Living and health conditions of public basic education teachers, economic providers for their families during the Covid-19 pandemic, in Minas Gerais / Condições de vida e saúde de professoras da educação básica pública de Minas Gerais provedoras financeiras de suas famílias durante a pandemia de Covid-19 / Condiciones de vida y salud de los docentes de educación básica pública en Minas Gerais, proveedores económicos de sus familias durante la pandemia de COVID-19

Resumo Este artigo busca analisar diferenças nas condições de vida e saúde das professoras principais provedoras do domicílio em comparação às coprovedoras, durante a pandemia de Covid-19. Trata-se de estudo transversal realizado em 2020, por meio de formulário on-line enviado aos professores da rede estadual de Minas Gerais. A variável dependente foi ser ou não a principal provedora da família (principal provedora vs. coprovedora) e as independentes foram agrupadas em sociodemográficas, ocupacionais, situação de saúde e comportamentos. Analisaram-se dados somente das mulheres e estimou-se a regressão logística. Entre as 12.817 professoras participantes, 47,2% declararam-se principais provedoras. Dentre elas, observou-se predomínio de mulheres mais velhas, que viviam sem companheiro(a), com filhos(as) e, no geral, apresentavam características que retrataram pior condição socioeconômica, maior acúmulo de trabalho e comportamentos menos saudáveis. Os resultados permitiram identificar desvantagens nas condições de vida e saúde das professoras principais provedoras financeiras de suas famílias em comparação às coprovedoras.

Abstract The objective was to analyze differences in living and health conditions of teachers who are the main providers for their household compared to co-providers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The cross-sectional study was carried out in 2020, through an online form sent to teachers of public schools in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. The dependent variable was whether or not they were their family's main provider (main provider vs. co-provider) and independent variables were grouped into sociodemographic, occupational, health status and behaviors. Only women's data were analyzed and logistic regression was estimated. Among the 12,817 participating female schoolteachers, 47.2% declared to be the main providers. In this subgroup, there was a predominance of older women, who lived without a partner, with children and, in general, these teachers presented worse socioeconomic conditions, greater accumulation of work and less healthy behaviors. The results of the present study allow to identify disadvantages in living and health conditions of female schoolteachers who are the main financial providers of their families compared to co-providers.

Resumen El objetivo fue analizar las diferencias en las condiciones de vida y salud entre las profesoras que son las principales proveedoras del hogar y las coproveedoras, durante la pandemia de COVID-19. Estudio transversal realizado en 2020, a través de un formulario en línea enviado a profesoras de escuelas públicas del estado de Minas Gerais, Brasil. La variable dependiente fue ser o no la proveedora principal de la familia (proveedora principal versus coproveedora) y las variables independientes se agruparon en sociodemográficas, ocupacionales, sanitarias y conductuales. Solo se analizaron los datos de las mujeres y se estimó una regresión logística. Entre las 12.817 maestras participantes, el 47,2 % se declaró proveedora principal. En este subgrupo predominaron las mujeres mayores, que vivían sin pareja, con hijos y, en general, estas profesoras tenían características que retrataban una peor condición socioeconómica, mayor acumulación de trabajo y conductas menos saludables. Los resultados del presente estudio permiten identificar desventajas en las condiciones de vida y salud de las profesoras de escuela que son las principales proveedoras económicas de sus familias en comparación con las coproveedoras.

Comparative Study about the Consumption of Organic Food Products on Samples of Portuguese and Turkish Consumers under the COVID-19 Pandemic Context

This research aimed to study consumers' trends and the consumption of foods obtained through organic farming in two different countries, Portugal and Turkey. A questionnaire survey was used, applied through internet tools as a result of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. For the treatment of data, we used basic statistics complemented with a tree classification, aimed at evaluating the influence of sociodemographic factors on the knowledge about this type of food. The results showed that the consumption patterns are relatively similar in both countries, with many participants consuming organic foods, especially vegetables and fruits, consuming them mostly two or three meals per week. The strongest motivations to consume organic foods include benefits for human health and lower environmental impacts, while the most substantial reason not to consume is the higher price. It was also found that in both countries, people have good knowledge about the advantages of organic foods over conventional ones. Finally, the perception of the value attributed by society to organic foods was considerably higher in Portugal. These results confirm the apparent trend of making more sustainable food choices, which is motivated by the perceived negative impact of conventional agriculture on ecosystems and health.

A dual-process approach to prosocial behavior under COVID-19 uncertainty.

