ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Regional COVID-19 measures and effects on subjective well-being in Germany: observing trends over time with data from a large population survey.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Living during COVID-19: qualitative analysis of Experts by Experience UK University Associates' socioeconomic inequalities, including readiness recommendations.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: COVID-19 measures in Germany varied during the pandemic, and it seems natural that in addition to factors such as incidence, health system capacity, etc., these interventions and their social and economic consequences had an impact on the evolution of the population's well-being. Since the beginning of the pandemic, there has been a suspicion that the health burden would fall mainly on population groups with a lower socio-economic status, and that COVID-19, including the policy measures, could therefore contribute to increasing social inequalities in health. We examine several indicators of well-being over the course of the pandemic, analyze the effect of the stringency of the measures on subjective well-being and the extent to which certain social groups were particularly affected. Methods: Our analyses are based on 2020 and 2021 data from the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP), complemented by various regional indicators, including the COVID-19 measures. Data on subjective well-being during the pandemic phases were regressed on the phases, socio-demographic, economic and health-related indicators, stringency of measures and other regional indicators in multi-level models with the district as the top level. Up to Results: Overall, there was little decline in well-being up to the end of the observation period, and even some increase. When the effect of the stringency of the measures was taken into account, the changes were partially attenuated. However, stringency had little direct effect on well-being. People with disabilities and chronic pre-existing conditions were particularly affected by a reduction in well-being. In some cases, COVID-19 measures had slightly different effects in these groups. Conclusion: The effects of socio-economic indicators were not strong enough to suggest that lower social status is generally associated with a negative trend in well-being. According to our results, people with disabilities and chronic diseases, including severe obesity, should be given more attention in the future. A change in time-related outcomes when considering COVID-19 measures could indicate adjustment effects on well-being.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.