Educational inequalities in risk perception, perceived effectiveness, trust, and preventive behaviour in the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany

Socioeconomic Differences in SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Vaccination in Germany: A Seroepidemiological Study After One Year of COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign

Objective: To evaluate the socioeconomic patterns of SARS-CoV-2 antigen contacts through infection, vaccination or both ("hybrid immunity") after 1 year of vaccination campaign. Methods: Data were derived from the German seroepidemiological Corona Monitoring Nationwide study (RKI-SOEP-2; n = 10,448; November 2021-February 2022). Combining serological and self-report data, we estimated adjusted prevalence ratios (PR) of SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 vaccination, basic immunization (at least two SARS-CoV-2 antigen contacts through vaccination and/or infection), and three antigen contacts by education and income. Results: Low-education groups had 1.35-times (95% CI 1.01-1.82) the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to high-education groups. COVID-19 vaccination (at least one dose) and basic immunization decreased with lower education and income. Low-education and low-income groups were less likely to have had at least three antigen contacts (PR low vs. high education: 0.74, 95% CI 0.65-0.84; PR low vs. high income: 0.66, 95% CI 0.57-0.77). Conclusion: The results suggest a lower level of protection against severe COVID-19 for individuals from low and medium socioeconomic groups. Pandemic response and vaccination campaigns should address the specific needs and barriers of these groups.

The association between the risk perceptions of COVID-19, trust in the government, political ideologies, and socio-demographic factors: A year-long cross-sectional study in South Korea

Risk perception research, targeting the general public, necessitates the study of the multi-faceted aspects of perceived risk through a holistic approach. This study aimed to investigate the association between the two dimensions of risk perception of COVID-19, i.e., risk as a feeling and analysis, trust in the current government, political ideologies, and socio-demographic factors in South Korea. This study used a year-long repeated cross-sectional design, in which a national sample (n = 23,018) participated in 23 consecutive telephone surveys from February 2020 to February 2021. Most factors differed in the magnitude and direction of their relationships with the two dimensions of risk perception. However, trust in the current government, alone, delineated an association in the same direction for both dimensions, i.e., those with a lower level of trust exhibited higher levels of cognitive and affective risk perception. Although these results did not change significantly during the one-year observation period, they are related to the political interpretation of risk. This study revealed that affective and cognitive risk perceptions addressed different dimensions of risk perception. These findings could help governments and health authorities better understand the nature and mechanisms of public risk perception when implementing countermeasures and policies in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and other public health emergencies.

Examining the Influence of Housing Conditions and Daily Greenspace Exposure on People’s Perceived COVID-19 Risk and Distress

Many people have worried about COVID-19 infection, job loss, income reduction, and family conflict during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some social groups may be particularly vulnerable due to their residential neighborhoods and daily activities. On the other hand, people’s daily exposure to greenspace offers promising pathways for reducing these worries associated with COVID-19. Using data collected with a questionnaire and a two-day activity diary from two typical neighborhoods in Hong Kong, this study examines how people’s housing conditions and daily greenspace exposure affect their perceived COVID-19 risk and distress (i.e., worries about job loss, income reduction, and family conflict) during the pandemic. First, the study compares people’s perceived COVID-19 risk and distress based on their residential neighborhoods. Further, it examines the associations between people’s perceived COVID-19 risk and distress with their housing conditions and daily greenspace exposure using ordinal logistic regression models. The results indicate that living in a high-risk neighborhood, being married, renting a residential unit, and living in a large household are significantly associated with a higher neighborhood-based perceived COVID-19 risk and distress during the pandemic. In addition, people also reported lower mobility-based perceived COVID-19 risk when compared to their neighborhood-based perceived COVID-19 risk, while they still have a high perceived COVID-19 risk in their occupational venues if they have to work in a high-risk district (e.g., Kowloon). Lastly, daily greenspace exposure (i.e., woodland) could reduce people’s perceived COVID-19 risk and distress. These results have important implications for the public health authority when formulating the measures during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Human Development Index Is Associated with COVID-19 Case Fatality Rate in Brazil: An Ecological Study

The Human Development Index measures a region's development and is a step for development debate beyond the traditional, economic perspective. It can also determine the success of a country's response to the COVID-19 pandemic, mainly affecting the case fatality rate among severe cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to associate the Human Development Index with the case fatality rate due to COVID-19 in each Brazilian state and the Federal District, taking into account comorbidities and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. We also evaluated the influence of the GINI index, number of intensive care unit beds, and occupied households in subnormal clusters on the case fatality rate. We performed an ecological study including two populations: COVID-19 individuals that did not require the mechanical ventilation protocol; and COVID-19 individuals under invasive mechanical ventilation. We performed a Pearson correlation test and a univariate linear regression analysis on the relationship between Human Development Index, Human Development Index-Education Level, Human Development Index-Life Expectancy, and Human Development Index-Gross National Income per capita and COVID-19 deaths. The same analyses were performed using the other markers. We grouped the patients with COVID-19 according to comorbidities and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. Alpha = 0.05. We included 848,501 COVID-19 individuals, out of which 153,710 needed invasive mechanical ventilation and 314,164 died, and 280,533 COVID-19 individuals without comorbidity, out of which 33,312 needed invasive mechanical ventilation and 73,723 died. We observed a low negative Pearson correlation between the Human Development Index and death and a moderate negative Pearson correlation between the Human Development Index and deaths of individuals on invasive mechanical ventilation, with or without comorbidity. The univariate linear analysis showed the case fatality rate depends on at least 20-40% of the Human Development Index. In Brazil, regions with a low Human Development Index demonstrated a higher case fatality rate due to COVID-19, mainly in individuals who needed invasive mechanical ventilation, than regions with a higher Human Development Index. Although other indexes studied, such as intensive care unit beds and GINI, were also associated with the COVID-19 case fatality rate, they were not as relevant as the Human Development Index. Brazil is a vast territory comprising cultural, social, and economic diversity, which mirrors the diversity of the Human Development Index. Brazil is a model nation for the study of the Human Development Index's influence on aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic, such as its impact on the case fatality rate.