ArticleCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique2026
"Just be honest with us": A qualitative analysis of Canadians' public trust during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique, 2026. 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis qualitative study examines how trust has changed during and after the pandemic among our study participants. It reveals how they made meaning of trust in federal and provincial governments, scientific research, and digital platforms, and how this meaning-making process changed and was challenged by a global public health crisis.
methodsWe applied a descriptive phenomenological approach to semi-structured interviews that were conducted between July and November of 2024. In total, 41 interviews were conducted. Interview transcripts were analyzed using the descriptive phenomenological approach to understand participants' lived experiences of the pandemic, followed by how these lived experiences contributed to how they made meaning of public trust, both during and after the height of the pandemic. This analysis resulted in themes by giving attention to expressive language and past experiences, and ultimately revealing the "essence" or distinct nature of these participants' experiences of the pandemic.
resultsResearch participants expressed polarized views on government trust, with provincial administrations often perceived as prioritizing economic or political interests over public health, while federal government were associated more with incompetence than with self-serving motives. Our participants experienced relatively stable trust in scientists, though they were concerned about transparency and profit-driven motives - particularly concerning the short time it took for vaccines to be developed. Social media was largely perceived as an unreliable source of information, yet it remained influential in shaping participants' perceptions, especially regarding vaccine hesitancy.
conclusionsWe found that participants' public trust during the pandemic in Canada was highly dynamic and subjective, and was greatly informed by histories, lived experiences, and preconceptions about various institutions, such as the government, public health officials, and scientists. Changes in trust experienced by participants were anchored in experts' ability to communicate reliable information. Participants further emphasized the need for transparent and consistent messaging, particularly from the Government of Canada, to rebuild lost trust and prepare for future public health crises.
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.