Factors Associated with COVID-19 Mitigation Behavior among US Adults
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
In early 2020, the CDC issued guidelines for personal COVID-19 mitigation behavior, such as mask-wearing, hand-washing, and social-distancing. We examine individual socio-behavioral factors that potentially predict mitigation compliance using public data. Our analysis finds that pandemic prompted strong mitigation behavior by adults, especially among females, non-whites, urban dwellers, and the psychological unwell. Other positive predictors were post-secondary education and higher income. Health symptoms and clinical risk factors did not predict increased mitigation practices, nor did age 65+ and proximity to infected persons. Our study findings are congruent with a report that pointed to a lack of increased pandemic mitigation practices in households with confirmed infections and health risks. We also point to lower levels of psychological resilience, lower socio-economic status, and non-urban location as potential explanatory factors for lack of mitigation behavior. Understanding what factors are associated with mitigation behavior will be important for policy makers in their efforts to curb the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.20.20157925: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable Successive models added independent variables including the anxiety-depression-stress scale and dichotomous variables for age 65 and older, individual characteristics (female gender, non-white race, post-secondary degree), household income greater than $50,000, urban location, and household member has COVID-19. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources We performed our analyses in SPSS version 26. SPSSsuggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.20.20157925: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable Successive models added independent variables including the anxiety-depression-stress scale and dichotomous variables for age 65 and older, individual characteristics (female gender, non-white race, post-secondary degree), household income greater than $50,000, urban location, and household member has COVID-19. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources We performed our analyses in SPSS version 26. SPSSsuggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.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.
-
