Individual differences in COVID-19 mitigation behaviors: The roles of age, gender, psychological state, and financial status

Reaching Vulnerable and Underserved Communities in the US Southwest Through a Successful COVID-19 Community-Academic Partnership

This article describes a community-academic partnership designed and implemented to address disparities in accessing COVID-19 testing in Arizona, from November 2020 through March 2023. An equitable community-academic partnership, the involvement of local leaders, and the engagement of community health workers were critical for the success of the intervention. More than 5000 previously underserved patients were tested and received COVID-19 related services. A profile comparison with a matched group documents the success of the program in reaching the targeted population. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(S5):S388-S391. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307684).

Personality dimensions, resilience, and depression during COVID-19 pandemic: A one-year longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has brought to light a significant surge in depression across diverse populations. While a considerable body of research has linked this upswing to lockdowns and restrictive measures, it is crucial to recognize that lockdowns alone cannot fully elucidate the observed increase in mental health disorders, given the vast array of individual psychological responses.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to test e whether personality dimensions (Extroversion, Neuroticism, and Psychoticism) and resilience play a role in shielding individuals from developing depression during the COVID-19 pandemic, as observed in a sample of Brazilian adults.

METHODS

This research employed a one-year longitudinal naturalistic study involving the general population. It utilized a web-based questionnaire administered in three waves during the COVID-19 pandemic: April 2020, September 2020, and May 2021. The research protocol contains the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 - PHQ-9, the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale - CD-RISC, and the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised-Abbreviated - EPQR-A.

RESULTS

Our study encompassed 455 participants, of which 35.6 % met the criteria for depression in the first wave, and this figure decreased to 18.5 % in the second and third waves (p = 0.001). Resilience levels in the non-depressed group (consistently exhibited higher means across all three waves when compared to the depressed group (first wave: x¯= 27.98; second wave: x¯= 37.26; third wave: x¯= 36.67; p = 0.001). Furthermore, resilience exhibited an overall protective effect against depression in all waves (PR = 0.93, p = 0.000). Neuroticism and Psychoticism emerged as predictors of depression across all waves (PR = 1.346; p = 0.0001 and PR = 1.157; p = 0.030), while the Extroversion dimension showed no significant effect.

CONCLUSION

The decline in depression rates during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic was influenced by levels of resilience, which acted as a protective factor against the development of depressive symptoms. Notably, Neuroticism and Psychoticism predicted the risk of developing depressive symptoms. Implications for practical intervention in future crisis scenarios suggest the need for public health policy programs featuring personalized interventions that prioritize enhancing resilience.

A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process2. In April 2020, an influential paper3 proposed 19 policy recommendations ('claims') detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms 'physical distancing' and 'social distancing'. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization.

Reelin' In The Years: Age and Selective Restriction of Liberty in the COVID-19 Pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, focused protection strategies including selective lockdowns of the elderly were proposed as alternatives to general lockdowns. These selective restrictions would consist of isolating only those most at risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and subsequent use of healthcare resources. The proposal seems to have troubling implications, including the permissibility of selective lockdown on the basis of characteristics such as ethnicity, sex, disability, or BMI. Like age, these factors also correlated with an increased risk of hospitalization from COVID-19. In this paper, we argue that age has meaningful differences as a morally relevant characteristic in the justification for selective restrictions of liberty. Thus, it might justify selective freedom restrictions in a way in which other factors might not. We offer four moral domains that separate age from other proxies: empiricism, operationality, discrimination, and disparity.

Trajectories of quality of life and mental health during the Covid-19 lockdown and six months after in Italy. A longitudinal exploration

Aim

Covid-19 pandemic and its relative containment measures have affected populations' quality of life and psychological well-being worldwide. The fear related to the pandemic and the imposed containment measures has acted as a trigger causing a global increase in negative mental health states. Thus, we aimed to explore the relationship between fear of covid-19 and mental health via QoL (the first and the second lockdown in Italy, 2020).

Subject and methods

Through a quantitative cross-lagged path model research design, the study investigates people's fear of Covid-19, quality of life, and negative mental states in a population of 444 Italian adults (Mean=40.7; Standard Deviation=16.9; 80% women), in the period between the first and the second waves of the pandemic.

Results

Results show that participants' Covid-19 fear decreased between waves, contributing to a decrease in negative mental states (stress, anxiety and depression), thus improving the perceived quality of life. Furthermore, quality of life emerged as able to buffer the impact of fear of Covid on people's psychological distress in short and medium terms, confirming its central role in regulating mental distress.

Conclusion

The study suggests important guidelines for developing interventions to support the populations' well-being and mental health.

Political Partisanship and Trust in Government Predict Popular Support for COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates for Various Professions and Demographic Groups: A Research Note

Due to the slow rate of COVID-19 vaccine uptake and the spread of the highly contagious Omicron variant, governments are considering mandating COVID-19 vaccination for specific professions and demographic groups. This study evaluates popular attitudes toward such policies. We fielded a survey of 535 registered voters in South Dakota to examine popular attitudes towards vaccine mandates for five groups-children 12 and older, K-12 teachers, medical staff, nursing homes staff, and police personnel. We estimated a series of logistic regression models and presented predicted probabilities to find the primary determinants of these attitudes. Results revealed that political partisanship and trust in government are strong predictors of support for vaccine mandates across all models. Should government and public health officials wish to increase the proportion of people vaccinated for COVID-19, they must recognize the limitations of current public health campaigns, and reshape their efforts in congruence with scientific findings.

Distress Signals: Age Differences in Psychological Distress before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Psychological distress reached historically high levels in 2020, but why, and why were there pronounced age differences? We address these questions using a relatively novel, multipronged approach, part narrative review and part new data analyses. We first updated previous analyses of national surveys that showed distress was increasing in the US and Australia through 2017 and then re-analyzed data from the UK, comparing periods with and without lockdowns. We also analyzed the effects of age and personality on distress in the US during the pandemic. Results showed distress levels and age differences in distress were still increasing through 2019 in the US, UK, and Australia. The effects of lockdowns in 2020 revealed the roles of social deprivation and fear of infection. Finally, age-related differences in emotional stability accounted for the observed age differences in distress. These findings reveal the limitations of analyses comparing pre-pandemic and pandemic periods without accounting for ongoing trends. They also suggest that differences in personality traits such as emotional stability modulate responses to stressors. This could explain age and individual differences in both increases and decreases in distress in response to changes in the level of stressors such as those occurring prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 health practices and attitudes in the United States: the role of trust in healthcare

Aim

Individual-level COVID-19 vaccination and related preventive health behaviors is politically polarized in the United States. We examined whether the current polarization in COVID-19 health behavior may be explained by differences in trust in healthcare, locus of control, or insurance status.

Subject and methods

Our sample includes 553 US adults recruited on Amazon MTurk. We assessed odds ratios of currently vaccinated, or willing to be vaccinated if unvaccinated using logistic regression. We assessed count of routine changes and positive attitudes toward facemasks using negative binomial regression.

Results

Trust in healthcare was found to be an important determinant of all COVID-19 related health behavior measured in our study. Further, the effects on COVID-related attitudes/behavior from trust in healthcare are large in magnitude. For instance, our results suggest that individuals at or above the upper quartile of trust in healthcare are around 20 percentage points more likely to be vaccinated than those at or below the lower quartile. Further, we find that the effect of trust in healthcare on adherence or endorsement of COVID-19 mitigation strategies is distinct from political affiliation, i.e., the effect on COVID-19 related health behavior is independent of the polarization across political party lines. Locus of control was not associated with adherence/attitude toward COVID-19 mitigation strategies. Insurance status was only found to be positively associated with odds of being vaccinated.

Conclusion

Our study highlights the importance of increasing trust in healthcare as a means to protect public health in the wake of major public health crises.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10389-022-01737-9.

Change in covid-19 risk over time following vaccination with CoronaVac: test negative case-control study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the change in odds of covid-19 over time following primary series completion of the inactivated whole virus vaccine CoronaVac (Sinovac Biotech) in São Paulo State, Brazil.

DESIGN

Test negative case-control study.

SETTING

Community testing for covid-19 in São Paulo State, Brazil.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged ≥18 years who were residents of São Paulo state, had received two doses of CoronaVac, did not have a laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection before vaccination, and underwent reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2 from 17 January to 14 December 2021. Cases were matched to test negative controls by age (in 5 year bands), municipality of residence, healthcare worker status, and epidemiological week of RT-PCR test.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

RT-PCR confirmed symptomatic covid-19 and associated hospital admissions and deaths. Conditional logistic regression was adjusted for sex, number of covid-19 associated comorbidities, race, and previous acute respiratory illness.

RESULTS

From 202 741 eligible people, 52 170 cases with symptomatic covid-19 and 69 115 test negative controls with covid-19 symptoms were formed into 43 257 matched sets. Adjusted odds ratios of symptomatic covid-19 increased with time since completion of the vaccination series. The increase in odds was greater in younger people and among healthcare workers, although sensitivity analyses suggested that this was in part due to bias. In addition, the adjusted odds ratios of covid-19 related hospital admission or death significantly increased with time compared with the odds 14-41 days after series completion: from 1.25 (95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.51) at 70-97 days up to 1.94 (1.41 to 2.67) from 182 days onwards.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant increases in the risk of moderate and severe covid-19 outcomes occurred three months after primary vaccination with CoronaVac among people aged 65 and older. These findings provide supportive evidence for the implementation of vaccine boosters in these populations who received this inactivated vaccine. Studies of waning should include analyses designed to uncover common biases.