Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32560716›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2020

Lay perspectives on social distancing and other official recommendations and regulations in the time of COVID-19: a qualitative study of social media posts.

Sabahat Ölcer, Yüce Yilmaz-Aslan, Patrick Brzoska

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. When Infodemic Meets Epidemic: Systematic Literature Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Sabahat ÖlcerHealth Services Research, Faculty of Health, School of Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred-Herrhausen-Straße 50, 58448, Witten, Germany.
Yüce Yilmaz-AslanDepartment of Epidemiology & International Public Health, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, 33501, Bielefeld, Germany.
Patrick BrzoskaHealth Services Research, Faculty of Health, School of Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, Alfred-Herrhausen-Straße 50, 58448, Witten, Germany. patrick.brzoska@uni-wh.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6489-5198

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCOVID-19 caused by a new form of coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) first appeared in China end of 2019 and quickly spread to all counties of the world. To slow down the spread of the virus and to limit the pressure on the health care systems, different regulations and recommendations have been implemented by authorities, comprising amongst others the closure of all entertainment venues and social distancing. These measures have received mixed reactions, particularly from young individuals, with many not following available advice. Drawing on the information in social media discussion forums, the present study explores the reasons why people ignore the orders and recommendations of the authorities and why the authorities are unable to produce a shared sense of inclusion concerning protective measures against the COVID-19 outbreak.

methodsThree open-access social media forums (Reddit, Twitter, and YouTube comments) were systematically searched with respect to COVID-19-related beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours of individuals. The data was retrieved in the first 3 weeks of March 2020. Qualitative document analysis and qualitative content analysis were used as the methodical approach. The data was reviewed by all authors and jointly interpreted to minimise inconsistencies.

resultsThe study reveals that reasons such as information pollution on social media, the persistence of uncertainty about the rapidly spreading virus, the impact of the social environment on the individual, and fear of unemployment associated with inequality in the distribution of income lead people to ignore the orders and recommendations of the authorities. The findings suggest that government representatives and politicians could not produce a shared sense of inclusion concerning protective measures against the COVID-19 outbreak, due to not building trust among the public and taking concrete economic steps to satisfy them.

conclusionIn uncertain crises, transparency in the presentation of information and government policies emerge as influential determinants in creating social susceptibility and solidarity. The differences between social classes constitute one of the important factors that affect the decision-making mechanisms of individuals in determining the necessary steps to be undertaken in times of crisis.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeSocial MediaCommunicable Disease ControlCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19HumansPandemicsPneumonia, ViralPublic HealthQualitative ResearchUnited KingdomUnited StatesCoronavirusCOVID-19SARS-CoV-2Self-isolationSocial distancingSocial media

Identifiers

PMID32560716
PMCPMC7303937

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.