Uncertainty has been shown to reduce the willingness to cooperate in various social dilemmas and negatively affect prosocial behavior. However, some studies showed that uncertainty does not always decrease prosocial behavior, depending on the type of uncertainty. More specifically, recent research has shown that prosocial behavior tends to increase under impact uncertainty-uncertainty about the consequences for others if they become infected. In addition, researchers have argued that intuition favors prosocial behavior while deliberation leads to selfish behavior. Our study explored how intuitive (time pressure) or deliberate mental processing, under outcome, or impact uncertainty affect prosocial behavior in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our sample consists of 496 participants, and we used a 4 (COVID-19 scenario: Control vs. Impact Uncertainty vs. Worst-Case vs. Indirect Transmission) by 2 (decision time: time delay vs. time pressure) between-subjects design. Results suggest that participants are more inclined to stay at home (prosocial intention) when forced to make their decisions intuitively rather than deliberately. Additionally, we found that uncertainty does not always decrease prosocial behavior. It seems that uncertainty does not affect the prosocial intention in a scenario with a real infectious disease. These findings suggest that the distinction between outcome and impact uncertainty may be due to the realism of experimental stimuli interventions.

Double jeopardy from the COVID-19 pandemic: risk of exposure and income loss in Portugal.

BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence indicates that the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had immediate health and social impact, disproportionately affecting certain socioeconomic groups. Assessing inequalities in risk of exposure and in adversities faced during the pandemic is critical to inform targeted actions that effectively prevent disproportionate spread and reduce social and health inequities. This study examines i) the socioeconomic and mental health characteristics of individuals working in the workplace, thus at increased risk of COVID-19 exposure, and ii) individual income losses resulting from the pandemic across socioeconomic subgroups of a working population, during the first confinement in Portugal. METHODS: This study uses data from 'COVID-19 Barometer: Social Opinion', a community-based online survey in Portugal. The sample for analysis comprised n = 129,078 workers. Logistic regressions were performed to estimate the adjusted odds ratios (AOR) of factors associated with working in the workplace during the confinement period and with having lost income due to the pandemic. RESULTS: Over a third of the participants reported working in the workplace during the first confinement. This was more likely among those with lower income [AOR = 2.93 (2.64-3.25)], lower education [AOR = 3.17 (3.04-3.30)] and working as employee [AOR = 1.09 (1.04-1.15)]. Working in the workplace was positively associated with frequent feelings of agitation, anxiety or sadness [AOR = 1.14 (1.09-1.20)] and perception of high risk of infection [AOR = 11.06 (10.53-11.61)]. About 43% of the respondents reported having lost income due to the pandemic. The economic consequences affected greatly the groups at increased risk of COVID-19 exposure, namely those with lower education [AOR = 1.36 (1.19-1.56)] and lower income [AOR = 3.13 (2.47-3.96)]. CONCLUSIONS: The social gradient in risk of exposure and in economic impact of the pandemic can result in an accumulated vulnerability for socioeconomic deprived populations. The COVID-19 pandemic seems to have a double effect in these groups, contributing to heightened disparities and poor health outcomes, including in mental health. Protecting the most vulnerable populations is key to prevent the spread of the disease and mitigate the deepening of social and health disparities. Action is needed to develop policies and more extensive measures for reducing disproportionate experiences of adversity from the COVID-19 pandemic among most vulnerable populations.

Predicting COVID-19 Vaccination Intention: The Determinants of Vaccine Hesitancy.

Do people want to be vaccinated against COVID-19? Herd immunity is dependent on individuals' willingness to be vaccinated since vaccination is not mandatory. Our main goal was to investigate people's intention to be vaccinated and their intentions to vaccinate their children. Moreover, we were interested in understanding the role of the personal characteristics, psychological factors, and the lockdown context on that decision. Therefore, we conducted an online survey during the lockdown in Portugal (15 January 2021 until 14 March 2021). Participants completed a socio-demographic questionnaire, questions about their intentions of being vaccinated, concerns about the vaccine, a COVID-19 attitudes and beliefs scale, a COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and beliefs scale, and the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT) Scale. Our results showed that from the 649 participants, 63% of the participants reported being very likely to have the vaccine, while 60% reported being very likely to vaccinate their children. We conducted two linear regression models, explaining 65% of the variance for personal vaccination and 56% of the variance for children vaccination. We found that the COVID-19 vaccine general beliefs and attitudes were the main determinants of vaccination intention. Additionally, our proposed artificial neural network model was able to predict with 85% accuracy vaccination intention. Thus, our results suggest that psychological factors are an essential determinant of vaccination intention. Thus, public policy decision makers may use these insights for predicting vaccine hesitancy and designing effective vaccination communication strategies.