Search

While Canada has had relatively high vaccination rates against COVID-19, specifically during earlier waves of the pandemic, vaccine hesitancy has continued to serve as a significant barrier to adequate protection against the virus and, more recently, booster vaccine uptake. This paper explores the processes underlying Canadians' perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines and their decisions to take or refuse them, as well as how public policy and health messaging about vaccination has influenced vaccination attitudes and behaviors. Our focus group interviews with 18 vaccinated and unvaccinated adult Canadians conducted during October 2021 reveal that, in some respects, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy conforms to prior knowledge about some of the factors that affect vaccine attitudes (e.g., the influence of known medical providers) but deviates from current theoretical frameworks regarding general vaccine hesitancy. Specifically, these frameworks emphasize a lack of scientific knowledge and literacy ("knowledge deficit" accounts) or individuals' inability to incorporate rational risk perceptions into initial emotional responses to vaccines ("emotionality/irrationality" accounts). In contrast to the knowledge deficit account, we find that expressions of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy were most frequently associated with an information surplus or inability to prioritize information from multiple and often contradictory sources. Furthermore, top-down pro-vaccination messaging often triggered significant pushback against what participants perceived as moral shaming of the unvaccinated. Our findings demonstrate the necessity for a new framework to understand and address vaccine hesitancy. A better theoretical account of vaccine hesitancy has important implications for future vaccination efforts, specifically within the context of new variants and low booster vaccination rates in Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 had an unprecedented impact on transit demand and usage. Stiff and vigilant hygiene safety requirements changed travellers' mode choice preferences during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, transit modal share is radically impacted. Therefore, quantitative measurements on transit demand impact are urgently needed to facilitate evidence-based policy responses to COVID-19. Thus, we collected 1000 random samples through a web-based survey in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), Canada, on traveler's modal choices behavior during the COIVD-19 pandemic. The paper presents an analysis with this firsthand dataset to understand transit users' behavioral adaptation resulting from the spreading of COVID-19 in 2020. We found that the transit frequency dropped by 21% to 71% for various socioeconomic groups in the GTA during the pandemic. The transit modal share dipped for all trip purposes. For private vehicle owners, around 70% of transit users switched to their private vehicles. More than 60% of those without cars switched to active transport for all travel purposes. Also, ride-hailing services are the second most popular substitution of transit for them. More than 80% of the respondents agreed with all transit safety policies, such as mandatory face-covering listed in the survey. Moreover, a similar proportion of the respondents agreed to return to public transit in the future. Multinomial, nested, and mixed logit models are estimated to capture relationships between modal choices and various factors. We found that the daily number of new COVID-19 cases impacts the choice of transit negatively. However, vaccine availability and mandatory face-covering onboard positively affect travellers' choices of riding transit during the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gender norms, roles and relations differentially affect women, men, and non-binary individuals' vulnerability to disease. Outbreak response measures also have immediate and long-term gendered effects. However, gender-based analysis of outbreaks and responses is limited by lack of data and little integration of feminist analysis within global health scholarship. Recognising these barriers, this paper applies a gender matrix methodology, grounded in feminist political economy approaches, to evaluate the gendered effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and response in four case studies: China, Hong Kong, Canada, and the UK. Through a rapid scoping of documentation of the gendered effects of the outbreak, it applies the matrix framework to analyse findings, identifying common themes across the case studies: financial discrimination, crisis in care, and unequal risks and secondary effects. Results point to transnational structural conditions which put women on the front lines of the pandemic at work and at home while denying them health, economic and personal security – effects that are exacerbated where racism and other forms of discrimination intersect with gender inequities. Given that women and people living at the intersections of multiple inequities are made additionally vulnerable by pandemic responses, intersectional feminist responses should be prioritised at the beginning of any crises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since December 2019, there has been a global explosion of research on COVID-19. In Canada, the six National Collaborating Centres (NCCs) for Public Health form one of the central pillars supporting evidence-informed decision making by gathering, synthesizing and translating emerging findings. Funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada and located across Canada, the six NCCs promote and support the use of scientific research and other knowledges to strengthen public health practice, programs and policies. This paper offers an overview of the NCCs as an example of public health knowledge mobilization in Canada and showcases the NCCs' contribution to the COVID-19 response while reflecting on the numerous challenges encountered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has been well documented that COVID-19 does not affect all populations equally; the pandemic disproportionately impacts racialized, ethnic minority, low-income, and underserved communities. To further this conversation, this paper examines three adjacent, yet very distinct, neighbourhoods in the downtown core of Toronto, Ontario: St. James Town, Cabbagetown, and Rosedale. The socioeconomic positions of each neighborhood vary from low to high, and their respective COVID-19 positive case counts are inversed. After laying out the COVID-19 case data for each region, we examine the stark demographic and socioeconomic inequalities of these neighborhoods. Finally, we frame this information through the lens of the social determinants of health to identify gaps as well as steps toward meaningful solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In late January 2020, the first COVID-19 case was reported in Canada. By March 5, 2020, community spread of the virus was identified and by May 26, 2020, close to 86,000 patients had COVID-19 and 6,566 had died. As COVID-19 cases increased, provincial and territorial governments announced states of public health emergency between March 13 and 20, 2020. This paper examines Canada's public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic during the first four months (January to May 2020) by overviewing the actions undertaken by the federal (national) and regional (provincial/territorial) governments. Canada's jurisdictional public health structures, public health responses, technological and research endeavours, and public opinion on the pandemic measures are described. As the pandemic unravelled, the federal and provincial/territorial governments unrolled a series of stringent public health interventions and restrictions, including physical distancing and gathering size restrictions; closures of borders, schools, and non-essential businesses and services; cancellations of non-essential medical services; and limitations on visitors in hospital and long-term care facilities. In late May 2020, there was a gradual decrease in the daily numbers of new COVID-19 cases seen across most jurisdictions, which has led the provinces and territories to prepare phased re-opening. Overall, the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada and the substantial amount of formative health and policy-related data being created provide an insight on how to improve responses and better prepare for future health emergencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]