Conspiracy Theories: A Public Health Concern and How to Address It

Patient and public understanding of antimicrobial resistance: a systematic review and meta-ethnography

Objectives

To further develop an understanding of laypeople's (adult patients and public) beliefs and attitudes toward antimicrobial resistance (AMR) by developing a conceptual model derived from identifying and synthesizing primary qualitative research.

Methods

A systematic search of 12 electronic databases, including CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed and Web of Science to identify qualitative primary studies exploring patient and public understanding of AMR published between 2012 and 2022. Included studies were quality appraised and synthesized using Noblit and Hare's meta-ethnographic approach and reported using eMERGe guidance.

Results

Thirteen papers reporting 12 qualitative studies were synthesized. Studies reported data from 466 participants aged 18-90 years. Five themes were identified from these original studies: the responsible patient; when words become meaningless; patient-prescriber relationship; past experience drives antibiotic use; and reframing public perception. These themes supported the development of a conceptual model that illustrates the tension between two different assumptions, that is, how can antibiotics be used for the collective good whilst balancing the immediate needs of individual patients.

Conclusions

Findings suggest that AMR is a distinct ethical issue and should not be viewed purely as a prescribing problem. The meta-ethnography-generated conceptual model illustrates many factors affecting the public's perception of AMR. These include laypeople's own knowledge, beliefs and attitudes around antibiotic use, the relationship with the healthcare provider and the wider context, including the overwhelming influence of the media and public health campaigns. Future research is needed to explore effective health messaging strategies to increase laypeople's baseline awareness of AMR as a public threat.

[Balancing drug regulation and health democracy: The role of patient and healthcare professional advisors at the ANSM]

The French National Agency for Health Products (ANSM) is a regulatory and public health agency. Its regulatory, health policing and public health protection activities require a perfect fit with the field and the various people involved in the use of health products. Since 2019, the ANSM has adapted its organisation, procedures and processes to encourage and improve interaction with its stakeholders, as part of its policy of openness towards civil society. To accompany this ambitious change and to support its staff, the Agency has recruited advisors corresponding to the main users of health products: prescribers (doctor's hospital and outpatient), pharmacists and patients. Working as a group or individually, they provide a "lived" user perspective on health products at each stage of the evaluation process. They may be involved in the assessment of dossiers, signals or applications received by the Agency, in the internal validation of reports or in discussions with stakeholders. They are particularly involved when the analysis requires expertise that goes beyond the technical, scientific or regulatory aspects. They may also work with ANSM staff to explain certain processes and difficulties in the field. Advisors help to ensure that regulatory and/or scientific expertise is clear and consistent with user experience. In addition to their scientific and therapeutic aspects, medicines are also economic, social and political issues. Their regulation is therefore particularly affected by the need for health democracy. This requires the active participation of health professionals, patients and, more broadly, civil society in the decision-making process. Civil society is a space occupied by a wide range of actors who exert pressure from different ideological positions to influence the regulation of health products. In this context, taking into account a plurality of viewpoints in the regulation of health products is necessary and complex, but its operation can be facilitated by the collective efforts of the actors and the adaptation of organisations, such as the integration of advisors.

Vaccine conspiracy association with higher COVID-19 vaccination side effects and negative attitude towards booster COVID-19, influenza and monkeypox vaccines: A pilot study in Saudi Universities

Conspiracies regarding vaccines are widely prevalent, with negative consequences on health-seeking behaviors. The current study aimed to investigate the possible association between the embrace of vaccine conspiracies and the attitude to booster COVID-19, seasonal influenza, and monkeypox (mpox) vaccinations as well as the perceived side effects following COVID-19 vaccination. The target population involved academic staff and university students in health colleges in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed in January 2023 to collect data on participants' demographics, self-reported side effects following each dose, willingness to get booster COVID-19, seasonal influenza, and mpox vaccinations, as well as an evaluation of vaccine conspiracies and attitude to mandatory vaccination. Among the 273 participants, the willingness to receive yearly booster COVID-19 vaccination was observed among 26.0% of the participants, while it was 46.9% and 34.1% for seasonal influenza and mpox vaccinations, respectively. Multinomial logistic regression analyses demonstrated a significant correlation between endorsing vaccine conspiracies and higher frequency of self-reported side effects following uptake of the second and third doses of COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccine conspiracies were also correlated with attitude toward booster COVID-19, influenza, mpox, and mandatory vaccination. The findings of this pilot study highlighted the potential adverse impact of the preexisting notions and negative attitudes toward vaccines, which could have contributed to heightened perceived side effects following COVID-19 vaccination. The study also highlighted the ongoing divisions concerning mandatory vaccination policies, emphasizing the need for cautious implementation of this strategy as a last resort for public health benefit.

