ArticleBMC public health2022
Perceived importance of pandemic interventions for attending cultural events - findings from Germany.
Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Airborne infections related to virus aerosol contamination at indoor cultural venues: Recommendations on how to minimize.Public health challenges · 2023Review
- The Agile Co-production and Evaluation framework for developing public health interventions, messaging and guidance.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring the first waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, many cultural and sporting events were held without spectators or had to be cancelled. Therefore, several containment strategies to provide requirements for safe events were developed and tested. Nonetheless, every second (50.7%) is afraid of becoming infected on an event. We therefore investigated which hygiene and containment measures are perceived to be important from the visitor's point of view and thus might increase subjective sense of safety.
methodsThis online study was carried out in November 2020. A total of 1,004 persons, who regularly attended events before the pandemic, took part in the study. The importance of different hygiene and containment measures was evaluated using a 5-point Likert-scale (1 "unimportant" to 5 "extremely important"). Potential statistical differences in socio-demographical aspects (age, gender, net disposable income for leisure activities) and attendance on events were tested with analyses of variance.
resultsParticipants perceived the use of disinfectant (M = 4.10) as the most important element of containment strategies, followed by transparent information on the hygiene strategy (M = 4.00), reduced occupancy (M = 3.98), and optimized ventilation (M = 3.97). Body temperature measurement at the entrance (M = 3.27), a negative SARS-CoV-2 test (M = 3.11), completion of a health questionnaire (M = 3.05), and abandoning breaks and catering (M = 2.98) were considered as less important. Analyses of group differences in socio-demographical aspects found abandoning breaks and catering to be more important to men than to women. This strategy is also more important to people aged 66 and above than to younger age groups (e.g., age 20-40). For women, the use of disinfectant is considerably more important. No other significant differences exist.
conclusionCombining relevant measures appears to be important to provide a safe containment strategy. Measures aimed at positively influencing people's sense of safety do not fully correspond to researched knowledge of effectiveness. There are also target group-specific differences in the rating of measures, which should be considered while preparing containment strategies. To describe the dynamic development of changes in subjective rating of containment strategies, continuing research is needed.
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.