Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 27, Number 4—April 2021

Dynamic Public Perceptions of the Coronavirus Disease Crisis, the Netherlands, 2020

Marion de Vries, Liesbeth Claassen, Margreet J.M. te Wierik, Susan van den Hof, Anne E.M. Brabers, Judith D. de Jong, Danielle R.M. Timmermans1, and Aura Timen1
Author affiliations: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands (M. de Vries, L. Claassen, M.J.M. te Wierik, S. van den Hof, A. Timen); Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, the Netherlands (A.E.M. Brabers, J.D. de Jong); Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands (J.D. de Jong); Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands (D.R.M. Timmermans); Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam (A. Timen)

Main Article

Table 6

Differences in self-reported protective behavior based on sex, age, region of residence, health condition, and healthcare employment determined in assessment of dynamic public perceptions of the coronavirus disease crisis, the Netherlands, 2020*

Independent variable Self-reported protective measures taken,
odds ratio (95% CI) Self-reported adherence to guidelines,
odds ratio (95% CI)
Female vs. male
1.8 (1.6 to 2.1)
1.2 (1.0 to 1.5)
Age, y
>70 vs. <50 1.2 (1.0 to 1.5) 1.7 (1.3 to 2.2)
50–69 vs. <50
1.1 (0.9 to 1.4)
1.2 (0.9 to 1.6)
Southern vs. northern 1.1 (0.9 to 1.4) 0.9 (0.6 to 1.2)
Western vs. northern 0.9 (0.7 to 1.1) 1.0 (0.8 to 1.3)
Eastern vs. northern
1.1 (0.9 to 1.3)
1.2 (0.9 to 1.7)
Health condition vs. no health condition
1.3 (1.1 to 1.4)
1.0 (0.8 to 1.2)
Work in healthcare vs. not in healthcare 0.9 (0.7 to 1.2) 0.8 (0.6 to 1.0)

*Actual survey questions shown in Table 1. Boldface indicates 95% CIs that do not include 1.0.

Main Article

1These authors contributed equally to this article.

Page created: January 25, 2021
Page updated: March 22, 2021
Page reviewed: March 22, 2021
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.