Pandemic and Protective Health Behaviour: How do Brussels citizens view the Covid pandemic and Future pandemics? A Qualitative study.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: SARS-CoV-2 crisis is an opportunity to be better prepared for similar episodes. Considering them from a behaviour perspective might be relevant. Indeed, difficulties arose in „translating” measures into behaviours. The research is part of a prospective participative study funded by Innoviris that aims to elaborate scenarios of a new pandemic in Brussels, focusing on behaviours. This part tackles the following questions: (1) What were the factors blocking/encouraging protective behaviour (i.e., compliance with government rules, vaccination, or self-behaviour) during the Covid episode? (2) What roles should citizens, government or other bodies play in maintaining “a good health”? Material and Methods: A qualitative study, using semi-structured interviews, was carried out with Brussels citizens. Citizens’ groups were interviewed twice by a pair of researchers with different backgrounds: once about the Covid-19 crisis, and once about future pandemics. A thematic analysis was conducted, associating the Canadian model of health determinants and emerging categories. Results: Fifty-one citizens took part in seven „double” focus groups and three individual interviews between March and July 2022. Surprisingly, the visions of the future mainly consist of a transfer of the participants, with the same age, into the future. While citizens did stress the need for better preparedness by drawing up plans, they also emphasized the difficulty of being ready and the possible need to learn anew, or even integrate the concept of ‚risk’ inherent to life. Different views of what a good crisis management should be were highlighted: specific at-risk groups versus “for everyone” management; renewed confidence in a democratically elected government versus new forms of participation governance to ensure trust in the decision; partly overlapping with convince versus coerce, spheres of influence on health (taking care of oneself, one’s entourage, „personified” strangers, the common good or the environment) matching with “appropriated” health education for the first four. The relevance of these choices is sometimes modulated by the “pathogen”. Conclusions: The visions cover a broad spectrum which, alongside other sources (literature review, databases), provides interesting material for scenarios that depend on the choices made by both politicians and citizens, before and during the pandemic.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».