Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37651637›Full record

ArticleJournal of global health2023

In the COVID-19 pandemic, who did we trust? An eight-country cross-sectional study.

Alexa P Schluter, Mélissa Généreux, Elsa Landaverde, Philip J Schluter

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of global health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Alexa P SchluterMātai Tōrangapū | Department of Political Science and International Relations, Te Whare Wānanga o Waitaha | University of Canterbury, Ōtautahi | Christchurch, Aotearoa | New Zealand.
Mélissa GénéreuxDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Faculté de Médecine et des Sciences de la Santé, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Canada.
Elsa LandaverdeDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Faculté de Médecine et des Sciences de la Santé, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Canada.
Philip J SchluterTe Kaupeka Oranga | Faculty of Health, Te Whare Wānanga o Waitaha | University of Canterbury, Ōtautahi | Christchurch, Aotearoa | New Zealand.
Université de Sherbrooke · CAUniversity of Canterbury · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Trust is a key determinant of health, but has been undermined by the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated infodemic. Using data from eight countries, we aimed to epidemiologically describe levels of trust in health, governments, news media organisations, and experts, and measure the impact of political orientation and COVID-19 information sources on participant's levels of trust. Methods: We simultaneously conducted a stratified randomised online cross-sectional study across eight countries on adults aged ≥18 years between 6 and 18 November 2020. We employed crude and adjusted weighted regression analyses. Results: We included 9027 adults with a mean age of 47 years (range = 18-99), of whom 4667 (51.7%) were female. Trust in health experts ranked highest across all countries (mean (x̄) = 7.83; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 7.79-7.88), while trust in politicians ranked lowest (x̄ = 5.34; 95% CI = 5.28, 5.40). In adjusted analyses, political orientation and utilised information sources were significantly associated with trust. Individuals using higher levels of health information sources trusted health authorities more than those using lower levels (mean difference = 1.12; 95% CI = 1.02, 1.14). Similarly, individuals using higher levels of government information sources (mean difference = 1.55; 95% CI = 1.43, 1.64) and those using higher levels of new media information sources (mean difference = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.06, 1.28) had highest trust in governments/politicians and news media, respectively. However, there was little difference in trust in health, government, or news media between individuals using higher or lower levels of social media information sources. Conclusions: Trust is a key determinant of health, but has been politically fragile during this infodemic. High compliance with public health measures is key to combatting infectious diseases. In terms of people's trust, our findings suggest that politicians and governments worldwide should coordinate their response with health experts and authorities to maximise the success of public health measures.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInformation SourcesMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsTrustYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID37651637
PMCPMC10471152
OpenAlexW4386306631

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.