Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37656890›Full record

Trial reportAnnals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine2023

Theory-based Trial to Promote Uptake and Sustained Use of Face Coverings During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Christopher J Armitage, Chris Keyworth, Nicola Gartland, Anna Coleman, David Fishwick, Sheena Johnson, Martie van Tongeren

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 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

7 authors.

Christopher J ArmitageManchester Centre for Health Psychology, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2365-1765
Chris KeyworthDepartment of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Nicola GartlandCentre for Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8074-3733
Anna ColemanCentre for Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
David FishwickCentre for Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5941-090X
Sheena JohnsonAlliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Martie van TongerenCentre for Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransmission of airborne viruses can be mitigated by wearing face coverings but evidence suggests that face covering declines with the removal of relevant legislation, partly due to low automatic motivation. PURPOSE: Test whether an intervention based on implementation intentions could support people's automatic motivation and promote face covering during the COVID-19 pandemic.

methodsRandomized controlled design. At baseline (May 20 to June 6, 2022), 7,835 UK adults reported how much time they spent wearing face coverings in work, public transport, and indoor leisure settings as well as their capabilities, opportunities, and motivations. 3,871 participants were randomized to form implementation intentions; 3,964 control participants completed questionnaires only. Measures were repeated 6 months postbaseline (November 1 to November 14, 2022). Data were analyzed using mixed measures ANOVAs and Bayes Factors to examine whether the observed data supported the experimental hypothesis.

resultsThe proportion of time spend wearing face coverings declined substantially across the 6-month study period, from 15.28% to 9.87% in work settings, 38.31% to 24.55% on public transport, and 9.58% to 7.85% in leisure settings. Bayes Factors indicated moderate relative evidence of no effect of implementation intentions on behavior in work and leisure settings, and inconclusive evidence of a positive effect on public transport.

conclusionsIn the context of declining COVID-19 rates and removal of legal mandates, implementation intentions were not effective in sustaining face covering. Further research is required to ensure that evidence-based interventions are prepared and deployed in the event of future pandemics.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultBayes TheoremHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesAdherenceCOM-BCOVID-19Face coveringFace maskInterventionSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID37656890
PMCPMC10578398

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.