Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35809351›Full record

ArticlePublic health2022

Coping strategies during legally enforced quarantine and their association to psychological distress level: a cross-sectional study.

L Klee, A Fabrice, N Eisenburger, S Feddern, C Gabriel, A Kossow, J Niessen, N Schmidt, G A Wiesmüller, B Grüne and 2 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

L KleeCologne Health Department, Infektions- und Umwelthygiene, Neumarkt 15-21, 50667, Köln, Germany; Institute for Occupational Medicine and Social Medicine, University Hospital, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany. Electronic address: l.klee@t-online.de.
A FabriceCologne Health Department, Infektions- und Umwelthygiene, Neumarkt 15-21, 50667, Köln, Germany; Institute for Occupational Medicine and Social Medicine, University Hospital, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
N EisenburgerDepartment for Physical Activity in Public Health, Institute of Movement and Neurosciences, German Sport University Cologne, Am Sportpark Müngersdorf 6, 50933, Cologne, Germany.
S FeddernCologne Health Department, Infektions- und Umwelthygiene, Neumarkt 15-21, 50667, Köln, Germany.
C GabrielCologne Health Department, Infektions- und Umwelthygiene, Neumarkt 15-21, 50667, Köln, Germany.
A KossowCologne Health Department, Infektions- und Umwelthygiene, Neumarkt 15-21, 50667, Köln, Germany; Institute of Hygiene, University Hospital Muenster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, 48149, Münster, Germany.
J NiessenCologne Health Department, Infektions- und Umwelthygiene, Neumarkt 15-21, 50667, Köln, Germany.
N SchmidtDepartment for Physical Activity in Public Health, Institute of Movement and Neurosciences, German Sport University Cologne, Am Sportpark Müngersdorf 6, 50933, Cologne, Germany.
G A WiesmüllerCologne Health Department, Infektions- und Umwelthygiene, Neumarkt 15-21, 50667, Köln, Germany; Institute for Occupational Medicine and Social Medicine, University Hospital, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
B GrüneCologne Health Department, Infektions- und Umwelthygiene, Neumarkt 15-21, 50667, Köln, Germany.
C JoistenCologne Health Department, Infektions- und Umwelthygiene, Neumarkt 15-21, 50667, Köln, Germany; Department for Physical Activity in Public Health, Institute of Movement and Neurosciences, German Sport University Cologne, Am Sportpark Müngersdorf 6, 50933, Cologne, Germany.
CoCo-Fakt-Group
German Sport University Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe non-pharmacological measures to contain the COVID-19 pandemic may lead to considerable psychological distress. The aim of the CoCo-Fakt study was to investigate possible coping strategies and their effects on psychological distress during legally enforced quarantine of infected persons (IPs) and their close contacts (CPs). STUDY

designThis was a cross-sectional cohort study.

methodsFrom 12 December 2020 to 6 January 2021, all IPs and their CPs (n = 8232) registered by the public health department (Cologne, Germany) were surveyed online. Psychosocial distress and coping were measured using sum scores; free-text answers related to specific strategies were subsequently categorised.

resultsPsychosocial distress was higher in IPs than in CPs (P < .001). Although the mean coping score did not differ between both groups, it was influenced by the reason for quarantine (IP vs CP) besides gender, age, socio-economic status, living situation, psychological distress, resilience, physical activity and eating behaviour. This final regression model explained 25.9% of the variance. Most participants used active coping strategies, such as contact with the social environment, a positive attitude and hobbies.

conclusionsAlthough psychological distress was higher in IPs than in CPs during the quarantine period, the mean coping score did not differ. The strategies most frequently used by IPs and CPs were activating social networks, a healthy lifestyle and professional support systems, such as the health department helpline. Appropriate advice should be implemented to prevent long-term psychological consequences when supporting affected people.

Indexed as

COVID-19Psychological DistressAdaptation, PsychologicalCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPandemicsQuarantineStress, PsychologicalCoping skillsCOVID-19Health departmentLegally enforced quarantinePsychological distress

Identifiers

PMID35809351
PMCPMC9197782
OpenAlexW4282916340

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.