Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
197,693 studies31 sourcesUpdated 19 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Frontiers in Public Health

Research attitudes through the COVID-19 pandemic

  • Sarah K. Schlund1
  • Dan K. Hoang2
  • Amy J. H. Kind3,4
  • Joshua D. Grill2,5,6,7
  • Daniel L. Gillen1,2
7 affiliations
  1. 1Department of Statistics, University of California, Irvine
  2. 2Irvine Institute for Memory Impairments and Neurological Disorders, University of California, Irvine
  3. 3Center for Health Disparities Research, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health
  4. 4Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health
  5. 5Department of Neurobiology and Behavior, University of California, Irvine
  6. 6Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, University of California, Irvine
  7. 7Institute for Clinical and Translational Science, University of California, Irvine
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

Introduction: Identifying the factors that influence attitudes toward biomedical research is essential for improving public engagement and participation. The COVID-19 pandemic offers a unique opportunity to assess how a public health crisis shapes perceptions of clinical research. We investigated whether attitudes toward biomedical research differed across phases of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: We analyzed data from 5,098 adults enrolled in the UC Irvine Consent-to-Contact (C2C) registry, an online voluntary recruitment registry in Southern California, between June 2016 and August 2025. Research attitudes were assessed with the validated 7-item Research Attitudes Questionnaire (RAQ) at enrollment and annually thereafter. Scores were analyzed continuously (7 -35) and dichotomously, with >28 defined a priori as high. COVID-19 periods were defined a priori as: P1 (before March 13, 2020—the U.S. national emergency declaration), P2 (March 13 to December 11, 2020—prior to COVID-19 vaccine approval), and P3 (after December 11, 2020—post-vaccine approval). Cross-sectional analyses included all participants; longitudinal analyses were limited to 1,388 participants who enrolled before March 2020 and had ≥3 assessments.

Results: Our sample of 5,098 adults was predominantly non-Hispanic White (70.2%), female (65.7%), highly educated, and over age 50 (66.7%). Participants enrolling during P2 had 60% higher odds of a high RAQ score (>28) compared with P1 (aOR 1.60; 95% CI: 1.07, 2.40; p =0.022). Longitudinally, the mean within-subject RAQ score was significantly higher during P2 versus P1 (Est. 0.37; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.66; p =0.011), and the odds of a high RAQ score were 24% higher in P2 (aOR 1.24; 95% CI: 1.09, 1.39; p <0.001) compared to P1.

Discussion: These findings suggest that awareness of urgent medical issues, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, may affect attitudes toward research.

Related

  1. Attitudes, perceptions, behaviours, and concerns of patients listed for kidney transplantation during the COVID-19 pandemic
    Nimet Aktas, Alparslan Ersoy, Aysegul Oruc +1
    PLOS OnePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Epidemiology & public healthPhysiologyPLOS
  2. Community mobilization and policy demands in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: A transnational dialogic non-extractive research approach
    Ruth Iguiñiz-Romero, Pamella Liz Nunes Pereira, Christiane Falge +11
    PLOS Global Public HealthPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textNeuroscienceEpidemiology & public healthPLOSEurope PMC
  3. Evolving trends in workplace accidents in Malaysia: death and disability patterns across sectors during pre-COVID, pandemic, and post-COVID periods
    Sashvin Raj Batumalai, Vijayan Manickam Achari, Mogana Darshini Ganggayah +1
    BMC Public HealthPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Epidemiology & public healthCrossref
  4. Delayed Seasonality but Consistent Age Burden: RSV Epidemiology Pre–, During, and Post–COVID-19 Pandemic on the Kenyan Coast (2008–2026)
    Open forum infectious diseasesPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  5. Author Gender Inequality in Medical Imaging Journals and the COVID-19 Pandemic
    Elske Quak, Gilles Girault, Marie Aude Thenint +3
    RadiologyPeer-reviewedLicence not stated39 citedMedical imaging & radiologyHAL

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{schlund2026research,
  title = {{Research attitudes through the COVID-19 pandemic}},
  author = {Sarah K. Schlund and Dan K. Hoang and Amy J. H. Kind and Joshua D. Grill and Daniel L. Gillen},
  journal = {Frontiers in Public Health},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3389/fpubh.2026.1899763},
  url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1899763/full},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Research attitudes through the COVID-19 pandemic
AU  - Sarah K. Schlund
AU  - Dan K. Hoang
AU  - Amy J. H. Kind
AU  - Joshua D. Grill
AU  - Daniel L. Gillen
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/15
JO  - Frontiers in Public Health
DO  - 10.3389/fpubh.2026.1899763
UR  - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1899763/full
AB  - Introduction: Identifying the factors that influence attitudes toward biomedical research is essential for improving public engagement and participation. The COVID-19 pandemic offers a unique opportunity to assess how a public health crisis shapes perceptions of clinical research. We investigated whether attitudes toward biomedical research differed across phases of the COVID-19 pandemic.  Methods: We analyzed data from 5,098 adults enrolled in the UC Irvine Consent-to-Contact (C2C) registry, an online voluntary recruitment registry in Southern California, between June 2016 and August 2025. Research attitudes were assessed with the validated 7-item Research Attitudes Questionnaire (RAQ) at enrollment and annually thereafter. Scores were analyzed continuously (7 -35) and dichotomously, with >28 defined a priori as high. COVID-19 periods were defined a priori as: P1 (before March 13, 2020—the U.S. national emergency declaration), P2 (March 13 to December 11, 2020—prior to COVID-19 vaccine approval), and P3 (after December 11, 2020—post-vaccine approval). Cross-sectional analyses included all participants; longitudinal analyses were limited to 1,388 participants who enrolled before March 2020 and had ≥3 assessments.  Results: Our sample of 5,098 adults was predominantly non-Hispanic White (70.2%), female (65.7%), highly educated, and over age 50 (66.7%). Participants enrolling during P2 had 60% higher odds of a high RAQ score (>28) compared with P1 (aOR 1.60; 95% CI: 1.07, 2.40; p =0.022). Longitudinally, the mean within-subject RAQ score was significantly higher during P2 versus P1 (Est. 0.37; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.66; p =0.011), and the odds of a high RAQ score were 24% higher in P2 (aOR 1.24; 95% CI: 1.09, 1.39; p <0.001) compared to P1.  Discussion: These findings suggest that awareness of urgent medical issues, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, may affect attitudes toward research.
SN  - 2296-2565
ER  -