scholarly journals Factors associated with adherence to self-isolation and lockdown measures in the UK; a cross-sectional survey

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise E. Smith ◽  
Richard Amlôt ◽  
Helen Lambert ◽  
Isabel Oliver ◽  
Charlotte Robin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Temperature ◽  
Contact Tracing ◽  
List Type ◽  
Perceived Effectiveness ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Perceived Severity ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Preventative Measures ◽  
The Uk

AbstractObjectivesTo investigate factors associated with adherence to self-isolation and lockdown measures due to COVID-19 in the UK.DesignOnline cross-sectional survey.SettingData were collected between 6th and 7th May 2020.Participants2240 participants living in the UK aged 18 years or over. Participants were recruited from YouGov’s online research panel.Main outcome measuresHaving gone out in the last 24 hours in those who reported symptoms of COVID-19 in their household. Having gone out shopping for items other than groceries, toiletries or medicines (non-essentials), and total number of outings, in the last week in those who reported no symptoms of COVID-19 in their household.Results217 people (9.7%) reported that they or someone in their household had symptoms of COVID-19 (cough or high temperature / fever) in the last seven days. Of these people, 75.1% had left the home in the last 24 hours (defined as non-adherent). Factors associated with non-adherence were being male, less worried about COVID-19, and perceiving a smaller risk of catching COVID-19. Adherence was associated with having received help from someone outside your household. Results should be taken with caution as there was no evidence for associations when controlling for multiple analyses. Of people reporting no symptoms in the household, 24.5% had gone out shopping for non-essentials in the last week (defined as non-adherent). Factors associated with non-adherence and with a higher total number of outings in the last week included decreased perceived effectiveness of Government “lockdown” measures, decreased perceived severity of COVID-19, and decreased estimates of how many other people were following lockdown rules. Having received help was associated with better adherence.ConclusionsAdherence to self-isolation is poor. As we move into a new phase of contact tracing and self-isolation, it is essential that adherence is improved. Communications should aim to increase knowledge about actions to take when symptomatic or if you have been in contact with a possible COVID-19 case. They should also emphasise the risk of catching and spreading COVID-19 when out and about and the effectiveness of preventative measures. Using volunteer networks effectively to support people in isolation may promote adherence.WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THIS TOPICThe UK Government introduced “lockdown” measures, including physical or ‘social’ distancing, on 23rd March 2020 due to COVID-19.Government guidance states that people with symptoms of COVID-19 should not leave their home, also known as self-isolation.There is no research investigating adherence to self-isolation and lockdown measures, or factors associated with self-isolation or lockdown measures in the UK.WHAT THIS STUDY ADDSApproximately 10% of participants indicated that they had had symptoms of potential COVID-19 (cough and high temperature / fever) in the last week. Of these participants, 75% had left their home in the last 24 hours.Factors associated with non-adherence to self-isolation measures included being male, less worried about COVID-19, and perceiving a smaller risk of catching COVID-19. However, these results should be taken with caution as there was no longer evidence for associations when correcting for multiple analyses.25% of people who reported no symptoms in their household reported having gone out shopping for items other than groceries, toiletries or medicines in the last week; this was not allowed by Government guidelines in place at the time of data collection.Factors associated with non-adherence to lockdown measures, and increased number of outings in the last week, included decreased perceived effectiveness of Government “lockdown” measures, decreased perceived severity of COVID-19, and decreased estimates of how many other people were following lockdown rules.

scholarly journals Adherence to protective measures among health care workers in the UK; a cross-sectional study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise E. Smith ◽  
Danai Serfioti ◽  
Dale Weston ◽  
Neil Greenberg ◽  
G James Rubin
Keyword(s):  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
Close Contact ◽  
Disease Outbreaks ◽  
Perceived Effectiveness ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Protective Behaviours

