ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Urban safety and psychological distress during the pandemic: the results of a longitudinal study.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In the last decades, a large body of literature has explored the topic of perceived safety and fear of crime in urban environments. The effects of psychological factors on such feelings have been studied, but rarely using prospective studies, and never when these factors intercept a worldwide dramatic event like the pandemic. This research aimed to analyze the variations of the feelings of urban safety during the pandemic, the role of resiliency and the effect of psychological stressors such as anxiety, stress, and depression. Methods: During 2019 and 2022, before and after the pandemic, a face-to-face interview was administered to the same group of 195 participants. The PUSAS scale was used to measure unsafety, the ER89-R to assess for resiliency, the DASS-21 to collect data about the general distress (anxiety, stress and depression), and the CAS scale was used to evaluate the specific coronavirus anxiety. Structural equation models were applied to test a theoretical framework grounded on the relationships between these measures. Results: The research findings showed decreased feelings of unsafety across the pandemic, consistent with the literature. The positive effect of ego-resiliency was significant but only for its interaction with data collected before the pandemic, whilst stress and anxiety impacted unsafety in 2022 through different pathways. None of the symptoms of general distress influenced the concern about crime and sense of vulnerability, as the feelings of unsafety were found independent from the variations of the specific coronavirus anxiety. Discussion: Although the research findings did not confirm the impact of coronavirus, they presented some facets that disconfirm what the literature reported about the relationships between psychological distress and fear of crime. Implications about measurement issues 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.