Search

English-language reporting on the continuing difficulties in accessing Evusheld reflects the marginalization of immunocompromised people in discussions about the public policy response to Covid-19. Moreover, the lack of available data on global Evusheld access, particularly in low-income countries, has emerged as a key form of nonknowledge that must be redressed within public health research. Through examining how knowledge about domestic and global barriers to Evusheld access circulates, and does not circulate, within The New York Times , this paper identifies a case study of the social production of ignorance related to a key issue in the Covid-19 pandemic. Drawing on science and technology studies, the history of science and media studies, I situate these trends in the context of longer explanatory histories of nonknowledge. First, through a critical discourse analysis of the New York Times' reporting on Evusheld access in the U.S., I trace the individualizing framework evident in many articles to longstanding trends in reporting on health and illness, and to the structural marginalization of immunocompromised people in U.S. Secondly, I argue that the near-total absence of reporting on Evusheld access in low-income countries is consistent with the longstanding structural neglect of health crises in the global south. • New York Times coverage of preventative treatment Evusheld rarely discusses access barriers. • Access barriers discussed are largely logistical rather than structural. • The perspectives of immunocompromised people are rarely included in Times articles on Evusheld. • Failure to include voices from impacted communities contributes to agnogenesis. • Centering the perspectives of constituencies most impacted by a health crisis will advance health equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Close oversight by a Community Coordinator, relationships built with community partners, and the use of telehealth were creative solutions used by the Infant Toddler Court Teams during COVID-19 to support timely access to services. • This study builds on a companion paper that examined receipt and access to child health services at multiple Infant-Toddler Court Teams prior to and during the first year of the pandemic and details the challenges faced and the solutions identified by ITCT partners to support access to child services in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic within the US. • Understanding the challenges and solutions faced by the Infant-Toddler Court Team Community Coordinators during COVID-19 will be important for future pandemics or crises that impact care for child welfare involved children. This qualitative study examines Infant-Toddler Court Teams' (ITCT) responses to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the accessibility and timeliness of services for children involved with an Infant Toddler Court Team (ITCT) within the United States. ITCTs utilize collaborative practice to improve, align, and integrate systems and build community capacity to improve outcomes for very young children and their families. This study reports findings from 350 transcripts of community partner interviews and an analysis of written case notes from ITCT Community Coordinators related to more than 700 instances of child service needs. We describe challenges faced and solutions and innovations developed by ITCTs to support and maintain child health services during the first year of the pandemic, as well as findings related to challenges associated with other types of services that reduced accessibility and timeliness. Understanding the challenges experienced and solutions developed can provide the child welfare field with insight and guidance on how to approach disruptions in care in the future and the persistent lack of service providers for court involved families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]