Search

Copyright of European Policy Analysis is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of World Medical & Health Policy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered a significant increase in academic research in the realm of social sciences. As such, there is an increasing need for the scientific community to adopt effective and efficient methods to examine the potential role and contribution of social sciences in the fight against COVID-19. Objectives: This study aims to identify the key topics and explore publishing trends in social science research pertaining to COVID-19 via automated literature analysis. Methods: The automated literature analysis employed utilizes keyword analysis and topic modelling technique, specifically Latent Dirichlet Allocation, to highlight the most relevant research terms, overarching research themes and research trends within the realm of social science research on COVID-19. Results: The focus of research and topics were derived from 9733 full-text academic papers. The bulk of social science research on COVID-19 centres on the following themes: 'Clinical Treatment', 'Epidemic Crisis', 'Mental Influence', 'Impact on Students', 'Lockdown Influence' and 'Impact on Children'. Conclusion: This study adds to our understanding of key topics in social science research on COVID-19. The automated literature analysis presented is particularly useful for librarians and information specialists keen to explore the role and contributions of social science topics in the context of pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID‐19 pandemic led to major changes in public policies to address supply chain disruption and escalated the price of consumer disinfectant products. To address market demands on alcohol‐based hand rubs and disinfectants, Health Canada implemented major changes to the regulations regarding composition, handling, transportation, and packaging to insure product availability. Furthermore, accelerated licensing of ingredients and packaging did not meet standard medical quality guidelines yet were authorized for manufacturing and packaging of alcohol‐based hand rubs and disinfectants. The accountability associated with these policy changes were reactive, including industry self‐reporting, consumer reporting, and Health Canada advisories and recalls that were responsive to products after they were available in the market. Nonetheless, Canadian public health policy increased hand sanitizers availability. However, some of the interim policies have raised major public health concerns associated with ethanol quality, packaging, and labeling, and enforcement of regulations. In this paper, we review the changes in the Canadian regulations amid the current pandemic and we evaluate the unintended health risks that might arise from these changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses the impacts of the COVID‐19 pandemic on population health in Asian countries. Compared to European countries, Asian countries, in general, experienced much fewer COVID‐19 cases and deaths. The underlying factors in this difference would include the earlier and more stringent nonpharmaceutical interventions, differences in the age structure, the geographical characteristics in Asia, and the experience of past outbreaks of emerging diseases, though further studies are needed to investigate the exact mechanisms. Still, regarding the aim of developing resilient health care systems, there remain several lessons from the COVID‐19 pandemic experience in Asian countries that could inform more effective management of future pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evidence is accumulating of the negative impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic and related public health measures on mental health. In this emergent field, there has been little research into the role of risk perception on depressive symptoms and the contribution of health‐care resources to model risk perception and mental health. The aim of this paper is to describe the relationship between individual‐level perception of risk and depression, controlling for a set of confounders and for country‐level heterogeneity. A cross‐sectional and observational online survey was conducted using a non‐probability snowball sampling technique. We use data on 11,340 respondents, living in six European countries (Italy, Sweden, United Kingdom, France, Poland, Czech Republic) who completed survey questionnaires during the first months of the pandemic. We used a fixed‐effect approach, which included individual and macro‐level variables. The findings suggest that a high proportion of people suffering from depression and heightened risk perception is positively associated with reporting depressive symptoms, even if this relationship varies significantly between countries. Moreover, the association is moderated by contextual factors including health‐care expenditure as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product, hospital beds for acute care, and number of medical specialists per head of population. Investment in health care offers a concrete means of protecting the mental health of a population living under pandemic restrictions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nurses are the largest group of healthcare workers in the world, and during the COVID‐19 pandemic, nurses have been recognized worldwide as frontline warriors working hard to stem suffering, infection rates and deaths. Korean nurses experienced the effects of the pandemic earlier than in most other countries, and the work of our nurses has been recognized as a successful model in responding COVID‐19. In this paper, we share the experiences of Korean nurses, including their experiences of workload, acute shortages of staff and equipment and work overload, and suggest ongoing tasks that need to be addressed to combat the pandemic's second wave and other possible waves. Specifically, the nursing issues relating to COVID‐19 are critically reviewed and recommendations for each issue are suggested in terms of nursing staffing, practice and policy, as well as health policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The novel coronavirus disease SARS‐CoV‐2 (COVID‐19) outbreak rapidly generated an unprecedented global, national, and state public health crisis with the need to rapidly develop alternate care sites (ACS) to care for COVID‐19 patients within an overburdened health care system. A hospital care model ACS to increase the health care capacity, provide care for mild to moderately symptomatic patients, and offer local self‐sustainment for a surge of patients was developed in Memphis, Tennessee located in Shelby County. We completed a temporary conversion of a large unused newspaper publication building to a health care facility for COVID‐19 patients. Developing an ACS from ground zero was met with many challenges, and throughout the process important lessons were learned. With the goal to complete the building conversion within a 28‐day timeframe, collaboration among the numerous governmental, health care, and private agencies was critical and nursing leadership was key to this process. The purpose of this paper is to describe the development of a COVID‐19 ACS in Memphis, TN, which has a large at‐risk population with limited access to health care. Specifically, we will discuss the strong leadership role of nursing faculty, key challenges, and lessons learned, as well as provide checklists and models for others in similar circumstances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public health responses to the Covid‐19 pandemic included various measures to mitigate the spread of the virus. Among these, the most restrictive was a broad category referred to as "lockdowns." We argue that the reasoning offered in favor of extended lockdowns—those lasting several months or longer—did not adequately account for a host of countervailing considerations, including the impact on mental illness, education, employment, and marginalized communities as well as health, educational, and economic inequities. Furthermore, justifications offered for extended lockdowns set aside a basic tenet of public health ethics: restrictions on liberty and autonomy should be the least intrusive means of achieving the desired end. Since it is now clear that extended lockdowns cause severe harm to many vulnerable populations, the burden of proof is on those who would advocate for them, and there must be a much higher bar to implement an extended lockdown, with high‐quality evidence that the benefit would substantially exceed its harm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To clarify factors that support a policy change from pandemic to endemic status and to examine options for non‐medical responses to reduce COVID‐19 transmission. Background: Critical factors to be considered in pandemic response decisions are not limited to medical options or public health orders, although these are important. Sources of evidence: All evidence drawn from publicly available sources is presented through the lens of the authors' nursing, management, education, policy and research experience. Discussion: As COVID‐19 variants cause infections to surge nurses and other health practitioners, who are the de facto implementers of public and health policy, need to consider the evidence supporting a pandemic policy change to endemic status. Non‐medical options for reducing transmission and variant mutations are needed to enable at‐risk populations to avoid infection. Conclusion: Public policy that shifts infection risks onto the general population requires close scrutiny of the evidence base for such decisions and warrants open debate and review. If people are to manage risks arising from policy decisions, they need access to non‐medical virus detection options as well as access to effective medicines and treatment. Implications for nursing practice: Nurses have an extension to their advocacy role when policy changes about infectious disease status are declared. Evaluation of policy in terms of validity, equity and scientific basis is part of nursing's public responsibility. Policies that fail to reflect what is happening at the patient care level need to be questioned and modified where necessary. Only policies deemed 'good' policy by nurses should be implemented without challenge. Access to devices for environmental detection of the virus would enable real‐time estimation of infection risks and inform individual decisions about the real risk of participating in work or other activities. Implications for health and social policy: Policy decisions to transition from pandemic to endemic status must be evidence based. Clear messaging about risks and options assists policy implementation. Terminologies describing stages of infectious disease spread from 'outbreak, epidemic, endemic and pandemic' are not interchangeable, although they will expand and contract across the range in response to interventions such as public health safety measures (PHSM), quarantine, vaccinations, antivirals and fatalities that alter the case count in defined locations for those who avoid or survive an infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The particular dynamics of public health emergencies urge scientists and Ethics Committee (EC) members to change and