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are frontline responders to emergency infectious disease outbreaks such as COVID-19. We investigated factors associated with adherence to personal protective behaviours in UK HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic using an online cross-sectional survey of 1035 healthcare professionals in the UK. Data were collected between 12th and 16th June 2020. Adjusted logistic regressions were used to separately investigate factors associated with adherence to use of personal protective equipment, maintaining good hand hygiene, and physical distancing from colleagues. Adherence to personal protective measures was suboptimal (PPE use: 80.0%, 95% CI [77.3 to 82.8], hand hygiene: 67.8%, 95% CI [64.6 to 71.0], coming into close contact with colleagues: 74.7%, 95% CI [71.7 to 77.7]). Adherence to PPE use was associated with having adequate PPE resources, receiving training during the pandemic, lower perceived fatalism from COVID-19, higher perceived social norms and higher perceived effectiveness of PPE. Adherence to physical distancing was associated with one's workplace being designed, using markings to facilitate physical distancing and receiving training during the pandemic. There were few associations with adherence to hand hygiene. Findings indicate HCWs should receive training on personal protective behaviours to decrease fatalism over contracting COVID-19 and increase perceived effectiveness of protective measures.

scholarly journals Perceived Treatment Satisfaction and Effectiveness Facilitators Among Patients With Chronic Health Conditions: A Self-Reported Survey

10.2196/13029 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e13029
Author(s):  
Kathryn Volpicelli Leonard ◽  
Courtney Robertson ◽  
Amrita Bhowmick ◽  
Leslie Beth Herbert
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Satisfaction ◽  
Survey Design ◽  
Strong Relationship ◽  
Chronic Health Conditions ◽  
Health Conditions ◽  
Perceived Effectiveness ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Chronic Health ◽  
Factors Associated

Background Approximately 50% of patients are nonadherent to prescribed medications. Patient perception regarding medication effectiveness has been linked to improved adherence. However, how patients perceive effectiveness is poorly understood. Objective The aim of this study was to elucidate factors associated with perceived treatment satisfaction and effectiveness among patients with chronic health conditions. Methods We conducted a descriptive study using a cross-sectional survey design. We administered a Web-based survey to participants with migraine, multiple sclerosis (MS), or rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Patients were recruited from established online communities of Health Union. Descriptive statistics, correlations, and comparison tests were used to examine outcomes. Results Data were collected from 1820 patients: 567 with migraine, 717 with MS, and 536 with RA. The majority of participants were female (1644/1820, 90.33%), >40 years old (1462/1820, 80.33%), and diagnosed >5 years ago (1189/1820, 65.33%). Treatment satisfaction and perceived medication effectiveness were highly correlated (r=0.90, P<.01). Overall, three temporal factors were positively correlated with satisfaction or perceived effectiveness: time on current medication (satisfaction rs=0.22, P<.01; effectiveness rs=0.25, P<.01), time since diagnosis (satisfaction rs=0.07, P<.01; effectiveness rs=0.09, P<.01), and time on treatment (effectiveness rs=0.08, P<.01). Conclusions Findings validated the strong relationship between treatment satisfaction and perceived effectiveness. Understanding the (1) positive relationship between time and treatment satisfaction and effectiveness and (2) factors associated with determining medication effectiveness can help clinicians better understand the mindset of patients regarding treatment. Clinicians may be better prepared to elicit patient beliefs, which influence medication adherence, for people diagnosed with chronic health conditions.

scholarly journals Perceived Treatment Satisfaction and Effectiveness Facilitators Among Patients With Chronic Health Conditions: A Self-Reported Survey (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Volpicelli Leonard ◽  
Courtney Robertson ◽  
Amrita Bhowmick ◽  
Leslie Beth Herbert
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Satisfaction ◽  
Survey Design ◽  
Strong Relationship ◽  
Chronic Health Conditions ◽  
Health Conditions ◽  
Perceived Effectiveness ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Chronic Health ◽  
Factors Associated

