A survey on the public's discrimination rate of typical rumors during the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic. / æ–°åž‹å† çŠ¶ç— æ¯’è‚ºç‚Žæµè¡ŒæœŸé—´å ¬ä¼—å¯¹å ¸åž‹è°£è¨€æ­£ç¡®ç”„åˆ«çŽ‡çš„è°ƒæŸ¥.

OBJECTIVES: During the epidemic of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), the wide spread of rumors caused significant public hazards. This study aims to understand the situation of discrimination for typical COVID-19 rumors by the public and related factors. METHODS: An anonymous online survey was carried out using Questionnaire Star. The contents included participants' gender, age, education level, the COVID-19 information sources, and the judgmental questions about 14 representative COVID-19 rumors. The discrimination rate and 95% confidence interval of 14 rumors were estimated, and the association of discrimination rate with gender, age, and education level was analyzed by binary logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 2 087 valid questionnaires were collected. The participants were mainly female (62.7%) and below 35 years old (63.4%); the education level was predominantly college/bachelor's degree (47.3%) and master's degree or above (39.1%); the participants, who accessed to COVID-19 information included internet media, accounted for 91%. The participants with different gender, age, and education level had significant differences in the distribution of COVID-19 information sources (all P<0.01). The participants' discrimination rate for 14 rumors ranged from 67.4% to 98.6%, with 4 rumors less than 80%. Women's discrimination rate of 9 rumors was significantly higher than men's (all P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the discrimination rate of rumors among the different age groups (all P>0.05), but the differences in the discrimination rate of other rumors among the different age groups varied according to the rumor. Compared to those with high school or less education levels, the discrimination rates were also higher in the respondents with high education levels (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A few publics are still unable to identify typical rumors during the COVID-19 epidemic. There are associations among genders, age, and the education levels with the discrimination of some rumors. The government authorities should strengthen the true information regarding COVID-19, and therefore enhance the public's ability to identify rumors.

Product-related injury morbidity among Americans aged 0–19 years, 2001–2020

BackgroundPediatric product-related injuries are an important public health problem. We used the latest national surveillance data to examine changes in injury morbidity related to all types of products among Americans aged 0–19 from 2001 to 2020.MethodsProduct-related injury morbidity data came from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS). Age-standardized morbidity was calculated using the national population of 2000 as reference. We performed Joinpoint regression models to identify time periods with significant changes during 2001–2020 and used the annual percent changes (APCs) in rates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to quantify the annual magnitude of significant morbidity changes.ResultsAge-standardized product-related injury morbidity declined consistently among Americans aged 0–19 years between 2001 and 2020 (from 7449.3 to 4023.5 per 100,000 persons;APC=-1.5%, 95% CI: -2.3%, -0.7%), with the most striking morbidity drop in 2019–2020 (-1576.8 per 100,000 persons). During the study time period, the sports and recreation equipment was the most common involved product and home was the most frequent occurring location for non-fatal pediatric product-related injuries. Substantial morbidity differences and varying spectrum by type of product and by occurring location existed across sex and age groups for non-fatal product-related injuries.ConclusionThe recent product-related injury morbidity declined substantially among Americans aged 0–19 years between 2001 and 2020, but large variations remained across sex and age groups, and the largest decrease of 2019–2020 was primarily associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.Learning outcomesWe recommend actions to decrease pediatric product-related injury morbidity and reduce subgroup disparities in the U.S.

Injury mortality and morbidity changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed society. We aimed to examine the systematic impact of the COVID-19 on injury burden in the United States. Methods: We extracted mortality and morbidity data from CDC WONDER and WISQARS. We estimated age-standardized injury mortality rate ratio and morbidity rate ratio (MtRR and MbRR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for all injuries, all unintentional injuries, homicide/assault by all methods, suicide/self-harm by all methods, as well as other 11 specific unintentional or intentional injury categories. Injury rate ratios were compared for 2020 vs. 2019 to those of 2019 vs. 2018 to demonstrate the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on fatal and nonfatal injury burden. The ratio of MtRRs (RMtRR) and the ratio of MbRRs (RMbRR) with 95% CI between 2020 vs. 2019 and 2019 vs. 2018 were calculated separately. Results: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with an increase in injury mortality (RMtRR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.11, 1.13) but injury morbidity decreased (RMbRR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.88, 0.89) when the changes of these rates from 2019 to 2020 were compared to those from 2018 to 2019. Mortality disparities between the two time periods were primarily driven by greater mortality during the COVID-influenced 2020 vs. 2019 from road traffic crashes (particularly motorcyclist mortality), drug poisoning, and homicide by firearm. Similar patterns were not present from 2019 vs. 2018. There were morbidity reductions from road traffic crashes (particularly occupant and pedestrian morbidity from motor vehicle crashes), unintentional falls, and self-harm by suffocation from 2019 to 2020 compared to the previous period. Change patterns in sexes and age groups were generally similar, but exceptions were observed for some injury types. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed specific injury burden in the United States. Some discrepancies also existed across sex and age groups, meriting attention of injury researchers and policymakers to tailor injury prevention strategies to particular populations and the environmental contexts citizens face.

COVID-19-Related Rumor Content, Transmission, and Clarification Strategies in China: Descriptive Study.

BACKGROUND: Given the permeation of social media throughout society, rumors spread faster than ever before, which significantly complicates government responses to public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the characteristics and propagation of rumors during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic in China and evaluated the effectiveness of health authorities' release of correction announcements. METHODS: We retrieved rumors widely circulating on social media in China during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and assessed the effectiveness of official government clarifications and popular science articles refuting those rumors. RESULTS: We show that the number of rumors related to the COVID-19 pandemic fluctuated widely in China between December 1, 2019 and April 15, 2020. Rumors mainly occurred in 3 provinces: Hubei, Zhejiang, and Guangxi. Personal social media accounts constituted the major source of media reports of the 4 most widely distributed rumors (the novel coronavirus can be prevented with "Shuanghuanglian": 7648/10,664, 71.7%; the novel coronavirus is the SARS coronavirus: 14,696/15,902, 92.4%; medical supplies intended for assisting Hubei were detained by the local government: 3911/3943, 99.2%; asymptomatically infected persons were regarded as diagnosed COVID-19 patients with symptoms in official counts: 322/323, 99.7%). The number of rumors circulating was positively associated with the severity of the COVID-19 epidemic (ρ=0.88, 95% CI 0.81-0.93). The release of correction articles was associated with a substantial decrease in the proportion of rumor reports compared to accurate reports. The proportions of negative sentiments appearing among comments by citizens in response to media articles disseminating rumors and disseminating correct information differ insignificantly (both correct reports: χ12=0.315, P=.58; both rumors: χ12=0.025, P=.88; first rumor and last correct report: χ12=1.287, P=.26; first correct report and last rumor: χ12=0.033, P=.86). CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the importance and urgency of monitoring and correcting false or misleading reports on websites and personal social media accounts. The circulation of rumors can influence public health, and government bodies should establish guidelines to monitor and mitigate the negative impact of such rumors.