ArticlePloS one2022
Impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on lifestyle behaviors and their association with personality among adults in Qatar: A cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Prevalence and factors associated with regular fast-food consumption among the adult population in Qatar: cross-sectional analysis from Qatar Biobank cohort.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Resilience and Mental Health in the "Post-Pandemic Era" among University Students: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) resulted in lockdowns and social distancing measures enforced by governments around the world. This study aimed to identify changes in adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MD) and physical activity (PA) and associations with personality during lockdown. Using a cross-sectional design, a convenient sample of 543 adults in Qatar completed an online questionnaire consisting of validated tools to measure adherence to MD (MEDAS questionnaire, score ranges 0-13), PA (IPAQ, assessing light, moderate high intensity PA) and personality (BFI-10, categorizing individuals' personalities). The majority of the participants were female (89%), aged between 21 and 29 years (45%). The overall MD adherence decreased during lockdown (5.9 vs. 6.1, p < 0.001). There was an increase in olive oil (9% vs. 12%; p < 0.001), vegetables (54.3% vs. 58.7%; p = 0.005), legumes (11.8% vs. 15.3%; p = 0.007), sofrito (70.9% vs. 77.3%; p < 0.001) and fat (45.9% vs. 53.8%; p < 0.001) consumption and a decrease in fresh fruit (39.4% vs. 15.8%; p < 0.001) and fish/seafood (5.9% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.0035) consumption during lockdown. Met-min/week values of total PA (1330.5 vs. 1836.7), vigorous activity (711.5 vs. 867.4), moderate activity (208.3 vs. 301.3), and walking (410.7 vs. 668.0) all decreased during lockdown (p < 0.001, p = 0.010, p = 0.010 p < 0.001, respectively), while sitting increased (3837.3 vs. 2896.4 p < 0.001). The extraversion personality dimension had a higher MD adherence (p = 0.039) compared to agreeableness before lockdown. No changes in MEDAS scores were observed during lockdown in those with high levels of openness. Openness was positively associated with all PA (p = 0.027), including walking (p = 0.026), and negatively associated with sitting (p = 0.038) before lockdown, while participants with high scores for neuroticism were less likely to be sitting during lockdown (p = 0.042). The findings can be used to guide the development of appropriate personality-tailored lifestyle interventions.
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.