Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34314450›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Factors influencing study engagement during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study among health and social professions students.

Clemens Koob, Kristina Schröpfer, Michaela Coenen, Sandra Kus, Nicole Schmidt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
11.4field-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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The COVID-19 pandemic and adolescents' and young adults' experiences at school: A systematic narrative review.Journal of research on adolescence : the official journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Clemens KoobDepartment of Health and Nursing, Catholic University of Applied Sciences Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0291-6413
Kristina SchröpferDepartment of Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology-IBE, Chair of Public Health and Health Services Research, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Michaela CoenenDepartment of Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology-IBE, Chair of Public Health and Health Services Research, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7492-7907
Sandra KusDepartment of Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology-IBE, Chair of Public Health and Health Services Research, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Nicole SchmidtDepartment of Social Work, Munich, Catholic University of Applied Sciences Munich, Munich, Germany.
Zimmer Biomet (Netherlands) · NLKatholische Stiftungshochschule München · DEUniversity Hospital of Geneva · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study is to explore factors influencing the study engagement of health and social professions students during the COVID-19 pandemic. While antecedents of study engagement have been studied previously, the factors influencing engagement under pandemic conditions have not yet been investigated. Furthermore, there is a particular need for research among students in health and social professions programs, as these students are particularly affected by the pandemic. As theoretical basis, the study draws on the demands-resources-theory. It is hypothesized that pandemic-related study and personal resources drive engagement during the pandemic, and that pandemic-related demands negatively influence engagement.

methodThe study uses a cross-sectional survey to explore the hypothesized effects. The sample consists of 559 university students of health and social professions in Germany. The study was carried out in July 2020, towards the end of the first digital semester and after the first peak in COVID-19 cases. Data are analyzed using linear multiple regression analysis.

resultsThe findings show that the demands-resources-theory is suitable to explain study engagement even under pandemic conditions. Suitable digital learning formats and social support are identified as important study resources for study engagement during major life events, while emotional resilience, active self-care and academic self-efficacy are identified as important personal resources.

conclusionsUnder pandemic conditions academic institutions should focus on providing beneficial teaching formats and innovative ways to support students lacking social networks. Besides, they should consider developing means to help students structuring daily life as well as establishing initiatives to strengthen students' self-efficacy beliefs.

Indexed as

PandemicsCOVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesEmotionsFemaleHealth OccupationsHumansMaleStudents, MedicalUniversitiesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34314450
PMCPMC8315536
OpenAlexW3183166897

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.