ArticlePsychopathology2024
How Do Adherence to COVID-19 Mitigation Measures and Its Predictors Change between 2020 and 2021? An Explorative Investigation in Eight European Union and Non-European Union Countries.
Article in Psychopathology, 2024. 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.
- Patterns of compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures in Armenia: results from a cross-sectional survey.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Understanding the dynamics and interplay of public support and adherence to five key mitigation behaviors over the course of the evolving COVID-19 pandemic.SSM - population health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAdherence to COVID-19 mitigation measures is an important vehicle that has contributed to the fight against the pandemic. The present study investigated potential changes of the level of adherence and its predictors between 2020 and 2021 in eight countries.
methodsAdherence to COVID-19 measures and its potential predictors (perception of usefulness of the measures, rating of the governmental COVID-19 communication, mental health variables, COVID-19 burden) were compared between representative population samples from European Union countries (France, Germany, Poland, Spain, Sweden) and non-European Union countries (Russia, UK, USA) assessed in 2020 (N = 7,658) and 2021 (N = 8,244).
resultsIn the overall sample, multiple analyses of variance revealed significantly higher levels of adherence to the measures, their perception as useful, positive mental health, and feelings of being well supported and well informed by governments in 2020 than in 2021. In contrast, feelings of being left alone and symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress were significantly higher in 2021 than in 2020. In France, Poland, Spain, and the UK, the adherence level was significantly higher in 2020 than in 2021. In European Union countries, ratings of governmental communication were less positive, and levels of mental health were lower in 2021 than in 2020. In non-European countries, an opposite result pattern was found.
conclusionThe current results indicate a decrease in adherence to the mitigation measures and factors that could foster it. Potential ways how governments and authorities could enhance the population's trust in COVID-19 mitigation measures are discussed.
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.