Cited by 483Public Health Policies and EducationDisaster Response and ManagementCOVID-19 Prevention and Impact

Factors influencing compliance with quarantine in Toronto during the 2003 SARS outbreak

DiGiovanni, Clete, Conley, Jerome, Chiu, Daniel, Zaborski, Jason·2004·Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to cull lessons from Toronto's experiences with large-scale quarantine during the outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome in early 2003. We focused on issues that affected the population's willingness to comply with quarantine. Information was acquired from interviews, telephone polling, and focus groups. Issues of quarantine legitimacy, criteria for quarantine, and the need to allow some quarantined healthcare workers to leave their homes to go to work were identified. Also important was the need to answer questions from people entering quarantine about the continuation of their wages, salaries, and other forms of income while they were not working, and about the means by which they would be supplied with groceries and other services necessary for daily living. The threat of enforcement had less effect on compliance than did the credibility of compliance-monitoring. Fighting boredom and other psychological stresses of quarantine, muting the forces of stigma against those in quarantine, and crafting and delivering effective and believable communications to a population of mixed cultures and languages also were critical. The need for officials to develop consistent quarantine policies, procedures, and public messages across jurisdictional boundaries was paramount.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/bsp.2004.2.265

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Eleven articles highlighted the psychological implications of mass quarantine as emotional distress and symptoms of mental illness.

    “Eleven articles from various geographical and disease contexts highlighted the psychological implications of mass quarantine as emotional distress and symptoms of mental illness.22–25,27–32,35”
  • People in or after quarantine experienced emotional distress including annoyance, anxiety, boredom, disappointment, life dissatisfaction, fear of infection, isolation, loneliness and mistrust.

    “Among people in or after quarantine, some experienced emotional distress, including: annoyance,32 anxiety,25,29 boredom,23,25,32 disappointment and life dissatisfaction,24,32,35 fear of infection,23,25,30,34 isolation,23,25,32 loneliness25,32 and mistrust.31”
  • Participants from three studies of the SARS outbreak in Toronto stressed that authorities did not provide clear and consistent messages on why, how and how long to enact quarantine, and that they were unable to contact designated public health staff.

    “Participants from three studies of the SARS outbreak in Toronto stressed that authorities did not provide clear and consistent messages on why, how and, how long to enact quarantine, and that they were unable to contact designated public health staff.23,25,27”
  • Nine studies stressed how mass quarantine aggravated inequalities in individuals' access to, understanding of, and actions on prevention and control of infections.

    “Nine studies stressed how mass quarantine aggravated inequalities in individuals’ access to, understanding of, and actions on prevention and control of infections.21,23–26,31–34”
  • Contradictory quarantine instructions from public health officials, mass media and expert opinions widened communication inequalities, made it difficult for interviewees to comply with quarantine orders and drove the public to take on word-of-mouth recommendations.

    “Moreover, contradictory quarantine instructions from public health officials, mass media and expert opinions widened communication inequalities, made it difficult for interviewees to comply with quarantine orders and drove the public to take on word-of-mouth recommendations that might or might not be true.25”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
DiGiovanni, C., Conley, J., Chiu, D., & Zaborski, J.
Affiliations
  • Defense Threat Reduction Agency (US)
  • Strategic Planning and Analysis, Hicks and Associates, Arlington, Va.
  • DFI Government Services, Washington, DC.
Venue
Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science
Published
2004-12
Volume
2
Issue
4
Pages
265-272
ISSN
  • 1538-7135 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-850X
OpenAlex
W2051329386
Cited by
483
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 96 · 2021: 143 · 2020: 136 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 2
FWCI
14.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biosecurity and Bioterrorism Biodefense Strategy Practice and Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Defense
  • Defense Threat Reduction Agency
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Disaster Response and Management
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › COVID-19 Prevention and Impact
Keywords
quarantine compliance, SARS epidemic, quarantine enforcement, public communication, multilingual communication, Toronto
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Attitude to Health, Disaster Planning, Disease Outbreaks, Humans, Ontario, Quarantine, Psychological Distance, Focus Groups, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review