Sharing positive behavior change made during COVID-19 lockdown: A mixed-methods coproduction study.

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.03.21252809: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: All materials and procedures were approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Strathclyde, Scotland, UK (Ref 61/05/05/2020 A Williams) and all participants provided informed consent.
    Consent: All materials and procedures were approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Strathclyde, Scotland, UK (Ref 61/05/05/2020 A Williams) and all participants provided informed consent.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.


    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    However, there are some weaknesses that need to be acknowledged. First, some groups, including men, those from lower education groups, and those from BAME communities are under-represented in our survey sample. Due to our purposive sampling approach, the fact that these groups are under-represented may tell us that they were less likely to have experienced positive change. In addition, we sought to overcome this limitation in the sampling approach for the qualitative component whereby we used a sampling matrix in order to recruit a balanced sample in relation to ethnic background, gender, educational attainment, income, and relationship status. A further limitation relates to the retrospective nature of our baseline self-report measures of behaviour which were taken at the same time as our lockdown measures. It is also important to note that the positive changes we report on here were experienced within the context of a national lockdown in Scotland, and the experiences of people living in other national lockdown contexts may have been different, particularly those countries that imposed stricter restrictions on time outdoors. The current study is the first in the world to take a multi-method, salutogenic approach to COVID-19, and to report on the rapid co-production of research-led resources intended to share insights into initiating positive change. We identified a number of key psychosocial processes that were key to the initiation of positive change, including re-framing,...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.