Prevalence of Face Mask Wearing in Northern Vermont in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Information on the prevalence of face mask use to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 is needed to model disease spread and to assess the effectiveness of policies that encourage face mask use. We sought to (1) estimate the prevalence of face mask use in northern Vermont and (2) assess the effect of age and sex on the likelihood of face mask use.
Methods
We monitored the entrances to public businesses and visually assessed age, sex, and face mask use. We collected 1004 observations during May 16-30, 2020. We calculated estimates of overall face mask use and odds ratios (ORs) for effects by age and sex.
Results
Of 1004 observations, 758 (75.5%) sampled people used a face mask. Our census-weighted estimate was 74.1%. A higher percentage of females than males wore face masks (83.8% vs 67.6%). The odds of face mask use were lower among males than among females (OR = 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37-0.73). Face mask use generally decreased with decreasing age: 91.4% among adults aged >60, 70.7% among adults aged 26-60, 74.8% among people aged 15-25, and 53.3% among people aged ≤14. The OR of an adult aged >60 wearing a face mask was 14.70 times higher, for young people aged 15-25 was 2.72 times higher, and for adults aged 26-60 was 2.99 times higher than for people aged ≤14. Females aged >60 had the highest percentage of face mask use (96.3%) and males aged ≤14 had the lowest (43.8%).
Conclusions
Educational efforts promoting the use of face masks should be targeted at males and younger age groups to limit the spread of SARS-CoV-2.
Article activity feed
-
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.23.20158980: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: The University of Vermont Research Protections Office granted our study an exemption from review by our institutional review board (CHRBSS (Behavioral): STUDY00001094). Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.
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 Barzook…
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.23.20158980: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: The University of Vermont Research Protections Office granted our study an exemption from review by our institutional review board (CHRBSS (Behavioral): STUDY00001094). Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.
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.
-