Changing trends of excess self-protective behavior, and association with belief in prevention myths during the COVID-19 epidemic in China: A panel study
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Abstract Objective This prospective observational study examined changing trends of excess self-protective behavior (EPB), and its association with perceived risk, severity and belief in prevention myths during the Chinese COVID-19 epidemic. Methods The study employed a longitudinal design. Participants were recruited for an online panel survey from chat groups on social media platforms. Descriptive statistics and the CATMOD program were used for data analysis. Findings Participants numbered 150 for the linkable baseline survey and 102 for the final survey. There were 5 waves of interviews. The prevalence of participants perceiving a personal risk of contracting COVID-19, and severe consequences of the disease, was 18.6% and 25.5%, respectively. Their prevalence had declined to 4.9% and 17.6%, respectively, by the last observation point. The 5 selected EPBs also manifested a decreasing trend. Belief in COVID-19 prevention myths trended upwards. Perceived risk was positively associated with each EPB, and perceived severity with disinfection of clothes and hoarding of products. Myth adherence was positively associated with disinfection of clothes and both hand washing and sanitization. Conclusion This study yielded new information about EPB among the public during the COVID-19 epidemic. Policy and health education modifications are essential for minimizing the adverse health effects of subscribing to prevention myths.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.18.20102434: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Consent: Upon consent, participants received an electronic questionnaire and instructions on how to proceed.
IRB: This study was approved by the ethics committee of Zhejiang University.Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Data analysis: All data were entered into a database using Microsoft Excel. Microsoft Excelsuggested: (Microsoft Excel, RRID:SCR_016137)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 L…SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.18.20102434: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement Consent: Upon consent, participants received an electronic questionnaire and instructions on how to proceed.
IRB: This study was approved by the ethics committee of Zhejiang University.Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources Data analysis: All data were entered into a database using Microsoft Excel. Microsoft Excelsuggested: (Microsoft Excel, RRID:SCR_016137)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:There are two study limitations. First, our sample size is small. Nevertheless, the sample originated from 24 provinces covering diverse regions and a wide array of demographic characteristics. On the other hand, sample attrition may introduce a “cluster” bias since many longitudinal studies likely over-represent some of these characteristics, such as high educational attainment. A more sophisticated design and representative sample would be necessary to resolve this problem. A secondly limitation in this study is the lack of a clear definition of EPB. We operationalized this concept through empirically identifying 5 constituents from a social norms perspective. Operationalization of the concept of belief in prevention myths may so be thought as an external criterion for measuring the validity of EPB [8,16,19]. Belief in prevention myths was significantly associated with 3 of the 5 types of EPB we utilized in this study. This finding enhances the validity of our measure of EPB. The concept and its operationalization requires further research This study provides new information on the relationship between belief in COVID-19 prevention myths and EPB among the Chinese public, in the context of perceived risk of contracting the disease and perception of the severity of its consequences during the epidemic. As the virus spreads relentlessly around the globe, our findings could guide similar research outside China in less and more developed countries. They harbor important implicat...
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.
-