Misinformation, Trust, and Use of Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19

Importance

The COVID-19 pandemic has been notable for the widespread dissemination of misinformation regarding the virus and appropriate treatment.

Objective

To quantify the prevalence of non-evidence-based treatment for COVID-19 in the US and the association between such treatment and endorsement of misinformation as well as lack of trust in physicians and scientists.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This single-wave, population-based, nonprobability internet survey study was conducted between December 22, 2022, and January 16, 2023, in US residents 18 years or older who reported prior COVID-19 infection.

Main Outcome and Measure

Self-reported use of ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine, endorsing false statements related to COVID-19 vaccination, self-reported trust in various institutions, conspiratorial thinking measured by the American Conspiracy Thinking Scale, and news sources.

Results

A total of 13 438 individuals (mean [SD] age, 42.7 [16.1] years; 9150 [68.1%] female and 4288 [31.9%] male) who reported prior COVID-19 infection were included in this study. In this cohort, 799 (5.9%) reported prior use of hydroxychloroquine (527 [3.9%]) or ivermectin (440 [3.3%]). In regression models including sociodemographic features as well as political affiliation, those who endorsed at least 1 item of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation were more likely to receive non-evidence-based medication (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.86; 95% CI, 2.28-3.58). Those reporting trust in physicians and hospitals (adjusted OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56-0.98) and in scientists (adjusted OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.51-0.79) were less likely to receive non-evidence-based medication. Respondents reporting trust in social media (adjusted OR, 2.39; 95% CI, 2.00-2.87) and in Donald Trump (adjusted OR, 2.97; 95% CI, 2.34-3.78) were more likely to have taken non-evidence-based medication. Individuals with greater scores on the American Conspiracy Thinking Scale were more likely to have received non-evidence-based medications (unadjusted OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06-1.11; adjusted OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.07-1.13).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this survey study of US adults, endorsement of misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic, lack of trust in physicians or scientists, conspiracy-mindedness, and the nature of news sources were associated with receiving non-evidence-based treatment for COVID-19. These results suggest that the potential harms of misinformation may extend to the use of ineffective and potentially toxic treatments in addition to avoidance of health-promoting behaviors.

From Conspiracy to Hesitancy: The Longitudinal Impact of COVID-19 Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Perceived Vaccine Effectiveness

The embrace of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine conspiracies has been linked to vaccine hesitancy. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between COVID-19 vaccine conspiracy theories and perceived vaccine effectiveness. The study utilized a longitudinal follow-up study in which adults in Chile completed surveys in December 2020 (T1) and May 2021 (T2). The psychometric properties of the five-item instrument on conspiracy theories for the COVID-19 vaccine were evaluated using data from T1 (n = 578). A confirmatory one-factor structure with suitable indicators of reliability was found. The longitudinal analysis (n = 292) revealed that conspiracy theories about the COVID-19 vaccine in T1 were associated with lower beliefs in its effectiveness in T2. However, no significant association was found between beliefs in effectiveness in T1 and conspiracy theories in T2. The study suggests that beliefs in conspiracy theories may temporally precede beliefs in vaccine effectiveness for COVID-19. The results have implications for strategies to address vaccine conspiracy beliefs and their implementation at the public policy level.

Conspiratorial Attitude of the General Public in Jordan towards Emerging Virus Infections: A Cross-Sectional Study Amid the 2022 Monkeypox Outbreak

Conspiracy theories accompany the emergence of infectious diseases and the 2022 multi-country monkeypox (MPX) outbreak is no exception. It is possible that the adoption of conspiracy beliefs negatively impacts health behavior. We aimed to assess the prevalence of conspiratorial attitudes towards emerging virus infections (EVIs) and the response measures aiming to control these infections among the general public in Jordan. In addition, we assessed MPX knowledge and the belief in the role of men who have sex with men (MSM) in virus spread. The online survey data were collected during 24 May 2022-28 June 2022. The survey instrument was based on previously published scales designed to measure MPX knowledge and EVI conspiracies. A total of 611 respondents formed the final study sample, with a mean age of 44 years and a majority of females (n = 433, 70.9%). On a scale ranging from -10 to +10, the median MPX knowledge score in the study sample was +3 (interquartile range: +1 to +5). Educational level was a determinant of MPX knowledge in multivariate analysis. More than 50% of the participants agreed at least to some extent with 9 out of 12 of the EVI conspiracy items. Multivariate analysis showed that embracing conspiracy beliefs about EVIs was associated with being female, and agreeing with or having no opinion regarding the role of MSM in MPX spread. The current study revealed the high prevalence of belief in conspiracies surrounding EVIs, and its accompanying intervention measures, among the general public in Jordan. In addition, a lower level of MPX knowledge was observed compared to previous studies among university students and health professionals in the country. We recommend evaluating the impact of the widely prevalent conspiracy beliefs on health aspects in future studies. This aim is particularly relevant in the Middle Eastern countries where embracing specific conspiracy ideas is a common occurrence.

