Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34492047›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2021

Health knowledge, health behaviors and attitudes during pandemic emergencies: A systematic review.

Fabio Alexis Rincón Uribe, Rejane Célia de Souza Godinho, Marcos Antonio Santos Machado, Kleber Roberto da Silva Gonçalves Oliveira, Cristian Ariel Neira Espejo, Natalia Carvalho Vianna de Sousa, Leonardo Lucas de Sousa, Marcos Vinicius Monteiro Barbalho, Pedro Paulo Freire Piani, Janari da Silva Pedroso

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The anatomical knowledge of Namibian school children.Anatomical sciences education · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  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

10 authors.

Fabio Alexis Rincón UribePrograma de Pós-graduação em Psicologia, Universidade Federal do Pará, Belém, Brasil.ORCID 0000-0001-9764-2429
Rejane Célia de Souza GodinhoPrograma de Pós-graduação em Teoria e Pesquisa do Comportamento, Universidade Federal do Pará, Belém, Brasil.ORCID 0000-0002-6207-588X
Marcos Antonio Santos MachadoPrograma de Pós-graduação em Teoria e Pesquisa do Comportamento, Universidade Federal do Pará, Belém, Brasil.
Kleber Roberto da Silva Gonçalves OliveiraPrograma de Pós-graduação em Teoria e Pesquisa do Comportamento, Universidade Federal do Pará, Belém, Brasil.
Cristian Ariel Neira EspejoPrograma de Pós-graduação em Teoria e Pesquisa do Comportamento, Universidade Federal do Pará, Belém, Brasil.
Natalia Carvalho Vianna de SousaPrograma de Pós-graduação em Teoria e Pesquisa do Comportamento, Universidade Federal do Pará, Belém, Brasil.
Leonardo Lucas de SousaPrograma de Pós-graduação em Teoria e Pesquisa do Comportamento, Universidade Federal do Pará, Belém, Brasil.
Marcos Vinicius Monteiro BarbalhoPrograma de Graduação em Psicologia, Universidade Federal do Pará, Belém, Brasil.
Pedro Paulo Freire PianiInstituto de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Federal do Pará, Belém, Brasil.
Janari da Silva PedrosoPrograma de Pós-graduação em Teoria e Pesquisa do Comportamento, Universidade Federal do Pará, Belém, Brasil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeople with good health knowledge present a conceptual and objective appropriation of general and specific health topics, increasing their probability to express health protection and prevention measures. The main objective of this study was to conduct a rapid systematic review about the effects of health knowledge on the adoption of health behaviors and attitudes in populations under pandemic emergencies.

methodsA systematic review was performed according to PRISMA checklist and the Cochrane method for rapid systematic reviews. Studies searches were performed in APA PsycNet, Embase, Cochrane Library and PubMed Central. Studies published between January 2009 and June 2020 and whose primary results reported a measure of interaction between health knowledge, health attitudes and behaviors in population groups during pandemics were included. A review protocol was recorded in PROSPERO (CRD42020183347).

resultsOut of a total of 5791 studies identified in the databases, 13 met the inclusion criteria. The included studies contain a population of 26099 adults, grouped into cohorts of health workers, university students, clinical patients, and the general population. Health knowledge has an important influence on the adoption of health behaviors and attitudes in pandemic contexts.

conclusionsThe consolidation of these preventive measures favors the consolidation of public rapid responses to infection outbreaks. Findings of this review indicate that health knowledge notably favors adoption of health behaviors and practices. Therefore, health knowledge based on clear and objective information would help them understand and adopt rapid responses to face a pandemic.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeCOVID-19EmergenciesHealth BehaviorHumansPandemicsRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID34492047
PMCPMC8423234

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.