ArticlePeerJ2024
COVID-19 related messaging, beliefs, information sources, and mitigation behaviors in Virginia: a cross-sectional survey in the summer of 2020.
Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Conflicting messages and misleading information related to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic (SARS-CoV-2) have hindered mitigation efforts. It is important that trust in evidence-based public health information be maintained to effectively continue pandemic mitigation strategies. Officials, researchers, and the public can benefit from exploring how people receive information they believe and trust, and how their beliefs influence their behaviors. Methods: To gain insight and inform effective evidence-based public health messaging, we distributed an anonymous online cross-sectional survey from May to July, 2020 to Virginia residents, 18 years of age or older. Participants were surveyed about their perceptions of COVID-19, risk mitigation behaviors, messages and events they felt influenced their beliefs and behaviors, and where they obtained information that they trust. The survey also collected socio-demographic information, including gender, age, race, ethnicity, level of education, income, employment status, occupation, changes in employment due to the pandemic, political affiliation, sexual orientation, and zip code. Analyses included specific focus on the most effective behavioral measures: wearing a face mask and distancing in public. Results: Among 3,488 respondents, systematic differences were observed in information sources that people trust, events that impacted beliefs and behaviors, and how behaviors changed by socio-demographics, political identity, and geography within Virginia. Characteristics significantly associated ( Conclusions: This study describes how information sources considered trustworthy vary across different populations and identities, and how these differentially correspond to beliefs and behaviors. This study can assist decision makers and the public to improve and effectively target public health messaging related to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and future public health challenges in Virginia and similar jurisdictions.
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.