Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36339221›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Predictors for adherent behavior in the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional telephone survey.

Andrea Siebenhofer, Clemens Könczöl, Klaus Jeitler, Daniela Schmid, Phillip Elliott, Alexander Avian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Heterogeneous risk tolerance, in-groups, and epidemic waves.Frontiers in applied mathematics and statistics · 2024
    Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Andrea SiebenhoferInstitute of General Practice and Evidence Based Health Services Research, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Clemens KönczölInstitute of Psychology, University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Klaus JeitlerInstitute of General Practice and Evidence Based Health Services Research, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.
Daniela SchmidAustrian Agency for Health and Food Safety Ltd. AGES, Vienna, Austria.
Phillip ElliottInstitute of General Practice, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Alexander AvianInstitute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Documentation, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, protective measures have been prescribed to prevent or slow down the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and protect the population. Individuals follow these measures to varying degrees. We aimed to identify factors influencing the extent to which protective measures are adhered to. Methods: A cross-sectional survey (telephone interviews) was undertaken between April and June 2021 to identify factors influencing the degree to which individuals adhere to protective measures. A representative sample of 1,003 people (age >16 years) in two Austrian states (Carinthia, Vorarlberg) was interviewed. The questionnaire was based on the Health Belief Model, but also included potential response-modifying factors. Predictors for adherent behavior were identified using multiple regression analysis. All predictors were standardized so that regression coefficients (β) could be compared. Results: Overall median adherence was 0.75 (IQR: 0.5-1.0). Based on a regression model, the following variables were identified as significant in raising adherence: higher age (β = 0.43, 95%CI: 0.33-0.54), social standards of acceptable behavior (β = 0.33, 95%CI: 0.27-0.40), subjective/individual assessment of an increased personal health risk (β = 0.12, 95%CI: 0.05-0.18), self-efficacy (β = 0.06, 95%CI: 0.02-0.10), female gender (β = 0.05, 95%CI: 0.01-0.08), and low corona fatigue (behavioral fatigue: β = -0.11, 95%CI: -0.18 to -0.03). The model showed that such aspects as personal trust in institutions, perceived difficulties in adopting health-promoting measures, and individual assessments of the risk of infection, had no significant influence. Conclusions: This study reveals that several factors significantly influence adherence to measures aimed at controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. To enhance adherence, the government, media, and other relevant stakeholders should take the findings into consideration when formulating policy. By developing social standards and promoting self-efficacy, individuals can influence the behavior of others and contribute toward coping with the pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdolescentCross-Sectional StudiesFatigueFemaleHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2TelephoneadherenceCOVID-19health belief modelpandemic fatigueperceived health riskrisk perceptionself-efficacysocial norms

Identifiers

PMID36339221
PMCPMC9632415

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.