adapt their operating procedures to function effectively. Despite having previous pandemic experiences, ethics committees were unprepared to adapt to COVID‐19 pandemic challenges. This survey aims to learn and thoroughly discuss the most salient issues for ECs during the COVID‐19 pandemic. The results indicate that the main problems faced by ECs were lack of/insufficient regulations, lack of data/experience/knowledge, sloppy review, poor research design, and poor adaptation to quarantine measures. Coping with factors that threaten the autonomy and independence of ECs, the ethical dilemma regarding maximizing common good versus protecting the rights and well‐being of study participants, comprehending the change in the context of vulnerable populations, and redefining the role of ECs to strengthen trust in science and vaccine confidence were outstanding issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Organizational reputation is critical for successful stakeholder engagement. A crisis can affect the organizational reputation and alter stakeholder perception about organizations. The current study investigates the impact of the Covid‐19 pandemic and its management on the World Health Organization's (WHO's) reputation among Indian public health professionals (PHPs). The study applies the situational crisis communication theory (SCCT) model to investigate the reputational impact of the pandemic on WHO among the study subjects. The study results indicate that most Indian PHPs attribute the current Pandemic to WHO. Their current reputation has dropped compared to their earlier reputation among Indian PHPs. The same is reflected in their behavioral intent, with the PHP's willingness to follow WHO guidelines on public health issues significantly reduced. The study also finds empirical support for the SCCT Model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public health and social measures (PHSM) have been central to the COVID‐19 response. Consequently, there has been much pressure on decision‐makers to make evidence‐informed decisions and on researchers to synthesize the evidence regarding these measures. This article describes our experiences, responses and lessons learnt regarding key challenges when planning and conducting rapid reviews of PHSM during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Stakeholder consultations and scoping reviews to obtain an overview of the evidence inform the scope of reviews that are policy‐relevant and feasible. Multiple complementary reviews serve to examine the benefits and harms of PHSM across different populations and contexts. Conceiving reviews of effectiveness as adaptable living reviews helps to respond to evolving evidence needs and an expanding evidence base. An appropriately skilled review team and good planning, coordination and communication ensures smooth and rigorous processes and efficient use of resources. Scientific rigor, the practical implications of PHSM‐related complexity and likely time savings should be carefully weighed in deciding on methodological shortcuts. Making the best possible use of modeling studies represents a particular challenge, and methods should be carefully chosen, piloted and implemented. Our experience raises questions regarding the nature of rapid reviews and regarding how different types of evidence should be considered in making decisions about PHSM during a global pandemic. We highlight the need for readily available protocols for conducting studies on the effectiveness, unintended consequences and implementation of PHSM in a timely manner, as well as the need for rapid review standards tailored to "rapid" versus "emergency" mode reviewing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We explain evolving policy choices made by all 50 states in response to the coronavirus (COVID‐19) pandemic in the United States against the background of each state's political and public health landscape. Method: We create an index of eight state preventative measures and explain variation in that index by infection and death rates, vaccination rates, support for President Trump in 2020, and the political party of the governor. We control for population density and the health vulnerability of each state. Results: State response was largely driven by three factors: the death rate from COVID‐19, Trump votes in 2020 and Republican control of the governorship. Conclusion: Understanding state response to the pandemic requires going beyond a partisan lens and considering the shifting onus of responsibility for taking action to protect against the virus from states to individual citizens in an increasingly politicized sphere of pandemic response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, public health has issued three interrelated dominant narratives through social media and news outlets: First, to care for others, we must keep physically distant; second, we live in the same world and experience the same pandemic; and third, we will return to normal at some point. These narratives create complexities as they collide with the authors' everyday lives as nurses, educators, and women. This collision creates three paradoxes for us: (a) learning to care by creating physical distance, (b) a sense of togetherness erases inequities, and (c) returning to normal is possible. To inquire into these three paradoxes, we draw on our experiences with Ingrid, an older adult who requires in‐home physical care, and Matthew, a man with multiple disabilities including severe oral dyspraxia and developmental delays. We outline how narrative care is a counterstory to the dominant narratives and enables us to find ways to live our lives within the