» Articles » PMID: 33657995

Public Perceptions, Individual Characteristics, and Preventive Behaviors for COVID-19 in Six Countries: a Cross-sectional Study

Overview
Date 2021 Mar 4
PMID 33657995
Citations 23
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Public perceptions and personal characteristics are heterogeneous between countries and subgroups, which may have different impacts on health-protective behaviors during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. To assess whether self-reported perceptions of COVID-19 and personal characteristics are associated with protective behaviors among general adults and to compare patterns in six different countries.

Methods: This cross-sectional study uses the secondary data collected through an online survey between 15 and 23 April 2020 across six countries (China, Italy, Japan, Korea, the UK, and the USA). A total of 5945 adults aged 18 years or older were eligible for our analysis. A logistic regression model was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) of three recommended behaviors (wearing a mask, handwashing, and avoiding social gatherings).

Results: In most countries except for China, the participants who perceived wearing a mask as being extremely effective to curtail the pandemic were more likely to wear a mask (OR, 95%CI: Italy: 4.14, 2.08-8.02; Japan: 3.59, 1.75-7.30; Korea: 7.89, 1.91-31.63: UK: 9.23, 5.14-17.31; USA: 4.81, 2.61-8.92). Those who perceived that handwashing was extremely effective had higher ORs of this preventive behavior (OR, 95%CI: Italy: 16.39, 3.56-70.18; Japan: 12.24, 4.03-37.35; Korea: 12.41, 2.02-76.39; UK: 18.04, 2.60-152.78; USA: 10.56, 2.21-44.32). The participants who perceived avoiding social gathering as being extremely effective to curtail the pandemic were more likely to take this type of preventive behavior (OR, 95%CI: China: 3.79, 1.28-10.23; Korea: 6.18, 1.77-20.60; UK: 4.45, 1.63-11.63; USA: 4.34, 1.84-9.95). The associations between personal characteristics, living environment, psychological status, and preventive behaviors varied across different countries. Individuals who changed their behavior because of recommendations from doctors/public health officials were more likely to take preventive behaviors in many countries.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that higher perceived effectiveness may be a common factor to encourage preventive behaviors in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. These results may provide a better understanding of the homogeneity and heterogeneity of factors related to preventive behaviors and improve public health policies in various countries and groups.

Citing Articles

Socioeconomic disparities in risk perceptions and precautionary actions against COVID-19 among the working age population aged 18-59 in Japan: a cross-sectional study.

Shimamoto K, Ibuka Y BMJ Public Health. 2025; 2(1):e000181.

PMID: 40018181 PMC: 11812742. DOI: 10.1136/bmjph-2023-000181.


Psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID-related handwashing behaviours: A systematic review.

Leonard R, OConnor S, Hanratty J, Keenan C, Chi Y, Ferguson J Campbell Syst Rev. 2024; 20(3):e1421.

PMID: 39010851 PMC: 11247476. DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1421.


Explaining differences in self-focused and other-involved public health preventive behaviors between the US and China: the role of self- construal and health locus of control.

Pan W, Liao W, Feng B, Li S Front Public Health. 2024; 12:1321506.

PMID: 38454993 PMC: 10917930. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1321506.


Association between area deprivation index and concerns to COVID-19: A multi-level analysis of individual and area factors.

Lee D, Jang J, Shin J SSM Popul Health. 2024; 25:101580.

PMID: 38283539 PMC: 10818255. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2023.101580.


Longitudinal relationship between quality of life and negative life events among adolescents during COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-lagged panel analysis.

Liu Y, Deng L, Zhang R, Pu Y, Yan J, Wang H Environ Health Prev Med. 2023; 28:67.

PMID: 37914349 PMC: 10636289. DOI: 10.1265/ehpm.22-00284.


References
1.
Feng S, Shen C, Xia N, Song W, Fan M, Cowling B . Rational use of face masks in the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet Respir Med. 2020; 8(5):434-436. PMC: 7118603. DOI: 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30134-X. View

2.
Laaksonen M, Prattala R, Helasoja V, Uutela A, Lahelma E . Income and health behaviours. Evidence from monitoring surveys among Finnish adults. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003; 57(9):711-7. PMC: 1732587. DOI: 10.1136/jech.57.9.711. View

3.
Wolf M, Serper M, Opsasnick L, OConor R, Curtis L, Yoshino Benavente J . Awareness, Attitudes, and Actions Related to COVID-19 Among Adults With Chronic Conditions at the Onset of the U.S. Outbreak: A Cross-sectional Survey. Ann Intern Med. 2020; 173(2):100-109. PMC: 7151355. DOI: 10.7326/M20-1239. View

4.
Lau J, Yang X, Tsui H, Kim J . Monitoring community responses to the SARS epidemic in Hong Kong: from day 10 to day 62. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003; 57(11):864-70. PMC: 1732318. DOI: 10.1136/jech.57.11.864. View

5.
Leung G, Quah S, Ho L, Ho S, Hedley A, Lee H . A tale of two cities: community psychobehavioral surveillance and related impact on outbreak control in Hong Kong and Singapore during the severe acute respiratory syndrome epidemic. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2005; 25(12):1033-41. DOI: 10.1086/502340. View