Cited by 999COVID-19 and Mental HealthCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesCOVID-19 Prevention and Impact

The psychological effects of quarantining a city

Open access
Rubin, G James, Wessely, Simon·2020·BMJ

Abstract

Whether the epidemiological benefits of mandatory mass quarantine outweigh the psychological costs is a judgement that should not be made lightly

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.m313

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Compulsory quarantine has more negative psychological effects than voluntary self-quarantine does.

    “Compulsory quarantine also has more negative psychological effects than voluntary self-quarantine does (1, 19).”

    From Definitions and psychological impacts of quarantine and strategies to reduce it: A review paper (2020) · cites this paper as [19]

    The paper’s discussion of imposed quarantine and alternatives says voluntary quarantine “may be associated with ... less psychological impact.” That supports the direction of the comparison, but the claim presents it as a definite difference rather than a possibility. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rubin, G. J., & Wessely, S.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2020-01-28
Volume
368
Pages
m313
ISSN
1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3003379403
Cited by
999
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 133 · 2022: 223 · 2021: 315 · 2020: 242
FWCI
90.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • Department of Health and Social Care
  • University of East Anglia
  • King's College London
  • Newcastle University
  • Public Health England
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › COVID-19 Prevention and Impact
Keywords
psychological impact, mental health, public health measures, COVID-19 pandemic

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