ArticleHealth affairs scholar2024
Learning from employer experiences with paid leave policy expansions during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Health affairs scholar, 2024. 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.
- Social policies as determinants of health: new evidence, ongoing challenges, and future pathways.Health affairs scholar · 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
Abstract
The United States does not have a federal policy offering employees paid leave. We study employer attitudes toward the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) federal emergency paid leave policies temporarily adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic to draw lessons for proposed permanent federal paid leave policies. We analyzed a 2021 survey of 300 San Francisco Bay Area employers to examine employers' experiences with paid sick leave (PSL) and paid family leave (PFL) policies during the COVID-19 pandemic, along with their attitudes regarding FFCRA paid leave. Most firms reported that it was not difficult to comply with or seek reimbursement for FFCRA leave. Nevertheless, most smaller firms did report difficulty in understanding policy details, and many reported being unaware of FFCRA paid leave availability. FFCRA paid leave was broadly popular among firms aware of it: 64% supported (9% opposed) the PSL provisions, and 52% supported (12% opposed) PFL. However, support for permanent extension dropped to just over 40%, despite this Bay Area sample having long familiarity with California's state paid leave policies. We conclude that federal pandemic paid leave offers a potential model that could be refined for future paid leave policies, but support is mixed.
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.