BACKGROUND Approximately 50% of patients are nonadherent to prescribed medications. Patient perception regarding medication effectiveness has been linked to improved adherence. However, how patients perceive effectiveness is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to elucidate factors associated with perceived treatment satisfaction and effectiveness among patients with chronic health conditions. METHODS We conducted a descriptive study using a cross-sectional survey design. We administered a Web-based survey to participants with migraine, multiple sclerosis (MS), or rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Patients were recruited from established online communities of Health Union. Descriptive statistics, correlations, and comparison tests were used to examine outcomes. RESULTS Data were collected from 1820 patients: 567 with migraine, 717 with MS, and 536 with RA. The majority of participants were female (1644/1820, 90.33%), &gt;40 years old (1462/1820, 80.33%), and diagnosed &gt;5 years ago (1189/1820, 65.33%). Treatment satisfaction and perceived medication effectiveness were highly correlated (<i>r</i>=0.90, <i>P</i>&lt;.01). Overall, three temporal factors were positively correlated with satisfaction or perceived effectiveness: time on current medication (satisfaction <i>r<sub>s</sub></i>=0.22, <i>P</i>&lt;.01; effectiveness <i>r</i><sub>s</sub>=0.25, <i>P</i>&lt;.01), time since diagnosis (satisfaction <i>r</i><sub>s</sub>=0.07, <i>P</i>&lt;.01; effectiveness <i>r</i><sub>s</sub>=0.09, <i>P</i>&lt;.01), and time on treatment (effectiveness <i>r</i><sub>s</sub>=0.08, <i>P</i>&lt;.01). CONCLUSIONS Findings validated the strong relationship between treatment satisfaction and perceived effectiveness. Understanding the (1) positive relationship between time and treatment satisfaction and effectiveness and (2) factors associated with determining medication effectiveness can help clinicians better understand the mindset of patients regarding treatment. Clinicians may be better prepared to elicit patient beliefs, which influence medication adherence, for people diagnosed with chronic health conditions.

scholarly journals Factors associated with adherence to self-isolation and lockdown measures in the UK: a cross-sectional survey

Public Health ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 187 ◽  
pp. 41-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
L.E. Smith ◽  
R. Amlȏt ◽  
H. Lambert ◽  
I. Oliver ◽  
C. Robin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
The Uk

scholarly journals Analysis of the factors affecting the adoption and compliance of the NHS COVID-19 mobile application: a national cross-sectional survey in England

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e053395
Author(s):  
Marcus Panchal ◽  
Sukhpreet Singh ◽  
Esther Rodriguez-Villegas
Keyword(s):  
Independent Study ◽  
Contact Tracing ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Privacy And Security ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Privacy Concerns ◽  
The Uk

ObjectivesTo conduct an independent study investigating how adults perceive the usability and functionality of the ‘National Health Service (NHS) COVID-19’ application (app). This study aims to highlight strengths and provide recommendations to improve adoption of future contact tracing developments.DesignA 60-item, anonymous online questionnaire, disseminated through social media outlets and email lists by a team from Imperial College London.SettingEngland.ParticipantsConvenience sample of 1036 responses, from participants aged 18 years and above, between December 2020 and January 2021.Primary outcome measuresEvaluate the compliance and public attitude towards the ‘NHS COVID-19’ app regarding its functionality and features. This included whether participants’ expectations were met, and their thoughts on the app privacy and security. Furthermore, to distinguish how usability, perception, and adoption differed with varying demographics and user values.ResultsFair compliance with the app features was identified, meeting expectations of the 62.1% of participants who stated they downloaded it after weighted analysis. However, participants finding the interface challenging were less likely to read information in the app and had a lesser understanding of its functionality. Furthermore, little understanding regarding the app’s functionality and privacy concerns was a possible reason why users did not download it. A readability analysis of the text revealed information within the app was conveyed at a level that may be too complex for up to 43% of the UK population. The study highlighted issues related to the potential of false positives caused by the design choices in the ‘Check-In’ feature.ConclusionThis study showed that while the ‘NHS COVID-19’ app was viewed positively, there remained issues regarding participants’ perceived knowledge of app functionality, potentially affecting compliance. Therefore, we recommended improvements regarding the delivery and presentation of the app’s information, and highlighted the potential need for the ability to check out of venues to reduce the number of false positive contacts.

