ArticleDisasters2015
Predicting support for non-pharmaceutical interventions during infectious outbreaks: a four region analysis.
Article in Disasters, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preferences for Nonpharmaceutical Interventions During the Endemic Phase of COVID-19: Discrete Choice Experiment.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025Article
- Longitudinal changes in proportionate mortality due to COVID-19 by occupation in England and Wales.Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health · 2022Article
- Worry and behaviour at the start of the COVID-19 outbreak: Results from three UK surveys (the COVID-19 rapid survey of Adherence to Interventions and responses [CORSAIR] study).Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Effect of time-varying adherence to non-pharmaceutical interventions on the occurrence of multiple epidemic waves: A modeling study.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Mask use during COVID-19: A risk adjusted strategy.Environmental pollution (Barking, Essex : 1987) · 2020Review
- The 2019 coronavirus: Learning curves, lessons, and the weakest link.International journal of clinical practice · 2020Article
- COVID-19 observations and accompanying dataset of non-pharmaceutical interventions across U.S. universities, March 2020.PloS one · 2020Article
- Non-pharmaceutical Interventions for Pandemic COVID-19: A Cross-Sectional Investigation of US General Public Beliefs, Attitudes, and Actions.Frontiers in medicine · 2020Article
- A Bibliometric Analysis of Corona Pandemic in Social Sciences: A Review of Influential Aspects and Conceptual Structure.IEEE access : practical innovations, open solutions · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are an important public health tool for responding to infectious disease outbreaks, including pandemics. However, little is known about the individual characteristics associated with support for NPIs, or whether they are consistent across regions. This study draws on survey data from four regions--Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, and the United States--collected following the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak of 2002-03, and employs regression techniques to estimate predictors of NPI support. It finds that characteristics associated with NPI support vary widely by region, possibly because of cultural variation and prior experience, and that minority groups tend to be less supportive of NPIs when arrest is the consequence of noncompliance. Prior experience of face-mask usage also results in increased support for future usage, as well as other NPIs. Policymakers should be attentive to local preferences and to the application of compulsory interventions. It is speculated here that some public health interventions may serve as 'gateway' exposures to future public health interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.