Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33805222›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Educational Disparities in COVID-19 Prevention in China: The Role of Contextual Danger, Perceived Risk, and Interventional Context.

Miao Li, Weidong Wang

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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Use of Respiratory Protection Devices by Medical Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    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

2 authors.

Miao LiDepartment of Sociology, Anthropology, and Criminal Justice, Clemson University, 135A Brackett Hall, Clemson, SC 29634, USA.
Weidong WangDepartment of Sociology, Renmin University of China, 59 Zhongguancun St., Beijing 100872, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the social disparities in COVID-19 infection, little is known about factors influencing social disparities in preventive behaviors during the pandemic. This study examined how educational disparities in mask-wearing, handwashing, and limiting public outings might be contingent upon three factors: contextual cue of danger, perceived risk of local outbreak, and interventional context with different levels of intensity (i.e, Wuhan vs. other areas). Data were obtained from a telephone survey of 3327 adults, who were recruited through a random-digit-dial method to be representative of all cell phone users in China. Interviews were conducted from 28 April to 26 May 2020. Stratified multiple regression models showed that educational disparities in all three behaviors were only consistently observed among people exposed to context cues of danger, with an enhanced sense of risk of a local outbreak, or in areas other than Wuhan. College education seems to make a difference in handwashing regardless of contextual cues of danger or perception of risk. The findings suggested that, in the process of an epidemic, emerging threats in one's immediate environment or raised awareness of risks are important conditions triggering educational disparities in prevention. However, effective public health interventions could potentially reduce such disparities.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultChinaCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2COVID-19disparitiesdistancingeducationfundamental causehand hygienemask-wearing

Identifiers

PMID33805222
PMCPMC8036684

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.