scholarly journals Anger and confrontation during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national cross-sectional survey in the UK

2020 ◽  
pp. 014107682096206
Author(s):  
Louise E Smith ◽  
Bobby Duffy ◽  
Vivienne Moxham-Hall ◽  
Lucy Strang ◽  
Simon Wessely ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Perceived Risk ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Financial Difficulties ◽  
Younger Age ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Considerable Strain

Objectives To investigate factors associated with anger or confronting others due to COVID-19. Design Online cross-sectional survey. Setting Data were collected between 17 and 20 July 2020. Participants A total of 2237 participants living in the UK aged 16–75 years. Main outcome measures Reporting having had arguments, felt angry or fallen out with others because of COVID-19. Reporting having confronted or reported someone to the authorities, or that you had been confronted or reported to the authorities, for not wearing a face covering; not keeping your distance from others or being in too large a group; or alternatively following recommended measures too carefully. We used logistic regression analyses to identify factors associated with anger and confrontation. Results Most participants reported having had arguments, feeling angry or fallen out with others because of COVID-19 (56%, n = 1255). Twenty-two percent (n = 500) of participants reported that they had confronted or reported someone. Fourteen percent (n = 304) of participants reported that they had been confronted or reported by someone. Confronting someone, having been confronted and feeling angry or having had arguments were strongly associated with each other. Anger and confrontation were associated with younger age, greater likelihood of experiencing significant financial difficulties due to the pandemic, greater perceived risk of COVID-19 and getting information about COVID-19 from social media. Conclusions Measures put in place to prevent the spread of COVID-19 have caused considerable strain. Increased support, clear messaging on the rationale for easing restrictions and combatting misinformation on social media may all help decrease tension.

scholarly journals Using the Health Belief Model to design a questionnaire aimed at measuring people's perceptions regarding COVID-19 immunity certificates

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corina Elena Niculaescu ◽  
Isabel Karen Sassoon ◽  
Irma Cecilia Landa-Avila ◽  
Ozlem Colak ◽  
Gyuchan Thomas Jun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Belief Model ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Methodological Approach ◽  
Health Belief ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Perceived Severity ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Belief Model ◽  
The Health Belief Model

The present short communication paper describes the methodological approach of applying the Health Belief Model to the use COVID-19 immunity certificates in the UK. We designed an online survey including an adaptation of the following Health Belief Model constructs: perceived COVID-19 susceptibility, perceived COVID-19 severity, perceived benefits of using immunity certificates, perceived barriers from using immunity certificates, perceived severity of not using immunity certificates, and perceived vaccination views. The online cross-sectional survey conducted on the 3rd of August 2021 gathered responses from 534 participants aged 18 and older, representative of the UK population in terms of gender, age, and ethnicity.

scholarly journals The impact of believing you have had COVID-19 on behaviour: Cross-sectional survey

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise E. Smith ◽  
Abigail L. Mottershaw ◽  
Mark Egan ◽  
Jo Waller ◽  
Theresa M. Marteau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
List Type ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Behavioural Insights ◽  
Prevalence Estimates ◽  
Competing Interest ◽  
The Uk

