ArticlePloS one2025
A cross-sectional study of COVID-19 testing and disclosure hesitancy: The role of responsibility attribution in South Korea.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Efficient and effective public health surveillance during epidemics relies heavily on active and voluntary public participation, including timely COVID-19 testing and disclosure of results to contacts. This study aimed to investigate predictors of COVID-19 testing and disclosure hesitancy, with a focus on the role of responsibility attribution during the early stages of the Omicron epidemic in South Korea. A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 1,000 participants between February 25 and March 2, 2022. Chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression models were used for analysis. Findings showed that 41.5% of participants expressed hesitancy toward COVID-19 testing, and 59.4% expressed hesitancy toward disclosing test results to contacts. Greater attribution of responsibility to individuals was significantly associated with increased hesitancy toward testing (OR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.63-0.90, p < 0.001) and disclosure (OR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.56-0.80, p < 0.001). Conversely, testing acceptance was positively associated with trust in the government (OR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.07-1.55, p = 0.01), social support (OR = 2.18, 95% CI = 1.73-2.73, p < 0.001), and full vaccination status (OR = 1.98, 95% CI = 1.11-3.50, p = 0.02). Disclosure acceptance was similarly associated with trust in the government (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.05-1.51, p = 0.01) and social support (OR = 2.23, 95% CI = 1.77-2.81, p < 0.001). These results underscore the central role of responsibility attribution in shaping public participation in surveillance efforts. Mitigating excessive individual attribution and fostering a balanced perspective that integrates both personal and contextual factors may enhance public engagement. While attribution remains a key psychological predictor, building trust in government and strengthening social support systems also emerge as important strategies for promoting active and voluntary participation in public health surveillance.
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.