ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Confronting SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Patients' Experience in the First Pandemic Wave-Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to investigate the real-life experience of persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 in Slovenia in the first pandemic wave and how the buffering effect of social and informational support affected negative feelings. We used a self-administrated questionnaire. There were 1182 eligible notified cases with the response rate 64.9%. At least 62% of responders were able to follow the isolation rules, while 21.1% did not or could not organize their living separately from other household members. The main providers during the isolation period were close family members. The most prevalent emotion in our study was worry (70.3%) and fear (37.6%). Worry and fear during the illness were less probable for men than women, but more probable for older patients. Participants with strong emotional support had lower odds of being sad. Those who were exposed to a larger number of sources of information had higher odds of being worried. Those patients who used a higher number of more credible sources of information had higher odds of being afraid during illness. Pets did not play a special role in psychological well-being. The role of the media and public health communications should be explored further to achieve an improved response.
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.