ABSTRACTObjectivesTo investigate whether people who think they have had COVID-19 are less likely to engage in social distancing measures compared with those who think they have not had COVID-19.DesignOn-line cross-sectional survey.SettingData were collected between 20th and 22nd April.Participants6149 participants living in the UK aged 18 years or over.Main outcome measuresPerceived immunity to COVID-19, self-reported adherence to social distancing measures (going out for essential shopping, nonessential shopping, and meeting up with friends/family; total out-of-home activity), worry about COVID-19 and perceived risk of COVID-19 to oneself and people in the UK. Knowledge that cough and high temperature / fever are the main symptoms of COVID-19.ResultsIn this sample, 1493 people (24.3%) thought they had had COVID-19. Only 245 (4.0%) reported receiving a test result saying they had COVID-19. Reported test results were often incongruent with participants’ belief that they had had COVID-19. People who believed that they had had COVID-19 were: more likely to agree that they had some immunity to COVID-19; less likely to report adhering to social distancing measures; less worried about COVID-19; and less likely to know that cough and high temperature / fever are two of the most common symptoms of COVID-19.ConclusionsThe number of people in the UK who think they have already had COVID-19 is about twice the rate of current prevalence estimates. People who think that they have had COVID-19 may contribute to transmission of the virus through non-adherence to social distancing measures. Clear communications to this growing group are needed to explain why protective measures continue to be important and to encourage sustained adherence.COPYRIGHTThe Corresponding Author has the right to grant on behalf of all authors and does grant on behalf of all authors, an exclusive licence (or non exclusive for government employees) on a worldwide basis to the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd to permit this article (if accepted) to be published in BMJ editions and any other BMJPGL products and sublicences such use and exploit all subsidiary rights, as set out in our licence.FUNDING SOURCESJW is funded by a career development fellowship from Cancer Research UK (ref C7492/A17219). LS and GJR are supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response at King’s College London in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with the University of East Anglia and Newcastle University. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care, Public Health England. Data collection was funded via a block Government grant to the Behavioural Insights Team.COMPETING INTEREST STATEMENTAll authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: ALM and ME report grants from government partners to the Behavioural Insights Team, during the conduct of the study, JW reports grants from Cancer Research UK, during the conduct of the study; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years, no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.TRANSPARENCY DECLARATIONThe authors affirm that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported; that no important aspects of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as originally planned have been explained.AUTHOR CONTRIBUTION STATEMENTThe study was conceptualised by LS, GJR, JW and TMM. AM and ME completed data collection. LS analysed the data. All authors contributed to, and approved, the final manuscript.WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THIS TOPICDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, multiple countries, including the UK, have introduced “lockdown” measures.The World Health Organization has warned against using the results of antibody tests to issue “immunity passports” due to fears that those who test positive for antibodies may stop adhering to protective measures.There is no research investigating adherence to protective measures among those who think they have had COVID-19.WHAT THIS STUDY ADDSThis is the first study investigating behavioural differences between those who think they have had COVID-19 and those who do not.About twice as many people think they have had COVID-19 than prevalence estimates suggest.Results suggest that there may be a high degree of self-misdiagnosis within those who think they have had COVID-19.Those who think they have had COVID-19 were more likely to think they were immune to COVID-19, and less likely to adhere to social distancing measures.

scholarly journals Digital contact-tracing in France: uptake by COVID-19 risk factor and by exposure risk

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Guillon
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factor ◽  
Contact Tracing ◽  
Exposure Risk ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Conspiracy Theories ◽  
Full Sample ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
The Government ◽  
Governmental Communication

Abstract Background Few studies have investigated the influence of COVID-19 conspiracy theories on digital contact-tracing adoption and the differentiated uptake of digital contact-tracing by COVID-19 risk factor and by exposure risk. Methods Using a cross-sectional survey conducted in France in November 2020 (N = 1042), we investigate the factors associated with the use of the French ‘TousAntiCovid’ contact-tracing application. Our independent variables of interest include COVID-19 and ‘TousAntiCovid’ perceptions, trust in the government, time and risk preferences and the level of adherence to COVID-19 conspiracy theories. We conduct regression analyses by COVID-19 risk factor and exposure groups. Results Among the full sample, a negative association is found between the propensity to believe in COVID-19 conspiracy theories and the use of ‘TousAntiCovid’. French respondents at risk of severe COVID-19 form are more likely to use ‘TousAntiCovid’. No difference in uptake is found by exposure group. Group analyses indicate that the factors associated with the uptake of digital contact-tracing differ by COVID-19 risk factor and exposure risk. Conclusion Governmental communication to fight COVID-19 misinformation and to stress out the utility and data safety of ‘TousAntiCovid’ should be reinforced. Targeted communication campaigns should be conducted among low adoption groups and key groups in COVID-19 transmission.

