Pandemic coping and COVID-19 preventive behaviors among cancer survivors

Background Cancer survivors are at greater risk for COVID-19 complications, emphasizing the importance of adherence to COVID-19 prevention. Active coping mechanisms can help manage pandemic stress but disengaged coping practices can have adverse effects. Objectives 1) Identify differences in COVID-19 coping styles and COVID-19 preventive behaviors among cancer survivors in active treatment, survivors not in treatment, and a comparison group without a cancer history 2) Exploring variables that may predict adherence to COVID-19 preventative behaviors. Patient Involvement & Methods This study used an online survey among two categories of cancer survivors – one group in active treatment and one group no longer in treatment – and one group without a cancer history (N=897 total). Results and Discussion Cancer survivors in treatment were more likely to utilize both active and disengaged coping (p<.001). This could indicate that the additional COVID-19 strain is making survivors more likely to engage in coping in any way possible. Cancer survivors not in treatment were less likely to report intent to carry out COVID- 19 preventative behaviors compared to the comparison group (p=.009). Providers should understand how survivors may use both coping mechanism types because these coping strategies predict both depression and adherence to COVID-19 preventive behaviors.

Pandemic coping and COVID-19 preventive behaviors among cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors are at greater risk for COVID-19 complications, emphasizing the importance of adherence to COVID-19 prevention. Active coping mechanisms can help manage pandemic stress but disengaged coping practices can have adverse effects. OBJECTIVES: 1) Identify differences in COVID-19 coping styles and COVID-19 preventive behaviors among cancer survivors in active treatment, survivors not in treatment, and a comparison group without a cancer history. 2) Exploring variables that may predict adherence to COVID-19 preventative behaviors. PATIENT INVOLVEMENT & METHODS: This study used an online survey among two categories of cancer survivors - one group in active treatment and one group no longer in treatment - and one group without a cancer history (N = 897 total). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Cancer survivors in treatment were more likely to utilize both active and disengaged coping (p < .001). This could indicate that the additional COVID-19 strain is making survivors more likely to engage in coping in any way possible. Cancer survivors not in treatment were less likely to report intent to carry out COVID- 19 preventative behaviors compared to the comparison group (p = .009). Providers should understand how survivors may use both coping mechanism types because these coping strategies predict both depression and adherence to COVID-19 preventive behaviors.

Stay Socially Distant and Wash Your Hands: Using the Health Belief Model to Determine Intent for COVID-19 Preventive Behaviors at the Beginning of the Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has quickly spread around the world, and since currently no treatments that are safe and effective for large groups of people nor a vaccine are available, the best way to prevent the illness is to avoid being exposed to the virus causing it. The purpose of this study was to examine the predictive effects of both demographic and psychosocial factors originating with the Health Belief Model on reported intent to adhere to COVID-19 preventive behaviors (e.g., social distancing, hand washing, and not attending large gatherings). METHOD: A Qualtrics survey of 500 U.S. adults was conducted to explore the relationships of demographics and psychosocial factors with the intent to adhere to COVID-19 preventive measures. RESULTS: Gender was a predictor of taking preventive action, with women more likely to take action. Health Belief Model constructs predicted uptake of most COVID-19 preventive actions, but the constructs often appeared to work independent of the model. Race/ethnicity was an infrequent predictor, but when it did, minorities were less likely to report intent to adhere to COVID-19 preventive behaviors. CONCLUSION/IMPLICATIONS: While not a perfect model for this pandemic, the Health Belief Model and its constructs should continue to be considered for use by public health communicators focusing on preventive measure campaign design in both the COVID-19 pandemic era and beyond.

Predicting and comparing COVID-19 risk perceptions across the Netherlands and Belgium: A cross-sectional survey among university students.

People's risk perception of COVID-19 is an important predictor for adopting protective behavior. Although risk perceptions, and factors influencing these, may vary between countries, less attention has been paid to differences between adjacent regions from neighboring countries. In the midst of the first wave of the corona outbreak (March-April-May 2020), we measured risk perceptions as perceived threat (consisting of perceived severity and susceptibility) among university students (N = 668) in two connected countries: the Netherlands and Belgium. Theory-based predictor variables included experiential, efficacy-related, socio-cultural, cognitive, and demographic factors. While demographic variables and country were not significant predictors of perceived threat level, all other constructs were. Personal and indirect experiences with COVID-19, as well as higher scores on personal (self) efficacy to carry out recommended preventive behaviors were all associated with higher perceived threat. However, low collective efficacy and lower levels of trust in government were both also significantly associated with higher perceived threat, as was a low level of "lack of COVID-19 knowledge". These results hold implications for suitable risk communication strategies for increasing students' COVID-19 risk perceptions.

Between Healthcare Practitioners and Clergy: Evangelicals and COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy.

