Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34609313›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2021

Exploring Online Health Reviews to Monitor COVID-19 Public Health Responses in Alabama State Department of Corrections: Case Example.

Pamela Valera, David Carmona, Sarah Malarkey, Noah Sinangil, Madelyn Owens, Asia Lefebre

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Pamela ValeraDepartment of Urban-Global Public Health, Rutgers School of Public Health, Newark, NJ, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0095-9209
David CarmonaDepartment of Urban-Global Public Health, Rutgers School of Public Health, Newark, NJ, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3811-819X
Sarah MalarkeyDepartment of Urban-Global Public Health, Rutgers School of Public Health, Newark, NJ, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9251-8901
Noah SinangilDepartment of Urban-Global Public Health, Rutgers School of Public Health, Newark, NJ, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3539-0793
Madelyn OwensDepartment of Urban-Global Public Health, Rutgers School of Public Health, Newark, NJ, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7235-3337
Asia LefebreDepartment of Urban-Global Public Health, Rutgers School of Public Health, Newark, NJ, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5509-0424

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCOVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has devastated incarcerated people throughout the United States.

objectiveThe purpose of this study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of a COVID-19 Health Review for Correctional Facilities.

methodsThe COVID-19 Health Review survey for the Department of Corrections was developed in Qualtrics to assess the following: (1) COVID-19 testing, (2) providing personal protective equipment, (3) vaccination procedures, (4) quarantine procedures, (5) COVID-19 mortality rates for inmates, (6) COVID-19 mortality rates for correctional officers and prison staff, (7) COVID-19 infection rates for inmates, (8) COVID-19 infection rates for correctional officers and prison staff, and (9) uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. The estimated time to review the Alabama State Department of Corrections COVID-19 responses on their website and complete the survey items was 45 minutes to 1 hour.

resultsOf the 21 participants who completed the COVID-19 Health Review for Correctional Facilities survey, 48% (n=10) identified as female, 43% (n=9) identified as male, and 10% (n=2) identified as transgender. For race, 29% (n=6) self-identified as Black or African American, 24% (n=5) Asian, 24% (n=5) White, 5% (n=1) Pacific Islander or Native Hawaiian, and 19% (n=4) Other. In addition, 5 respondents self-identified as returning citizens. For COVID-19 review questions, the majority concluded that information on personal protective equipment was "poor" and "very poor," information on COVID-19 testing was "fair" and above, information on COVID-19 death/infection rates between inmates and staff was "good" and "very good," and information on vaccinations was "good" and "very good." There was a significant difference observed (P=.03) between nonreturning citizens and returning citizens regarding the health grade review with respect to available information on COVID-19 infection rates.

conclusionsCOVID-19 health reviews may provide an opportunity for the public to review the COVID-19 responses in correctional settings.

Indexed as

acceptabilityAlabamacase studycorrectional facilitiesCOVID-19feasibilityformativemonitoringonline health reviewspolicyprisonpublic healthresponsereviewsurveyUnited States

Identifiers

PMID34609313
PMCPMC8580175

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.