Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37360115›Full record

ArticleSocio-economic planning sciences2023

Fear itself.

Vincenzo Alfano, Salvatore Ercolano

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Socio-economic planning sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Vincenzo AlfanoDiSEGIM, University of Napoli Parthenope, Italy & Center for Economic Studies CES-ifo, Germany.
Salvatore ErcolanoDepartment of Mathematics, Computer Science and Economics, University of Basilicata, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Among non-pharmaceutical measures for fighting the COVID-19 pandemic, one of the most important is the implementation of lockdowns. The cost and effectiveness of this policy remains a much-debated topic in economics. In this study we investigate whether a 'fear effect' is at work in influencing the effectiveness of lockdowns. According to previous contributions on the topic, fear can increase protective habits, and for this reason we may imagine that a high number of COVID-19-caused deaths creates fear among the population, which may make people more likely to follow government prescriptions and observe lockdowns strictly. By means of a qualitative-quantitative analysis, we find that among the 46 countries that reported coronavirus-caused deaths before the implementation of a lockdown, the top quartile for per capita deaths has better results in terms of reducing new COVID-19 cases after a lockdown, compared to the worst quartile. This suggests that the number of reported deaths, as well as its communication to the population, are important determinants of the effectiveness of a lockdown.

Indexed as

CoronavirusCOVID-19Lockdown determinantsNumber of deathsPublic health complianceSpread of awareness

Identifiers

PMID37360115
PMCPMC10257332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.