Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33668717›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Different Responses to Stress, Health Practices, and Self-Care during COVID-19 Lockdown: A Stratified Analysis.

Elena Bermejo-Martins, Elkin O Luis, Ainize Sarrionandia, Martín Martínez, María Sol Garcés, Edwin Y Oliveros, Cristian Cortés-Rivera, Maider Belintxon, Pablo Fernández-Berrocal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Rural Social Participation through Osekkai during the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  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

9 authors.

Elena Bermejo-MartinsSchool of Nursing, University of Navarra, 31009 Pamplona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-7040-3508
Elkin O LuisNavarra Institute for Health Research, IdiSNA, 31009 Pamplona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-7981-1177
Ainize SarrionandiaFaculty of Psychology, University of the Basque Country, 20018 Donostia-San Sebastián, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-4140-4370
Martín MartínezNavarra Institute for Health Research, IdiSNA, 31009 Pamplona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-3053-7920
María Sol GarcésColegio de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, Universidad San Francisco de Quito USFQ, Instituto de Neurociencias, Quito 170901, Ecuador.
Edwin Y OliverosFaculty of Psychology, University of San Buenaventura, Bogota 1008, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0002-1152-9167
Cristian Cortés-RiveraFaculty of Psychology, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago 7590943, Chile.ORCID 0000-0002-5875-4564
Maider BelintxonSchool of Nursing, University of Navarra, 31009 Pamplona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-2214-051X
Pablo Fernández-BerrocalFaculty of Psychology, University of Málaga, 29071 Malaga, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0844-2976

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the present cross-sectional study was to analyze the differential impact of the first COVID-19 lockdown (3 April 2020) on stress, health practices, and self-care activities across different Hispanic countries, age range, and gender groups. One thousand and eighty-two participants from Spain, Chile, Colombia, and Ecuador took part in this study. Irrespective of the country, and controlling for income level, young people, especially females, suffered a greater level of stress, perceived the situation as more severe, showed less adherence to health guidelines, and reported lower levels of health consciousness, in comparison to their male peers and older groups. However, in the case of self-care, it seems that older and female groups are generally more involved in self-care activities and adopt more healthy daily routines. These results are mostly similar between Colombia, Ecuador, and Spain. However, Chile showed some different tendencies, as males reported higher levels of healthy daily routines and better adherence to health guidelines compared to females and people over the age of 60. Differences between countries, genders, and age ranges should be considered in order to improve health recommendations and adherence to guidelines. Moreover, developing community action and intersectoral strategies with a gender-based approach could help to reduce health inequalities and increase the success of people's adherence to health guidelines and self-care-promoting interventions. Future studies should be addressed to explore the possible causations of such differences in more cultural-distant samples and at later stages of the current outbreak.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorSelf CareChileColombiaCommunicable Disease ControlCOVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesEcuadorFemaleHumansMaleSpainStress, PsychologicalCOVID-19cross-cultural studyhealth practicesself-carestress

Identifiers

PMID33668717
PMCPMC7956515

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.