Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36844799›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2023

A Theoretical Qualitative Investigation Exploring Illness Perceptions and Decision-Making About COVID-19 in an Ethnically Diverse UK-Based Sample.

Stephanie McDonald, Laura E R Blackie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2023. 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

2 authors.

Stephanie McDonaldSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4857-7485
Laura E R BlackieSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9259-2063

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The primary aim of the present investigation was to explore perceptions, experiences, and decision-making relating to the COVID-19 illness as the UK entered into a phase of "living safely with COVID-19". A secondary aim was to explore how perceptions around the COVID-19 vaccine might vary by ethnicity. Participants and Methods: We adopted a qualitative approach with a diverse sample of UK-based participants. One-hundred-and-ninety-three individuals completed an online survey measuring perceptions towards COVID-19 with questions conceptualized through the Common-Sense Model of Self-Regulation. Results: Through deductive thematic analysis we identified one overarching theme in our data, "The transition back to normal routines", with four themes illustrating individuals' perceptions and experiences with COVID-19: 1) "Living with the uncertainty", 2) "Concern for others", 3) "The multiple consequences of COVID-19", and 4) "Sense of control", with the sub-theme of "Should I vaccinate, should I not vaccinate?". Conclusion: Findings from the present investigation provide key insights for understanding how people's perceptions of COVID-19 during this transition period might impact their decisions and behavior moving forward. Specifically, findings suggest some prevailing concerns around catching the virus, while no strong qualitative evidence for concerns over long COVID were identified in this sample, the responsibility felt by individuals towards taking their own precautionary measures in light of the easing of all national restrictions, and some potential differences in perceptions towards the vaccine between individuals from different ethnic backgrounds.

Indexed as

common-sense modelCOVID-19illness perceptions

Identifiers

PMID36844799
PMCPMC9948639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.