Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37403166›Full record

ArticleArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2023

Data collection in pandemic times: the case of the Belgian COVID-19 health surveys.

Elise Braekman, Rana Charafeddine, Finaba Berete, Helena Bruggeman, Sabine Drieskens, Lydia Gisle, Lize Hermans, Johan Van der Heyden, Stefaan Demarest

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elise BraekmanDepartment Epidemiology and public health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium. elise.braekman@sciensano.be.
Rana CharafeddineDepartment Epidemiology and public health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
Finaba BereteDepartment Epidemiology and public health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
Helena BruggemanDepartment Epidemiology and public health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
Sabine DrieskensDepartment Epidemiology and public health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
Lydia GisleDepartment Epidemiology and public health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
Lize HermansDepartment Epidemiology and public health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
Johan Van der HeydenDepartment Epidemiology and public health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
Stefaan DemarestDepartment Epidemiology and public health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium.
Sciensano (Belgium) · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurvey data were needed to assess the mental and social health, health related behaviors and compliance with preventive measures of the population during the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, the pandemic challenged classical survey methods. Time and budgetary constraints at the beginning of the pandemic led to ad hoc recruitment of participants and easily manageable data collection modes. This paper describes the methodological choices and results in terms of participation for the COVID-19 health surveys conducted in Belgium.

methodsThe COVID-19 health surveys refer to a series of ten non-probability web surveys organized between April 2020 and March 2022. The applied recruitment strategies were diverse including, amongst others, a launch through the website and the social media of the organizing research institute. In addition, the survey links were shared in articles published in the national press and participants were requested to share the surveys in their network. Furthermore, participants were asked consent to be re-contacted for next survey editions using e-mail invitations.

resultsThese mixed approaches allowed to reach a substantial number of participants per edition ranging from 49339 in survey 1 to 13882 in survey 10. In addition, a longitudinal component was created; a large share of the same individuals were followed up over time; 12599 participants completed at least 5 surveys. There were, however, sex, age, educational level and regional differences in participation. Post-stratification weighting on socio-demographic factors was applied to at least partly take this into account.

conclusionThe COVID-19 health surveys allowed rapid data collection after the onset of the pandemic. Data from these non-probability web surveys had their limitations in terms of representativeness due to self-selection but were an important information source as there were few alternatives. Moreover, by following-up the same individuals over time it was possible to study the effect of the different crisis phases on, amongst others, the mental health. It is important to draw lessons from these experiences: initiatives in order to create a survey infrastructure better equipped for future crises are needed.

Indexed as

BelgiumCoronavirusCOVID-19General populationLongitudinal data collectionNon-probability surveysParticipationWeb surveys

Identifiers

PMID37403166
PMCPMC10318627
OpenAlexW4383069330

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.