Monkeypox Knowledge and Confidence in Diagnosis and Management with Evaluation of Emerging Virus Infection Conspiracies among Health Professionals in Kuwait

As the 2022 human monkeypox (HMPX) multi-country outbreak is spreading, the response of healthcare workers (HCWs) is central to mitigation efforts. The current study aimed to evaluate HMPX knowledge and confidence in diagnosis and management among HCWs in Kuwait. We used a self-administered questionnaire distributed in July–August 2022 through a snowball sampling approach. The survey items evaluated HMPX knowledge, confidence in diagnosis and management of the disease, and the belief in conspiracies regarding emerging virus infections (EVIs). The sample size was 896 HCWs: nurses (n = 485, 54.1%), pharmacists (n = 154, 17.2%), physicians (n = 108, 12.1%), medical technicians/allied health professionals (MT/AHP, n = 96, 10.7%), and dentists (n = 53, 5.9%). An overall low level of HMPX knowledge was noticed for items assessing virus transmission and non-cutaneous symptoms of the disease, with higher knowledge among physicians. Approximately one-fifth of the study sample agreed with the false notion that HMPX is exclusive to male homosexuals (n = 183, 20.4%), which was associated with lower knowledge with higher frequency among MT/AHP compared to nurses, physicians, and pharmacists. Confidence levels were low: confidence in diagnosis based on diagnostic tests (n = 449, 50.1%), confidence in the ability to manage the HMPX (n = 426, 47.5%), and confidence in the ability to diagnose HMPX clinically (n = 289, 32.3%). Higher confidence levels were found among nurses and participants with postgraduate degrees. Higher embrace of conspiracy beliefs regarding EVIs was noticed among participants with lower knowledge, and among those who agreed or were neutral/had no opinion regarding the false idea of HMPX exclusive occurrence among male homosexuals, while lower levels of belief in conspiracies were noticed among physicians, dentists, and pharmacists compared to MT/AHP. Variable levels of HMPX knowledge were observed in this study per item, with low level of knowledge regarding virus transmission. Differences in knowledge and confidence levels in diagnosis and management of HMPX should be considered in education and training aiming to prepare for outbreak response. The relatively high prevalence of embracing conspiratorial beliefs regarding EVIs is worrisome and needs proper interventions. The attitude towards male homosexuals’ role in monkeypox spread should be evaluated in future studies considering the possibility of stigma and discrimination in this most-at-risk group.

University students' mental health amidst the COVID-19 pandemic in Georgia

AIMS

We aimed to identify the prevalence of anxiety, depression, and suicidality and identify relevant risk and protecting factors among university students during the COVID-19 pandemic in Georgia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted an anonymous online survey (n = 984, convenience sample by approaching all universities in Georgia and some student organizations) using valid instruments (e.g., STAI to assess anxiety, CES-D for depression, and RASS to assess suicidality). We calculated frequencies and prevalence and applied regression analysis and Chi-square tests to identify risk and protecting factors.

FINDINGS

Respondents' mental health had been significantly affected (with a high prevalence of depression (46.7%) and anxiety (79%)) during the pandemic (which coincided with political turmoil and caused an economic crisis) in Georgia. Some of the critical factors affecting mental health were: female sex (p = .000), bad general health condition (anxiety p = .001, depression p = .004), finances (anxiety and depression p < .001), reduced physical activity (anxiety p < .001, depression p = .014), and a history of self-harming (suicidality p < .001). Less family conflicts (anxiety and depression p < .05), absence of nightmares (anxiety and depression p < .001), moderate or low fears of COVID-19 (anxiety p < .001), and lower substance use (anxiety p = .023) were among the potentially protective factors. International students coped better, despite vulnerability. Medical students had a lower risk of depression.

CONCLUSIONS

In the complex socioeconomic context, mental health of students in Georgia suffered a lot during the COVID-19 pandemic, requiring thorough planning and delivery of student support services in higher educational institutions during and after the pandemic.