Evangelical Christians are among the most hesitant to get the COVID-19 vaccine. This study examined the extent to which COVID-19 vaccination uptake among Evangelicals is explained by demographic characteristics, Health Belief Model constructs, and faith-based support factors. Survey research firm Qualtrics recruited 531 U.S. adults and conducted a survey to explore predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people who self-identified as Evangelicals in September 2021. A logistic regression showed that those reporting high perceived benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine were more likely to be vaccinated, while those reporting high perceived barriers were less likely to be vaccinated. Those whose healthcare provider asked them about the vaccine were more likely to be vaccinated than those whose healthcare provider did not ask. Finally, while those who reported information seeking from religious leaders were less likely to be vaccinated, those who reported more faith-based support for vaccination were more likely to be vaccinated. In addition to beliefs about benefits and barriers to vaccination, the role of healthcare providers and clergy were important factors influencing vaccination status. Intervention efforts that capitalize on partnerships between health providers and clergy in supportive congregations may be able to reach undecided Evangelicals.

State Health Department Communication about Long COVID in the United States on Facebook: Risks, Prevention, and Support.

Greater public awareness of long COVID severity and susceptibility is needed to support those with long COVID and encourage preventive behaviors. It is not yet known to what extent health departments have informed the public about long COVID risks or offered guidance and support for those with long COVID. The objective of this research was to determine how and to what extent US state health departments have communicated with the public about long COVID via Facebook. Facebook posts with COVID-19 and long COVID terms made by 50 US state health departments plus Washington, DC, from 1 January 2020 to 31 January 2022, were collected using CrowdTangle. The first long COVID post appeared on 15 July 2020. From 15 July 2020 to 31 January 2022, state health departments made 49,310 COVID-19 posts and 137 long COVID posts. Using quantitative content analysis methods, long COVID posts were coded for health belief model constructs. Among long COVID posts, 75.18% included language about susceptibility, 64.96% severity, and 64.23% benefits of prevention. Cues to preventive action appeared in 54.01% of posts. 19.71% of posts provided guidance for those with long COVID. While health departments posted extensively about COVID-19, posts about long COVID were rare. This represents a missed opportunity to bolster arguments for preventive behaviors and support those experiencing long COVID.

Tweeting a Pandemic: Communicating #COVID19 Across the Globe.

The COVID-19 pandemic brought about an urgent need for public health departments to clearly communicate their prevention, testing, and treatment recommendations. Previous research supports that Twitter is an important platform that public health departments use to communicate crisis information to stakeholders. This study aimed to shed light on how international health departments shared relevant information about COVID-19 on Twitter in 2020. We conducted a quantitative content analysis of N = 1,200 tweets from twelve countries, across six continents. COVID-19 prevention behaviors were consistently referenced far more than testing or treatment recommendations across countries. Disease severity and susceptibility were referenced more than recommendation benefits, barriers, and efficacy. Results provide support for how public health departments can better communicate recommendations related to COVID-19 behaviors. Based on these results, implications for public health organizations and public relations practitioners worldwide are discussed, and hands-on action guidelines are provided.

At home and online during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic and the relationship to alcohol consumption in a national sample of U.S. adults.

INTRODUCTION: The current study aimed to understand the links between social media use and alcohol consumption during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: Data were from the national Understanding American Study, a probability-based Internet panel weighted to represent the U.S. population. Subjects (N = 5874; 51% female) were adults, 18 years and older, who completed a March survey (wave 1) and a follow-up survey one month later (wave 3). Analyses assessed the relationships of social media use at wave 1 with wave 3 alcohol use frequency, accounting for wave 1 alcohol use frequency and the sociodemographic characteristics of the sample. Two alcohol use change variables were also assessed as outcomes-increased and decreased alcohol use between waves. We considered the effect of work status changes (working/studying from home and job loss) as potential moderators. RESULTS: Twitter and Instagram users and users of multiple social media platforms, but not Facebook users, drank more frequently at wave 3. The results were similar when assessing relationships between social media use and increased alcohol use between waves. For Instagram users, more frequent alcohol use at wave 3 was at least partially attributed to drinking frequency at wave 1. Additionally, working/studying from home at wave 3 and employment (rather than job loss) were associated with greater consumption. The interaction effect between Twitter use and working/studying from home was statistically significant in association with alcohol use frequency at wave 3, as was the interaction effect between using multiple platforms and working/studying from home in association with decreased alcohol use between waves. DISCUSSION: Exposure to content about COVID-19 and increased alcohol consumption during the pandemic may have contributed to more frequent alcohol use for some social media users. The study of public health messaging via social media to change alcohol use behaviors during traumatic events is warranted.

Social distancing during COVID-19: threat and efficacy among university students in seven nations.

