ArticleThe International journal of health planning and management2026
On the Association of Community Belonging With Over Time Changes in Self-Rated Health and Mental Health Since the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Article in The International journal of health planning and management, 2026. 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.
- On the Association of Community Belonging With Over Time Changes in Self-Rated Health and Mental Health Since the COVID-19 Pandemic.The International journal of health planning and management · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluates how community belonging influences over time changes in self-rated health (SRH) and self-rated mental health (SRMH) after the COVID-19 pandemic using a large Canadian population survey (N = 9013, response rate 25%). The study uses descriptive analysis and a set of ordered logistic regressions. The results suggest that 1 year after the height of the pandemic, most of the respondents consider their SRH and SRMH as excellent, good, or fair, with 89.1% for SRH and 85.7% for SRMH. By contrast, only 10.8% and 14.3% of respondents reported poor and very poor SRH and SRMH. Furthermore, about 25%-29% of respondents reported that their SRH and SRMH became better over time, and only 11%-12% reported worsening SRH and SRMH, while the rest reported no changes. Regression results suggest that higher levels of community belonging are associated with higher SRH and SRHM. For instance, reporting strong community belonging is associated with higher SRH (OR = 4.734, 95% CI [4.004, 5.598]) and SRMH (OR = 5.778, 95% CI [4.879, 6.842]). Moreover, they suggest that a higher level of community belonging is associated with perceived improvement over time in SRH and SRMH. For example, reporting strong community belonging is associated with more improvement over time in SRH (OR = 2.105, 95% CI [1.757, 2.523]) and SRHM (OR = 1.927, 95% CI [1.607, 2.312]). The study concluded by discussing theoretical, policy, and methodological implications of these findings.
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.