Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35967656›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

Risky business: A mixed methods study of decision-making regarding COVID-19 risk at a public university in the United States.

Shelley N Facente, Mariah De Zuzuarregui, Darren Frank, Sarah Gomez-Aladino, Ariel Muñoz, Sabrina Williamson, Emily Wang, Lauren Hunter, Laura Packel, Arthur Reingold and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

11 authors.

Shelley N FacenteDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Mariah De ZuzuarreguiDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Darren FrankDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Sarah Gomez-AladinoDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Ariel MuñozDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Sabrina WilliamsonDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Emily WangDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Lauren HunterDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Laura PackelDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Arthur ReingoldDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Maya PetersenDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Until vaccines became available in late 2020, our ability to prevent the spread of COVID-19 within countries depended largely on voluntary adherence to mitigation measures. However, individual decision-making regarding acceptable COVID-19 risk is complex. To better understand decision-making regarding COVID-19 risk, we conducted a qualitative substudy within a larger Berkeley COVID-19 Safe Campus Initiative (BCSCI) during the summer of 2020, and completed a mixed-methods analysis of factors influencing decision-making. Materials and methods: We interviewed 20 participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 10 who remained negative, and analyzed quantitative survey data from 3,324 BCSCI participants. The BCSCI study enrolled university-affiliated people living in the local area during summer of 2020, collected data on behaviors and attitudes toward COVID-19, and conducted SARS-CoV-2 testing at baseline and endline. Results: At baseline, 1362 students (57.5%) and 285 non-students (35.1%) said it had been somewhat or very difficult to comply with COVID-19-related mandates. Most-cited reasons were the need to go out for food/essentials, difficulty of being away from family/friends, and loneliness. Eight interviewees explicitly noted they made decisions partially because of others who may be at high risk. We did not find significant differences between the behaviors of students and non-students. Discussion: Despite prevailing attitudes about irresponsibility of college students during the COVID-19 pandemic, students in our study demonstrated a commitment to making rational choices about risk behavior, not unlike non-students around them. Decision-making was driven by perceived susceptibility to severe disease, need for social interaction, and concern about risk to others. A harm reduction public health approach may be beneficial.

Indexed as

COVID-19qualitativeriskrisk behaviorsstudents

Identifiers

PMID35967656
PMCPMC9372553

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.