COVID-19 Knowledge, Attitude, Practice, and Vaccine-Related Decision Making among Immigrants: A Cross-Sectional Exploratory Study

Immigrants are disproportionally impacted by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and of the reported positive cases and fatalities, many are from historically disadvantaged groups that face severe health inequities and suffer from health disparities. Therefore, in the current research, using cross-sectional survey of immigrants, we conduct an exploratory investigation to examine their Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) regarding COVID-19 and the vaccine. In addition, we explore the role of subjective norms and response efficacy on vaccine-related decision making. The findings reveal that most participants were knowledgeable regarding the COVID-19 infection and the vaccine and practiced important safety behaviors to contain the spread. In addition, a significant effect of social norms and response efficacy on vaccine intentions were found suggesting the importance of integrating normative, culturally informed messaging while designing health campaigns for this hard-to-reach population. Given the small sample size, due to it being a hard-to-reach population, the findings should not be generalized, and future research should extend the study to draw broader conclusions. Implications of the findings are discussed. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of American Behavioral Scientist is the property of Sage Publications Inc. 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 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 . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Advancing Community-Based Participatory Research During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Methods Commentary on the Lessons Learned from Working with Community Data Collectors on a Refugee Health Disparities Study.

This methods commentary focuses on lessons learned from working with community data collectors on a refugee health disparities study during the COVID-19 pandemic. While there is a strong literature base for community health workers in refugee or migrant communities, there is less known about the procedural elements, challenges, and effectiveness of using community data collectors (CDCs) in research with refugee or migrant communities. Recognizing the cultural wealth and unique strengths of local stakeholders in the refugee community, the research team employed a robust collaborative approach by partnering with CDCs to design and administer the Telehealth and COVID-19 Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices in New York Refugee Communities Survey. The study's success was largely due to the CDC partnership. This methods commentary highlights the utility of Community-Based Participatory Research as a culturally-responsive framework well-suited to exploring health disparities as part of a broader agenda of public health communication research.

Identifying Health Equity Factors That Influence the Public's Perception of COVID-19 Health Information and Recommendations: A Scoping Review.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted global public health and public trust in health recommendations. Trust in health information may waver in the context of health inequities. The objective of this scoping review is to map evidence on public perceptions of COVID-19 prevention information using the PROGRESS-Plus health equity framework. We systematically searched the MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycInfo, and Embase databases from January 2020 to July 2021. We identified 792 citations and 31 studies published in 15 countries that met all inclusion criteria. The majority (30/31; 96.7%) of the studies used an observational design (74.2% cross-sectional, 16.1% cohort, 6.5% case study, 3.2% experimental trials). Most studies (61.3%) reported on perception, understanding, and uptake, and 35.5% reported on engagement, compliance, and adherence to COVID-19 measures. The most frequently reported sources of COVID-related information were social media, TV, news (newspapers/news websites), and government sources. We identified five important equity factors related to public trust and uptake of recommendations: education and health literacy (19 studies; 61.3%), gender (15 studies; 48.4%), age (15 studies; 48.4%), socioeconomic status (11 studies; 35.5%), and place of residence (10 studies; 32.3%). Our review suggests that equity factors play a role in public perception of COVID-19 information and recommendations. A future systematic review could be conducted to estimate the impact of equity factors on perception and behavior outcomes.

Communicating Scientific Uncertainty in an Age of COVID-19: An Investigation into the Use of Preprints by Digital Media Outlets.

In this article, we investigate the surge in use of COVID-19-related preprints by media outlets. Journalists are a main source of reliable public health information during crises and, until recently, journalists have been reluctant to cover preprints because of the associated scientific uncertainty. Yet, uploads of COVID-19 preprints and their uptake by online media have outstripped that of preprints about any other topic. Using an innovative approach combining altmetrics methods with content analysis, we identified a diversity of outlets covering COVID-19-related preprints during the early months of the pandemic, including specialist medical news outlets, traditional news media outlets, and aggregators. We found a ubiquity of hyperlinks as citations and a multiplicity of framing devices for highlighting the scientific uncertainty associated with COVID-19 preprints. These devices were rarely used consistently (e.g., mentioning that the study was a preprint, unreviewed, preliminary, and/or in need of verification). About half of the stories we analyzed contained framing devices emphasizing uncertainty. Outlets in our sample were much less likely to identify the research they mentioned as preprint research, compared to identifying it as simply "research." This work has significant implications for public health communication within the changing media landscape. While current best practices in public health risk communication promote identifying and promoting trustworthy sources of information, the uptake of preprint research by online media presents new challenges. At the same time, it provides new opportunities for fostering greater awareness of the scientific uncertainty associated with health research findings.