paradoxes. Narrative care allows us, through attention to embodiment, liminality, and imagination, to create forward looking stories. Understanding narrative care within these paradoxes allows us to offer more complex understandings of the ways narrative care can be embodied in our, and others', lives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study demonstrates that religion protected mental health but constrained support for crisis response during the crucial early days of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Data from a national probability‐based sample of the U.S. population show that highly religious individuals and evangelicals suffered less distress in March 2020. They were also less likely to see the coronavirus outbreak as a crisis and less likely to support public health restrictions to limit the spread of the virus. The conservative politicization of religion in the United States can help explain why religious Americans (and evangelicals in particular) experienced less distress and were less likely to back public health efforts to contain the virus. We conclude that religion can be a source of comfort and strength in times of crisis, but—at least in the case of the COVID‐19 pandemic—it can also undercut efforts to end the root causes of suffering. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the educational concerns and awareness level among dental hygiene students during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire, created via Google Forms, was sent electronically to 240 dental hygiene students from Turkey, of which 223 replied to the survey. The questionnaire was divided into 4 parts and consisted of 24 close‐ended questions. Results: The main symptoms of COVID‐19 were correctly recognized by 71% of the students, and 40.2% of the students were aware of the transmission routes. Of all, 77.1% of the students expressed fear of getting infected, 96.9% believed that they would more likely get infected while performing dental procedures, and 91% believed that dental hygienists' cross‐contamination risk was high. Furthermore, 69.5% of the students stated that their undergraduate education process was negatively affected, 59.6% appreciated ongoing online education, and 31.8% wanted face‐to‐face clinical internships. Conclusions: Although most of the students were aware of the transmission routes and preventive measures of COVID‐19, concerns regarding disease transmission among them remain. Students appreciated the ongoing online education and believed that face‐to‐face education is risky during this current pandemic. However, they believe that this process can adversely affect their professional knowledge and especially practical skills. A balance must be struck between sustaining an effective dental hygiene education process and containing the spread of COVID‐19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We tested the link between COVID‐19 conspiracy theories and health protective behaviours in three studies: one at the onset of the pandemic in the United Kingdom (UK), a second just before the first national lockdown, and a third during that lockdown (N = 302, 404 and 399). We focused on conspiracy theories that did not deny the existence of COVID‐19 and evaluated the extent to which they predicted a range of health protective behaviours, before and after controlling for psychological and sociodemographic characteristics associated with conspiracy theory belief. COVID‐19 conspiracy beliefs were positively correlated with beliefs in other unrelated conspiracies and a general conspiracy mind‐set, and negatively correlated with trust in government and a tendency towards analytical thinking (vs. intuitive thinking). Unexpectedly, COVID‐19 conspiracy believers adhered to basic health guidelines and advanced health protective measures as strictly as non‐believers. Conspiracy believers were, however, less willing to install the contact‐tracing app, get tested for and vaccinated against COVID‐19, and were more likely to share COVID‐19 misinformation—all of which might undermine public health initiatives. Study 3 showed conspiracy theory believers were less willing to undertake health protective behaviours that were outside of their personal control, perceiving these as having a negative balance of risks and benefits. We discuss models explaining conspiracy beliefs and health protective behaviours, and suggest practical recommendations for public health initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The SARS‐CoV‐2 or COVID‐19 pandemic has raised public awareness around disease protection. The aims in this study were to recruit participants from Australia and Germany to determine their use of personal protective equipment and COVID‐19 avoidance strategies using scales designed for this study. Principal components analysis with the Australian data revealed two factors in the Protection from Infection Scale, Self‐Care and Protective Behaviors, and a single factor in the Infection Avoidance Scale, with each scale demonstrating strong internal reliability. Data from German participants were used to confirm the scales' structure using confirmatory factor analysis. A comparison of the two data sets data revealed that Australian participants scored higher overall on protection and avoidance strategies but at the item level there were several commonalities, including self‐care behaviors people adopted to avoid contracting COVID‐19. With no foreseeable end to this pandemic, it is important that follow‐up studies ascertain whether the public continues to adopt high levels of PPE use and follows government advice or if pandemic fatigue sets in. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: As labor markets in recent decades have become increasingly volatile and precarious, more workers are susceptible to working conditions threatening their economic security. COVID‐19 has further laid bare such economic insecurity from holding a precarious job. We examined the association between precarious employment and the probability of losing income or a job during COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods: A multivariate regression analysis was conducted using a cross‐sectional data set collected in May 2020 in the United States. Results: Our results confirm a strong positive association between precarious employment and losing work or income. Specifically, holding part‐time work in the service sector, and feeling disempowered in the workplace, receiving low material rewards, having few benefits, and experiencing obstacles in exercising rights all significantly doubled the probability of losing income or jobs. Conclusion: Our analysis underscores the increasing vulnerability faced by our workforce and how a public health crisis magnifies the dire consequences of a precarious job. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study was conducted to develop and evaluate a theoretical model to explain the relationships among participation in individual and social activities, compliance with prevention guidelines, and the perception of fatalism and fear of COVID‐19. Methods: Cross‐sectional survey of 1,067 participants who were >18 years of age living in different provinces of Turkey recruited between August 15, 2020 and October 15, 2020. We used covariant structural analysis to assess the relationships of the constructs of the theoretical model. Results: Significant fits were detected for Model 1 (χ2 = 924,389, p <.001, comparative fit index or CFI = 0.944), and for Model 2 (χ2 = 2,253,751, p <.001, CFI = 0.926). The predetermination and luck subdimensions reduce the fear of COVID‐19, while the pessimism subdimension and compliance with preventive measures increase the fear. Conclusion: In public health crises such as COVID‐19, it is important to plan scientific knowledge‐based public education; take initiatives in accordance with the cultural, social, economic, religious, and local characteristics of the societies; and conduct public health studies covering the whole society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Politics & Policy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Efforts to control the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic have led to national lockdowns around the world. Reactions to the rapidly evolving outbreak were shared on social media platforms. We conducted a mixed‐methods analysis of tweets collected from May 10 to May 24, 2020, using MAXQDA software in conjunction with Twitters search API using the keywords: "COVID‐19," "coronavirus pandemic," "Covid19," "face masks," and included terms such as "Queens," "Bronx," "New York." A total of 7, 301 COVID‐19‐related tweets across the globe were analyzed. We used SAS Text Miner V.15.1 for descriptive text mining to uncover the primary topics in unstructured textual data. Content analysis of tweets revealed six themes: surveillance, prevention, treatments, testing and cure, symptoms and transmission, fear, and financial loss. Our study also demonstrates the feasibility of using Twitter to capture real‐time data to assess the public's concerns and public health needs during the COVID‐19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hospital staff are at the frontline in the COVID‐19 outbreak. The stressors they experience may induce sleep problems in a population already at risk. Sleep deprivation, long shifts and insomnia in hospital staff have been associated with individual, organizational and public health hazards. These include increased risk of mental and somatic disorders, altered immune responses, medical errors, misunderstandings, drowsy driving and burnout. In March 2020, the World Health Organization called for providing access to mental health and counselling for health professionals involved in the COVID‐19 outbreak. To answer this call, we propose practical advice for the management of sleep problems (sleep deprivation, insomnia and shift work) that can be included in supportive interventions. The advice is based on psychobiological principles of sleep regulation and on guidelines for the treatment of insomnia and was implemented within an initiative offering psychological support to the staff of three university hospitals in Rome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

EDs play a crucial role as frontline health services throughout public health emergencies, including pandemics. The strength of the Australian public health response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) has mitigated the impact of the pandemic on clinical services, but there has still been a substantial impact on EDs and the health system. We revisit major events and lessons from the first wave of COVID‐19 in Australia to consider the implications and avenues for system‐level improvements for future pandemic and public health emergency response for EDs. Notwithstanding, the remarkable efforts of healthcare workers across the health system, COVID‐19 has uncovered structural and planning challenges and highlighted weaknesses and strengths of the Australian federation. In anticipating future pandemics and other public health threats, particularly in the face of climate change, hard‐won lessons from the COVID‐19 response should be incorporated in future planning, policies, practice and advocacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]