Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32690752›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Public perceptions and experiences of social distancing and social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic: a UK-based focus group study.

Simon N Williams, Christopher J Armitage, Tova Tampe, Kimberly Dienes

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04699851 (Optimization of the Management of COVID-19 Through Tailored Recommendations to the Citizens), which is not on this map. Cited by 202 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
202citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
33.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT04699851 naunknown statusnot on this map

Optimization of the Management of COVID-19 Through Tailored Recommendations to the Citizens

TypeinterventionalSponsorLaval UniversityRan2020 to 2021Enrolled1,200ConditionsCOVID19, Tailored Recommendations, Citizen Self-reported SymptomsArmsTailored recommendations, General recommendation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

202 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 484 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

142 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Simon N WilliamsCentre for People and Organisation, School of Management, Swansea University, Swansea, UK s.n.williams@swansea.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-2854-9946
Christopher J ArmitageManchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Tova TampeWorld Health Organization, Genève, Switzerland.
Kimberly DienesManchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBSwansea University · GBWorld Health Organization · CH

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study explored UK public perceptions and experiences of social distancing and social isolation related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

designThis qualitative study comprised five focus groups, carried out online during the early stages of the UK's stay at home order ('lockdown'), and analysed using a thematic approach.

settingFocus groups took place via online videoconferencing.

participantsParticipants (n=27) were all UK residents aged 18 years and older, representing a range of gender, ethnic, age and occupational backgrounds.

resultsQualitative analysis revealed four main themes: (1) loss-participants' loss of (in-person) social interaction, loss of income and loss of structure and routine led to psychological and emotional 'losses' such as loss of motivation, loss of meaning and loss of self-worth; (2) criticisms of government communication-participants reported a lack of trust in government and a lack of clarity in the guidelines around social distancing and isolation; (3) adherence-participants reported high self-adherence to social distancing guidelines but reported seeing or hearing of non-adherence in others; (4) uncertainty around social reintegration and the future-some participants felt they would have lingering concerns over social contact while others were eager to return to high levels of social activity.Most participants, and particularly those in low-paid or precarious employment, reported feeling that the social distancing and isolation associated with COVID-19 policy has had negative impacts on their mental health and well-being during the early stages of the UK's 'lockdown'.

conclusionsA rapid response is necessary in terms of public health programming to mitigate the mental health impacts of COVID-19 social distancing and isolation. Social distancing and isolation 'exit strategies' must account for the fact that, although some individuals will voluntarily or habitually continue to socially distance, others will seek high levels of social engagement as soon as possible.

Indexed as

AttitudeCommunicable Disease ControlCoronavirus InfectionsGovernmentPandemicsPneumonia, ViralPublic PolicySocial IsolationAdolescentAdultBetacoronavirusCommunicationCOVID-19EmploymentFemaleFocus Groupsmental healthpublic healthqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID32690752
PMCPMC7387310
OpenAlexW3043188314

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.