scholarly journals COVID-19, smoking, and inequalities: a cross-sectional survey of adults in the UK

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah E. Jackson ◽  
Jamie Brown ◽  
Lion Shahab ◽  
Andrew Steptoe ◽  
Daisy Fancourt
Keyword(s):  
Socioeconomic Disparities ◽  
List Type ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Adherence To Guidelines ◽  
Current Smoking ◽  
Never Smokers ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Seriously Ill ◽  
Lower Adherence

AbstractObjectivesTo examine associations between smoking and COVID-19 relevant outcomes, taking into account the influence of inequalities and adjusting for potential confounding variables.DesignOnline cross-sectional survey.SettingUK.Participants53,002 men and women aged ≥18y.Main outcome measuresConfirmed and suspected COVID-19, worry about catching and becoming seriously ill from COVID-19, and adherence to protective behaviours. Socioeconomic position was defined according to highest level of education (post-16 qualifications: yes/no).ResultsCompared with never smokers (0.3% [95%CI 0.2-0.3%]), prevalence of confirmed COVID-19 was higher among current (0.6% [0.4-0.8%]) but not ex-smokers (0.2% [0.2-0.3%]). The associations were similar before (current: OR 2.14 [1.49-3.08]; ex-smokers: OR 0.73 [0.47-1.14]) and after (current: OR 1.79 [1.22-2.62]; ex-smokers: OR 0.85 [0.54-1.33]) adjustment for potential confounders. For current smokers, this was moderated by socioeconomic position, with higher rates relative to never smokers only seen in those without post-16 qualifications (OR 3.53 [2.04-6.10]). After including suspected cases, prevalence was higher among current smokers (11.2% [10.6-11.9%], OR 1.11 [1.03-1.20]) and ex-smokers (10.9% [10.4-11.5%], OR 1.07 [1.01-1.15]) than never smokers (10.2% [9.9-10.6%]), but remained higher only among ex-smokers after adjustment (OR 1.21 [1.13-1.29]). Current and ex-smokers had higher odds than never smokers of reporting significant stress about catching (current: OR 1.43 [1.35-1.52]; ex-smokers: OR 1.15 [1.09-1.22]) or becoming seriously ill from COVID-19 (current: OR 1.34 [1.27-1.43]; ex-smokers: OR 1.22 [1.16-1.28]). Adherence to recommendations to prevent the spread of COVID-19 was generally high (96.3% [96.1-96.4%]), but lower among current than never smokers (OR 0.70 [0.62-0.78]).ConclusionsWhen assessed by self-report in a population sample, current smoking was independently associated with confirmed COVID-19 infection. There were socioeconomic disparities, with the association only apparent among those without post-16 qualifications. Smokers reported lower adherence to guidelines despite being more worried than non-smokers about catching or becoming seriously ill from COVID-19.RegistrationThe analysis plan was pre-registered on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/pcs49/).What is already known on this topicFormer or current smoking can increase the risk of respiratory viral and bacterial infections and is associated with worse outcomes for those infected.However, data from several countries indicate that rates of current smoking are substantially lower among hospitalised COVID-19 patients than would be expected based on population-level smoking prevalence.What this study addsData from a large population-based sample of adults in the UK conflict with the hypothesis that smoking is protective against COVID-19 infection; rather, we found that current smoking was independently associated with increased odds of confirmed COVID-19 infection after adjusting for relevant confounders.Socioeconomic disparities were evident, with the association between smoking and confirmed COVID-19 only apparent among those without post-16 qualifications.Smokers reported lower adherence to guidelines despite being more worried than non-smokers about catching or becoming seriously ill from COVID-19.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document