ArticleBMJ public health2025
Public perceptions of health and economic impacts during COVID-19: Findings from a repeated cross-national survey in the US, UK and Germany (2020-2022).
Article in BMJ public health, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected both health and economic domains at individual, national and global levels, sparking public debate about the severity of these impacts and the necessity of protective measures. This study compared the perceived severity of the pandemic's impacts across three dimensions: (a) domain (health vs economy), (b) target (self, own country, world) and (c) country (US, UK and Germany), over time (April 2020 to January 2022). Methods: We administered a serial cross-sectional online survey as part of the 'EUCLID' project. A total of 78 498 participants from the US, UK and Germany completed the questionnaire across 26 waves per country-78 survey waves in total. Data collection used quota-sampling to approximate national distributions by age group x gender. Results: Perceived health (M=3.41, SD=1.07) and economic (M=3.69, SD=1.09) impacts were rated as moderate to serious (scale: 1-5). Most participants showed individual optimism, perceiving the impact on themselves as less severe than on their country or the world (e.g., health: 55.6% self vs country, 66.0% self vs world; economy: 66.0% and 67.5%, respectively). Conversely, national optimism was less common (health: 33.5%, economy: 15.9%). These patterns remained largely consistent across countries and time points. Conclusion: Although the pandemic was fundamentally a health crisis, participants perceived its economic impact as more severe. Most individuals were personally optimistic but showed little national-level optimism. This indicates that they perceived their country to be affected at least as much as, or possibly more than, the global average. Notably, participants in three of the world's largest economies viewed their national economic situation as equally impacted as the global average-potentially weakening the perceived need for international support and solidarity.
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.