ArticleRisk, hazards & crisis in public policy2021
Trust in experts, not trust in national leadership, leads to greater uptake of recommended actions during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Risk, hazards & crisis in public policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- How populist-aligned views affect receipt of non-COVID-19-related public health interventions: a systematic review of quantitative studies.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Health-Related Rumor Debunking on Sina Weibo in China (2009-2024): 15-Year Retrospective Infodemiology Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Impact of local COVID-19 incidence on health care personnel risk perception and social activity.American journal of infection control · 2026Article
- The effect of government information release on public protective behaviors during the emerging infectious diseases epidemic in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Adherence to COVID-19 measures and the associated factors: evidence from a two-wave longitudinal study in Singapore.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Trust in public health policy in the time of the COVID-19 epidemic in Israel.Israel journal of health policy research · 2024Article
- Exploring trust dynamics in health information systems: the impact of patients' health conditions on information source preferences.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Best practice guidelines for citizen science in mental health research: systematic review and evidence synthesis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Review
- Characterising trusted spokespeople in noncommunicable disease prevention: A systematic scoping review.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Risk, hazards and crisis: Covid-19 and beyond.Risk, hazards & crisis in public policy · 2022Article
- An incongruous intervention: Exploring the role of anti-institutionalism in less-educated individual's limited uptake of nutrition information.Sociology of health & illness · 2022Article
- The Prevention Behaviors and Impact Mechanisms Among Different Chinese Social Classes at the Early Stage of COVID-19 Pandemic.Psychology research and behavior management · 2022Article
- Different roles of interpersonal trust and institutional trust in COVID-19 pandemic control.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2022Article
- Trust in experts, not trust in national leadership, leads to greater uptake of recommended actions during the COVID-19 pandemic.Risk, hazards & crisis in public policy · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evidence suggests that people vary in their desire to undertake protective actions during a health emergency, and that trust in authorities may influence decision making. We sought to examine how the trust in health experts and trust in White House leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic impacts individuals' decisions to adopt recommended protective actions such as mask-wearing. A mediation analysis was conducted using cross-sectional U.S. survey data collected between March 27 and 30, 2020, to elucidate how individuals' trust in health experts and White House leadership, their perceptions of susceptibility and severity to COVID-19, and perceived benefits of protecting against COVID-19, influenced their uptake of recommended protective actions. Trust in health experts was associated with greater perceived severity of COVID-19 and benefits of taking action, which led to greater uptake of recommended actions. Trust in White House leadership was associated with lower perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 and was not associated with taking recommended actions. Having trust in health experts is a greater predictor of individuals' uptake of protective actions than having trust in White House leadership. Public health messaging should emphasize the severity of COVID-19 and the benefits of protecting oneself while ensuring consistency and transparency to regain trust in health experts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.