COVID-19 has been spreading fast worldwide, and until effective and safe vaccines have been widely adopted, preventive measures such as social distancing are crucial to keep the pandemic under control. The study's research questions asked which psychosocial factors predict social distancing behavior and whether there are country-level differences in social distancing? Using the Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) as a theoretical lens, we examined the predictive effects of threat and efficacy and demographic variables on adherence to the COVID-19 preventive behavior of social distancing using a survey among an international sample of university students. Using path modeling and analysis of covariance, we confirmed the predictive effects of the EPPM on social distancing behavior. Our final model showed that perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 was both directly and indirectly (through response efficacy) associated with social distancing behavior; that perceived severity of COVID-19 yielded a significant indirect effect on social distancing behavior through both self-efficacy and response efficacy; that perceived susceptibility is indirectly and positively associated with social distancing behavior through response efficacy; and that self-efficacy and response efficacy were directly associated with social distancing behavior. Additionally, there were country-level differences in social distancing. Possible explanations for and implications of these findings are discussed.

Endorsement of COVID-19 related misinformation among cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether cancer survivors currently in treatment are more or less likely to endorse COVID-19 related misinformation compared to their counterparts no longer in treatment and those without a cancer history. METHODS: We conducted a Qualtrics survey among 897 adults to determine differences in endorsement of COVID-19 misinformation among cancer survivors in active treatment, cancer survivors no longer in treatment, and a control group with no cancer history. RESULTS: Cancer survivors currently undergoing treatment were more likely to believe misinformation related to COVID-19 than those without a cancer history. Least likely to endorse COVID-19 misinformation were cancer survivor no longer in treatment. CONCLUSION: These results alert healthcare professionals to overall high levels of endorsement of COVID-19 misinformation among cancer survivors on active treatment. Oncologists and other providers working with patients undergoing treatment for cancer should be particularly mindful of the potential elevated beliefs in misinformation among this group. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Since patients undergoing cancer treatment seem to be particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 misinformation, oncologists and other healthcare providers working with this patient population should help address patients' concerns about the pandemic and how it relates to their course of treatment.

U.S. public support for COVID-19 vaccine donation to low- and middle-income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.

As COVID-19 vaccines become available to the public, there will be a massive worldwide distribution effort. Vaccine distribution has historically been unequal primarily due to the inability of nations with developing economies to purchase enough vaccine to fully vaccinate their populations. Inequitable access to COVID-19 vaccines will not just cause humanitarian suffering, it will likely also be associated with increased economic suffering worldwide. This study focuses on the U.S. population and its beliefs about future COVID-19 vaccine donation by the U.S. to low- and middle-income countries. This study carried out a survey among 788 U.S. adults. Variables include demographics, COVID-19 vaccine priority status, COVID-19 vaccine donation beliefs, and Social Dominance Orientation. Analyses showed that older respondents were both less likely to endorse higher levels of COVID-19 vaccine donations and were more likely to want to wait until all in the U.S. who want the vaccine have received it; those who identified as Democrats were more likely to endorse higher levels of future COVID-19 vaccine donation than Republicans; and those scoring higher on SDO were both less likely to endorse higher levels of COVID-19 vaccine donations as well as more likely to want to wait until all in the U.S. who want the vaccine have received it. Policymakers, as well as healthcare providers and public health communication professionals, should give consideration to those messages most likely to engender support for global prevention efforts with each audience segment.

Willingness to get the COVID-19 vaccine with and without emergency use authorization.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed psychosocial predictors of U.S. adults' willingness to get a future COVID-19 vaccine and whether these predictors differ under an emergency use authorization (EUA) release of the vaccine. METHODS: A survey of 788 U.S. adults was conducted to explore the relationships between demographics and psychosocial predictors of intent to get a future COVID-19 vaccine as well as willingness to get such a vaccine under EUA. RESULTS: Significant predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions were education, having insurance, scoring high on subjective norms, a positive attitude toward the vaccine, as well as high perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, high perceived benefits of the vaccine, scoring low on barriers to the vaccine, and scoring high on self-efficacy. Predictors of willingness to take a COVID-19 vaccine under EUA were age, race/ethnicity, positive subjective norms, high perceived behavioral control, positive attitudes toward the vaccine, as well as high perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, high perceived benefits of the vaccine, low barriers to the vaccine, and scoring high on self-efficacy for getting the vaccine. Concerns about rushed vaccine development appear to reduce vaccine uptake intent, as well as willingness to get the vaccine under EUA. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine-related messages should both address concerns about the vaccine and its development and reinforce benefits of the vaccine (both factors significant in both models). Vaccine efforts may need to go beyond just communications campaigns correcting misinformation about a COVID-19 vaccine to also focus on re-establishing public trust in government agencies.

COVID-19-Related Misinformation among Parents of Patients with Pediatric Cancer.

We conducted a survey among 735 parents to determine differences in endorsement of misinformation related to the coronavirus disease pandemic between parents of children in cancer treatment and those with children who had no cancer history. Parents of children with cancer were more likely to believe misinformation than parents of children without cancer.