ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2023
Public awareness of and opinions on the use of mathematical transmission modelling to inform public health policy in the United Kingdom.
Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Public awareness of and opinions on the use of mathematical transmission modelling to inform public health policy in the United Kingdom.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mathematical modelling is used to inform public health policy, particularly so during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the public are key stakeholders, understanding the public perceptions of these tools is vital. To complement our previous study on the science-policy interface, novel survey data were collected via an online panel ('representative' sample) and social media ('non-probability' sample). Many questions were asked twice, in reference to the period 'prior to' (retrospectively) and 'during' the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents reported being increasingly aware of modelling in informing policy during the pandemic, with higher levels of awareness among social media respondents. Modelling informing policy was perceived as more reliable during the pandemic than in reference to the pre-pandemic period in both samples. Trust in government public health advice remained high within both samples but was lower during the pandemic in comparison with the (retrospective) pre-pandemic period. The decay in trust was greater among social media respondents. Many respondents explicitly made the distinction that their trust was reserved for 'scientists' and not 'politicians'. Almost all respondents believed governments have responsibility for communicating modelling to the public. These results provide a reminder of the skewed conclusions that could be drawn from non-representative samples.
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.