ArticlePublic health2022
Tiered restrictions for COVID-19 in England: knowledge, motivation and self-reported behaviour.
Article in Public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimal algorithms for controlling infectious diseases in real time using noisy infection data.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Is a tiered restrictions system an effective intervention for COVID-19 control? Results from Portugal, November-December 2020.BMC public health · 2024Article
- COVID-19 and the Physio4FMD trial: Impact, mitigating strategies and analysis plans.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2023Article
- Effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions in nine fields of activity to decrease SARS-CoV-2 transmission (Spain, September 2020-May 2021).Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Article
- Patterns of social mixing in England changed in line with restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic (September 2020 to April 2022).Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo test whether public knowledge and confidence in one's understanding of the local restrictions, motivation to adhere to local restrictions, and self-reported behaviour (going out for exercise, to work, socially) differed according to tier level. STUDY
designCross-sectional, nationally representative, online survey of 1728 participants living in England (data collection: 26 to 28 October 2020).
methodsWe conducted logistic regression analyses to investigate whether knowledge of restrictions, confidence in knowledge of restrictions, motivation to adhere to restrictions, and self-reported behaviour were associated with personal characteristics and tier.
resultsBetween 81% (tier 2) and 89% (tier 3) of participants correctly identified which tier they lived in. Knowledge of specific restrictions was variable. 73% were confident that they understood which tier was in place in their local area, whereas 71% were confident they understood the guidance in their local area. Confidence was associated with being older and living in a less deprived area. 73% were motivated to adhere to restrictions in their local area. Motivation was associated with being female and older. People living in tiers with greater restrictions were less likely to report going out to meet people from another household socially; reported rates of going out for exercise and for work did not differ.
conclusionsAlthough recognition of local tier level was high, knowledge of specific guidance for tiers was variable. There was some indication that nuanced guidance (e.g. behaviour allowed in some settings but not others) was more poorly understood than guidance which was absolute (i.e. behaviour is either allowed or not allowed).
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.