COVID-19 vaccine willingness amongst patients with mental illness compared with the general population.

Patients with mental illness are at an increased risk of COVID-19 infection, morbidity, and mortality, and prioritisation of this group for COVID-19 vaccination programmes has therefore been suggested. Vaccine uptake may, however, be compromised by vaccine hesitancy amongst patients with mental illness, posing a critical public health issue. We conducted two surveys to provide weighted estimates of vaccine willingness amongst patients with mental illness and the general population of Denmark. Vaccine willingness was high in both groups, but slightly lower amongst patients with mental illness (84.8%), compared with the general population (89.5%) (p < .001). Based on these findings, vaccine hesitancy does not appear to be a major barrier for vaccine uptake amongst patients with mental illness in Denmark, but may be so in other countries with lower general vaccine willingness. Replication of the present study in other countries is strongly warranted.

Running on empty: a longitudinal global study of psychological well-being among runners during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: There are indications that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound negative effect on psychological well-being. Here, we investigated this hypothesis using longitudinal data from a large global cohort of runners, providing unprecedented leverage for understanding how the temporal development in the pandemic pressure relates to well-being across countries. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Global. PARTICIPANTS: We used data from the worldwide Garmin-RUNSAFE cohort that recruited runners with a Garmin Connect account, which is used for storing running activities tracked by a Garmin device. A total of 7808 Garmin Connect users from 86 countries participated. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: From 1 August 2019 (prepandemic) to 31 December 2020, participants completed surveys every second week that included the five-item WHO Well-Being Index (WHO-5). Pandemic pressure was proxied by the number of COVID-19-related deaths per country, retrieved from the Coronavirus Resource Centre at Johns Hopkins University. Panel data regression including individual- and time-fixed effects was used to study the association between country-level COVID-19-related deaths over the past 14 days and individual-level self-reported well-being over the past 14 days. RESULTS: The 7808 participants completed a total of 125 409 WHO-5 records over the study period. We found a statistically significant inverse relationship between the number of COVID-19-related deaths and the level of psychological well-being-independent of running activity and running injuries (a reduction of 1.42 WHO-5 points per COVID-19-related death per 10 000 individuals, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative effect on the psychological well-being of the affected populations, which is concerning from a global mental health perspective.

Public support for unequal treatment of unvaccinated citizens: Evidence from Denmark.

While billions have been vaccinated against COVID-19, unvaccinated citizens remain a challenge to public health given their higher likelihood of passing on the virus. One way for governments to reduce this concern is to enact more restrictive rules and regulations for the unvaccinated citizens in order to incentivize them to become vaccinated and/or reduce their spread of the virus. However, such rule differentiation conflicts with liberal principles of equal treatment, thereby raising a trade-off between material (public health) and principled concerns. To gain legitimacy in trading off these difficult concerns, governments are likely to look to preferences in the general population. We therefore analyze to what extent unequal treatment of the unvaccinated in terms of differentiation of various rules and regulations finds support among the general public. In a pre-registered survey experiment, we investigate public support for various COVID-19 regulations (e.g., test fees, isolation pay, and hospital prioritization). In the experiment, we randomly assign respondents to evaluate regulations that either (i) apply to adults in general or (ii) only to those adults who deliberately have chosen not to be vaccinated. This design provides a valid means to assess support for unequal treatment of the unvaccinated by minimizing various concerns relating to survey responding. Furthermore, we examine how these preferences vary by individual vaccination status, trust in institutions, as well as over-time changes in severity of the pandemic. We find significantly (both statistically and substantively) higher support for restrictive policies when targeted exclusively toward the unvaccinated, which we interpret as support for unequal treatment of this group. We also uncover strong polarization in these preferences between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, but a much more limited role for trust and severity of the pandemic.