Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33351852›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Myths, misconceptions, othering and stigmatizing responses to Covid-19 in South Africa: A rapid qualitative assessment.

Tenielle Schmidt, Allanise Cloete, Adlai Davids, Lehlogonolo Makola, Nokubonga Zondi, Monalisa Jantjies

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

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

60 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 127 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Beyond COVID-19: Behavioral Drivers of Pandemic Prevention in Ghana's Informal Urban Settlements.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. "SAHARA J : journal of Social Aspects of HIV/AIDS Research Alliance · 2023
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tenielle SchmidtHuman and Social Capabilities Division, the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC), Pretoria, South Africa.
Allanise CloeteHuman and Social Capabilities Division, the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC), Pretoria, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-6763-9675
Adlai DavidsHuman and Social Capabilities Division, the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC), Pretoria, South Africa.
Lehlogonolo MakolaChildren's Institute of the University of Cape Town (UCT), Cape Town, South Africa.
Nokubonga ZondiHuman and Social Capabilities Division, the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC), Pretoria, South Africa.
Monalisa JantjiesHuman and Social Capabilities Division, the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC), Pretoria, South Africa.
Human Sciences Research Council · ZAUniversity of Cape Town · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a new strain of virus in the Coronavirus family that has not been previously identified. Since SARS-CoV-2 is a new virus, everyone is at risk of catching the Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). No one has immunity to the virus. Despite this, misconceptions about specific groups of people who are immune to Covid-19 emerged with the onset of the pandemic. This paper explores South African communities' misconceptions about who is most vulnerable to Covid-19. A rapid qualitative assessment was conducted remotely in Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal and the Western Cape provinces of South Africa. Recruitment of study participants took place through established relationships with civil society organizations and contacts made by researchers. In total, 60 key informant interviews and one focus group discussion was conducted. Atlas.ti.8 Windows was used to facilitate qualitative data analysis. The qualitative data was coded, and thematic analysis used to identify themes. The results show a high level of awareness and knowledge of the transmission and prevention of SARS-CoV-2. Qualitative data revealed that there is awareness of elderly people and those with immunocompromised conditions being more vulnerable to catching Covid-19. However, misconceptions of being protected against the virus or having low or no risk were also evident in the data. We found that false information circulated on social media not only instigated confusion, fear and panic, but also contributed to the construction of misconceptions, othering and stigmatizing responses to Covid-19. The study findings bring attention to the importance of developing communication materials adapted to specific communities to help reduce misconceptions, othering and stigmatization around Covid-19.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdaptation, PhysiologicalAdultAgedCommunity Health WorkersCOVID-19Diabetes MellitusFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleMiddle AgedSARS-CoV-2Sexual and Gender MinoritiesSex WorkersSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID33351852
PMCPMC7755184
OpenAlexW3114572848

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.