Polarization in COVID-19 Vaccine Discussion Networks

The emergence of COVID-19 spurred the fastest development of a vaccine in history. Yet, a large proportion of Americans remain hesitant to receive it. Our paper investigates how the social networks we inhabit might explain persistent vaccine hesitancy. We argue that the COVID-19 vaccination status of respondents' closest associates inhibits or motivates their decision to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. To test our argument, we conduct an original survey asking respondents a battery of questions about the people with whom individuals most frequently discuss vaccines and COVID-19. Our survey reports that individuals' discussion networks are polarized by vaccination status. Concurrently, there is a strong association between the social network's vaccination status and the respondent's vaccination status. This association is so robust that partisanship does not moderate the association between discussants' vaccination status and respondents' vaccination status. Together, our results imply that unvaccinated individuals remain hesitant because they face reinforcing social pressure from their closest associates. The unique timing of our survey, during an unprecedented vaccination campaign against a novel disease, offers a snapshot of how relationships may affect attitudes. © The Author(s) 2023.

Polarization in COVID-19 Vaccine Discussion Networks

The emergence of COVID-19 spurred the fastest development of a vaccine in history. Yet, a large proportion of Americans remain hesitant to receive it. Our paper investigates how the social networks we inhabit might explain persistent vaccine hesitancy. We argue that the COVID-19 vaccination status of respondents' closest associates inhibits or motivates their decision to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. To test our argument, we conduct an original survey asking respondents a battery of questions about the people with whom individuals most frequently discuss vaccines and COVID-19. Our survey reports that individuals' discussion networks are polarized by vaccination status. Concurrently, there is a strong association between the social network's vaccination status and the respondent's vaccination status. This association is so robust that partisanship does not moderate the association between discussants' vaccination status and respondents' vaccination status. Together, our results imply that unvaccinated individuals remain hesitant because they face reinforcing social pressure from their closest associates. The unique timing of our survey, during an unprecedented vaccination campaign against a novel disease, offers a snapshot of how relationships may affect attitudes.

A Comparative Analysis of St-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction between Canada and the United States from the North American Covid-19 Stemi Registry

Background: Important healthcare differences exist between the US and Canada. The goal of this investigation is to compare clinical characteristics, treatment strategies and clinical outcomes of STEMI patients with COVID-19 infection treated in the US versus Canada. Methods and Results: The North American COVID-19 Myocardial Infarction (NACMI) registry is a prospective, investigator-initiated study enrolling STEMI patients with documented COVID infection in the US and Canada. The primary end-point is in-hospital mortality. The secondary end-points include stroke, reinfarction and a composite of death, stroke or reinfarction. Of the 767 STEMI-COVID patients, 67 (9%) were from Canada and 669 (91%) from the US. Patients enrolled in Canada were more likely to present with chest pain (79% vs. 54%, p< 0.001), otherwise patients across both countries had comparable presenting demographics (Table 1). The proportion of patients not undergoing coronary angiography was significantly lower in Canada compared with the US (9% vs. 19%, p=0.039);of those who underwent angiography, no significant differences in reperfusion modalities were noted. Compared with the US, patients in Canada had a significantly lower unadjusted risk for in-hospital mortality (15% vs. 29%, p=0.016) and the risk for the composite of death, stroke or re-infarction (15% vs. 31%, p=0.006). Vaccination status was available in Canada 26 / 67 patients (unvaccinated 13, vaccinated 13) and US 328/ 669 patients (unvaccinated 282, vaccinated 46);a strong association between vaccination and adverse clinical composite is noted in both countries (Canada: 3/13, 23% (unvaccinated) vs. 0/13, 0% (vaccinated), p=0.22;and, US: 75/282, 27% (unvaccinated) vs. 6/46, 13% (vaccinated), p=0.048). Conclusion(s): Among patients with STEMI and COVID-19 infection those treated in Canada had higher proportions undergoing angiography and a lower risk of death, stroke or reinfarction. Regardless of geography, vaccination was associated with significantly lower risk of mortality in both countries. [Formula presented] Copyright © 2022

The Impact of Vote-By-Mail Policy on Turnout and Vote Share in the 2020 Election

The COVID-19 pandemic spurred many states and counties to reduce public health risks by adopting policies that made voting by mail easier in the 2020 general election. Employing a two-period difference-in-difference research design, this article investigates how these policy changes affected turnout and presidential vote share. We find that counties that moved to send registered voters mail-in ballots ahead of Election Day experienced 2.6 percent higher turnout compared to counties that made no change, although lesser reforms may have hindered turnout. We also find no evidence that making voting by mail easier conferred a partisan advantage. © 2022, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers.