ArticleBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2023
[Consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic: Are there risk groups for reduced subjective well-being after the first lockdown?]
Article in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2023. 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.
- Regional COVID-19 measures and effects on subjective well-being in Germany: observing trends over time with data from a large population survey.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- [Subjective health in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic-a comparison of socio-demographic groups and pandemic-related risk factors].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMeasures to contain COVID-19 have created burdens that have widened health inequalities. We examine the extent to which risk groups for reduced subjective well-being can be identified after the 2020 lockdown. In doing so, we also consider possible interactions of different social grouping characteristics as part of an intersectional approach.
methodSocio-Economic Panel (SOEP) data from the years 2018-2020 were analyzed. A total of 16,000 cases with information on changes in well-being (SF-12 scores and individual indicators) were included in the analyses. We use the classification method "random forests" to identify groups with different trends in well-being. For the interpretation of the content, we also present results from a regression model with social and health aspects as predictors.
resultsDemographic and social characteristics explained only a very small part of the changes in subjective well-being (R DISCUSSION: The currently available data do not allow a clear identification of risk groups for losses in well-being in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Health status before the onset of the pandemic appears to be more important for short-term changes in subjective well-being than socio-demographic and socio-economic categorization characteristics.
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.