a small delay in FPT to the U.S. When other containment measures are applied at the source in conjunction with travel restrictions, delays could be much longer. If in addition, control measures are instituted worldwide, there is a significant reduction in cases worldwide and specifically in the U.S. However, if travel restrictions are not combined with other measures, local epidemic severity may increase, because restriction-induced delays can push local outbreaks into high epidemic season. The per annum cost to the U.S. economy of international and major domestic air passenger travel restrictions is minimal: on the order of 0.8% of Gross National Product.ConclusionsInternational air travel restrictions may provide a small but important delay in the spread of a pandemic, especially if other disease control measures are implemented during the afforded time. However, if other measures are not instituted, delays may worsen regional epidemics by pushing the outbreak into high epidemic season. This important interaction between policy and seasonality is only evident with a global-scale model. Since the benefit of travel restrictions can be substantial while their costs are minimal, dismissal of travel restrictions as an aid in dealing with a global pandemic seems premature.

Project description:BackgroundHealth risks associated with contracting COVID-19, stay-at-home orders, and pandemic-related economic and social hardships created unique challenges for individuals throughout the pandemic, and in particular for families whose daily routines were disrupted at the start of the pandemic. This study applied a contextual behavioral science lens to Family Systems Theory to examine the impact of COVID-19 stressors on family and individual functioning.MethodsA sample of 742 coparents (86% married/engaged; 84% Caucasian; 71% female; M = 40.7 years old, SD = 8.1; M income = $82,435, SD income = $27,604) of school-aged children (5-18 years old) completed a baseline survey from late March to late April 2020. Of the initial sample, 556 coparents completed weekly diaries for 8 weeks.ResultsMediation models were tested within a multilevel path modeling framework to evaluate both the stable, between-family differences (i.e., at level 2) and the within-family changes from week to week (i.e., at level 1). Across both levels of the model, parent psychological inflexibility was robustly linked to poorer functioning across all levels of the family system, showing direct links to a majority of the processes assessed. The results further supported a top-down spillover cascade in which parent inflexibility was proximally linked to greater COVID-19 related stress and parent depressive symptoms, which were proximally linked to poorer romantic functioning (greater negative conflict, lower satisfaction), which were proximally linked to poorer family functioning (greater coparent discord and family chaos), which were proximally linked to poorer parenting (greater angry/reactive parenting), which was proximally linked to greater child distress. Multi-group models suggested that the results were largely stable across (1) parent race (white vs non-white), (2) family size (1 child vs 2 or more), (3) child age (less than 10 years old vs 10 or older), (4) parent age (under 40 vs. 40 or older), (5) perceived COVID-19 risk, (6) parent gender (mothers vs fathers), (7) household income groups (less than $100k vs $100k or more), and (8) perceived economic stress/uncertainty (low vs high). However, a handful of moderated effects emerged from those multi-group models suggesting that fathers might be slightly more prone to negative spillover effects across the family systems and that wealthier families might have experienced the stress of new demands (e.g., homeschooling, remote working) as more disruptive.ConclusionsResults highlight the crucial role parental psychological flexibility and inflexibility play in families managing the stress of COVID-19, as well as key mechanisms for how those stressors may either reverberate or become dampened throughout the family system.

Project description:ObjectivesTo comprehensively map the existing evidence assessing the impact of travel-related control measures for containment of the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic.DesignRapid evidence map.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science, and COVID-19 specific databases offered by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the WHO.Eligibility criteriaWe included studies in human populations susceptible to SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19, SARS-CoV-1/severe acute respiratory syndrome, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus/Middle East respiratory syndrome or influenza. Interventions of interest were travel-related control measures affecting travel across national or subnational borders. Outcomes of interest included infectious disease, screening, other health, economic and social outcomes. We considered all empirical studies that quantitatively evaluate impact available in Armenian, English, French, German, Italian and Russian based on the team's language capacities.Data extraction and synthesisWe extracted data from included studies in a standardised manner and mapped them to a priori and (one) post hoc defined categories.ResultsWe included 122 studies assessing travel-related control measures. These studies were undertaken across the globe, most in the Western Pacific region (n=71). A large proportion of studies focused on COVID-19 (n=59), but a number of studies also examined SARS, MERS and influenza. We identified studies on border closures (n=3), entry/exit screening (n=31), travel-related quarantine (n=6), travel bans (n=8) and travel restrictions (n=25). Many addressed a bundle of travel-related control measures (n=49). Most studies assessed infectious disease (n=98) and/or screening-related (n=25) outcomes; we found only limited evidence on economic and social outcomes. Studies applied numerous methods, both inferential and descriptive in nature, ranging from simple observational methods to complex modelling techniques.ConclusionsWe identified a heterogeneous and complex evidence base on travel-related control measures. While this map is not sufficient to assess the effectiveness of different measures, it outlines aspects regarding interventions and outcomes, as well as study methodology and reporting that could inform future research and evidence synthesis.

Project description:BackgroundThe impact of COVID-19 international travel restrictions has to date, not been fully explored, and with the ongoing threat that new variants could potentially restrict movement further, it is important to consider the impacts that travel restrictions have on community members. This study aimed to evaluate the psychological and financial impact of COVID-19 travel restrictions on those separated from their partners or immediate families, as well as temporary visa holders who were unable to migrate.MethodsBetween 4 November 2021 to 1 December 2021, we executed a cross-sectional online survey targeting three specific groups; (1) those stranded from their partners; (2) those stranded from immediate families; and (3) temporary visa holders unable to migrate or cross international borders. We collected data on respondents' demographic profile; the nature of COVID-19-related travel impacts; depression, anxiety, and stress levels (using the validated DASS-21); and finally, data on respondents financial, employment and accommodation situation.Results1363 respondents located globally completed the survey. 71.2% reported financial stress, 76.8% ([Formula: see text], SD = 5.94) reported moderate-to-extremely severe depression, 51.6% ([Formula: see text], SD = 5.49) moderate-to-extremely severe anxiety, and 62.6% ([Formula: see text], SD = 5.55) moderate-to-extremely severe stress levels. Statistically significant factors associated with moderate-to-extremely severe depression, anxiety, and stress included being female, chronic illness, and experiencing financial stress. Employment during COVID-19 -specifically essential services workers or unemployed-was associated with higher levels of anxiety and stress, with only essential workers being a predictor of higher stress severity. Factors that provided psychological protection included being older and having children.ConclusionThis study is one of the first to explore the impact COVID-19-related international travel restrictions have had on the financial status and psychological health of affected individuals. It highlights the significant human cost associated with the restrictions and identifies psychologically vulnerable populations. These results will help the design of targeted health and social policy responses.

Dataset Information

Risk stratification and assessment framework for international travel and border measures amidst the COVID-19 pandemic - A Malaysian perspective.

Background

Method

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Risk stratification and assessment framework for international travel and border measures amidst the COVID-19 pandemic - A Malaysian perspective.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets