Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35146276›Full record

ArticleJournal of health monitoring2020

Developments in the health situation in Germany during the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic for selected indicators of GEDA 2019/2020-EHIS.

Stefan Damerow, Alexander Rommel, Franziska Prütz, Ann-Kristin Beyer, Ulfert Hapke, Anja Schienkiewitz, Anne Starker, Almut Richter, Jens Baumert, Judith Fuchs and 4 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of health monitoring, 2020. 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 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Stefan DamerowRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Alexander RommelRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Franziska PrützRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Ann-Kristin BeyerRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Ulfert HapkeRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Anja SchienkiewitzRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Anne StarkerRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Almut RichterRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Jens BaumertRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Judith FuchsRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Beate GaertnerRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Stephan MütersRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Johannes LemckeRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Jennifer AllenRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

SARS-CoV-2, the novel coronavirus, has posed major challenges in Germany in 2020. It is unclear whether the pandemic and containment measures will have an impact on the health of the population beyond the point of infection. The German Health Update (GEDA 2019/2020-EHIS) is a nationwide survey of the population aged 15 years and older (n=23,001) that was conducted between April 2019 and September 2020. The focus of the analysis was on indicators for which pandemic-related changes could be expected. Based on regression models, adjusted proportions and mean values were estimated as trends over time. Any differences in the values found for the time period of containment measures in spring 2020 and the reference period 2019 were statistically tested. Since the implementation of containment measures, both body weight and body mass index (BMI) have increased. The utilisation of general and specialist medical services decreased temporarily. The number of tobacco smokers during the observation period also decreased, yet without revealing a clear link to the pandemic situation. No differences were found in the general population for depressive symptoms and household assistance received and provided. During the period of containment measures, changes to the health situation beyond the occurrence of infections can be observed. However, a more differentiated explanation of these findings will require further analyses.

Indexed as

ASSISTANCE AT HOMEBMIHEALTH CARE UTILISATIONMENTAL HEALTHSARS-COV-2SMOKING

Identifiers

PMID35146276
PMCPMC8823006

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.