ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Navigating distrust and competing priorities during the COVID-19 pandemic: insights from Florida to strengthen cooperation.
Article in Frontiers in 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Stopping an infectious disease outbreak relies on a coordinated set of actions across public and private institutions and the wider public. However, cooperation with public health recommendations was notably hindered during the pandemic by widespread distrust in science and government and the notion that public health competed with other priorities. This study aims to examine the factors driving distrust and competing priorities in Florida, and potential pathways to overcome these issues. Methods: We conducted an additional analyses of qualitative data from our original study involving 25 semi-structured interviews with Florida stakeholders from government, academia, and the private sector. We employed a deductive-inductive approach to qualitative content analysis, using themes from the initial study as a guiding framework while allowing for the emergence of additional insights. Results: Interviews revealed that inadequate transparency and data availability, politicization, and poor communication were perceived as undermining public trust in science and decision-makers during COVID-19. The economy and individual rights were discussed as priorities competing against public health during the pandemic. Objectives for building trust and balancing priorities included five essential areas: transparency, representation, communication, education, and balance. Discussion: These challenges and objectives reflect the need for a reimagined approach to public health policy and practice-one that is rooted in trust and respect for diverse value systems. By leveraging core collective values that cut across political ideologies, we may mitigate polarization and perceived stigmatization to build a more culturally resonant public health practice.
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.