ArticlePublic health2022
Non-adherence to COVID-19 lockdown: who are they? A cross-sectional study in Portugal.
Article in Public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Individual risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection during Alpha variant in high-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- Impact of non-pharmacological interventions on the first wave of COVID-19 in Portugal 2020.Heliyon · 2025Article
- Azole Antifungal Consumption in Community Pharmacy Sales in Mainland Portugal: Trend Analysis from 2014 to 2023.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Adherence to COVID-19 measures and the associated factors: evidence from a two-wave longitudinal study in Singapore.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Examining the educational experiences of Behvarzes from the insufficient participation of some people in preventive measures against the COVID-19 pandemic: a lesson for the future.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- An extended SEIRDV compartmental model: case studies of the spread of COVID-19 and vaccination in Tunisia and South Africa.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- Uncovering COVID-19 infection determinants in Portugal: towards an evidence-based spatial susceptibility index to support epidemiological containment policies.International journal of health geographics · 2023Article
- Adherence of those at low risk of disease to public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe SARS-CoV-2 virus has spread worldwide, leading governments to implement mitigation measures. Understanding the reluctance to adhere to non-pharmacological interventions might help promote adherence to these measures. This study aimed to identify factors associated with non-adherence to the first lockdown in Portugal. STUDY
designCross-sectional study.
methodsThis study used data from a Portuguese community-based survey entitled 'COVID-19 Barometer: Social Opinion'. Data were collected on risk perception, health status and social experiences using a snowball sampling technique. The event of interest corresponded to participants who reported not staying home during the lockdown period, serving as a proxy for non-adherence to lockdown. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with non-adherence to the first lockdown.
resultsResponses from 133,601 individual questionnaires that were completed during the first week of the first lockdown in 2020 were analysed. A minority of participants (5.6%) reported non-adherence to lockdown (i.e. leaving home for reasons other than essential situations). Working in the workplace was the factor with the strongest association of non-adherence to the lockdown. Several other factors were also associated with non-adherence to the first lockdown; namely, being a man, being a student, having a low level of education, having a low income, living alone or with a high-infection-risk professional (e.g. doctor, nurse, pharmaceutical, health technician, firefighter, police officer, military, essential services worker), perceiving the risk of getting COVID-19 to be high, not having social support in case of infection, feeling agitated, sad or anxious every day, and considering the preventive measures to be unimportant or inadequate.
conclusionsNon-adherence to lockdown was associated with socio-economic, trust and perception factors. Future research should investigate the mechanisms underlying these associations to help identify the population groups who are most at risk of non-adherence.
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.