Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34139479›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2021

Crowdfunding as a response to COVID-19: Increasing inequities at a time of crisis.

Mark Igra, Nora Kenworthy, Cadence Luchsinger, Jin-Kyu Jung

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
18.3field-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.

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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 103 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Inequity in Washington state covid-19-related crowdfunding.Social sciences & humanities open · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The ethics of crowdfunding in paediatric neurology.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. What Determines the Success of Charitable Crowdfunding Campaigns? Evidence from China During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Voluntas : international journal of voluntary and nonprofit organizations · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mark IgraDepartment of Sociology, University of Washington, USA. Electronic address: igra@uw.edu.
Nora KenworthySchool of Nursing and Health Studies, University of Washington Bothell, USA.
Cadence LuchsingerDepartment of Health Services, University of Washington, USA.
Jin-Kyu JungSchool of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences, University of Washington Bothell, USA.
University of Washington · USUniversity of Washington Bothell · US

Funding

Scientific/Technical CoreP2CHD042828 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI SARA R. CURRAN · 2017 to 2026
$6.3M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD042828
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the first seven months of the COVID-19 pandemic, more than 175,000 crowdfunding campaigns were established in the US for coronavirus-related needs using the platform GoFundMe. Though charitable crowdfunding has been popular in recent years, the widespread creation of COVID-19 related campaigns points to potential shifts in how the platform is being used, and the volume of needs users have brought to the site during a profound economic, social, and epidemiological crisis. This study offers a systematic examination of the scope and impacts of COVID-19 related crowdfunding in the early months of the pandemic and assesses how existing social and health inequities shaped crowdfunding use and outcomes. Using data collected from all US-based GoFundMe campaigns mentioning COVID or coronavirus, we used descriptive analysis and a series of negative binomial and linear models to assess the contributions of demographic factors and COVID-19 impacts to campaign creation and outcome. We find significant evidence of growing inequalities in outcomes for campaigners. We find that crowdfunding provides substantially higher benefits in wealthier counties with higher levels of education. People from these areas are more likely to initiate campaigns in response to adverse health and economic impacts of COVID-19, and they also receive more funding compared to people living in areas with lower income and education. Modeling also indicates differential outcomes based on the racial and ethnic composition of county population, though without more detail about who is creating and funding campaigns we cannot explain causality. A targeted qualitative analysis of the top earning COVID-19 campaigns offers further evidence of how user privilege and corporate practices contribute to highly unequal outcomes. Taken together, these findings demonstrate how a market-oriented digital technology used to respond to large-scale crisis can exacerbate inequalities and further benefit already privileged groups.

Indexed as

COVID-19CrowdsourcingHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2COVID-19CrisisCrowdfundingHealth inequitySocial determinants of health

Identifiers

PMID34139479
PMCPMC8411868
OpenAlexW3171470666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.