Intentions to be Vaccinated Against COVID-19: The Role of Prosociality and Conspiracy Beliefs across 20 Countries.

Understanding the determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake is important to inform policy decisions and plan vaccination campaigns. The aims of this research were to: (1) explore the individual- and country-level determinants of intentions to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, and (2) examine worldwide variation in vaccination intentions. This cross-sectional online survey was conducted during the first wave of the pandemic, involving 6697 respondents across 20 countries. Results showed that 72.9% of participants reported positive intentions to be vaccinated against COVID-19, whereas 16.8% were undecided, and 10.3% reported they would not be vaccinated. At the individual level, prosociality was a significant positive predictor of vaccination intentions, whereas generic beliefs in conspiracy theories and religiosity were negative predictors. Country-level determinants, including cultural dimensions of individualism/collectivism and power distance, were not significant predictors of vaccination intentions. Altogether, this study identifies individual-level predictors that are common across multiple countries, provides further evidence on the importance of combating conspiracy theories, involving religious institutions in vaccination campaigns, and stimulating prosocial motives to encourage vaccine uptake.

The distinct associations of ingroup attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic: Evidence from a multilevel investigation in 21 countries.

While public health crises such as the coronavirus pandemic transcend national borders, practical efforts to combat them are often instantiated at the national level. Thus, national group identities may play key roles in shaping compliance with and support for preventative measures (e.g., hygiene and lockdowns). Using data from 25,159 participants across representative samples from 21 nations, we investigated how different modalities of ingroup identification (attachment and glorification) are linked with reactions to the coronavirus pandemic (compliance and support for lockdown restrictions). We also examined the extent to which the associations of attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic are mediated through trust in information about the coronavirus pandemic from scientific and government sources. Multilevel models suggested that attachment, but not glorification, was associated with increased trust in science and compliance with federal COVID-19 guidelines. However, while both attachment and glorification were associated with trust in government and support for lockdown restrictions, glorification was more strongly associated with trust in government information than attachment. These results suggest that both attachment and glorification can be useful for promoting public health, although glorification's role, while potentially stronger, is restricted to pathways through trust in government information.

Pandemic boredom: Little evidence that lockdown-related boredom affects risky public health behaviors across 116 countries.

Some public officials have expressed concern that policies mandating collective public health behaviors (e.g., national/regional "lockdown") may result in behavioral fatigue that ultimately renders such policies ineffective. Boredom, specifically, has been singled out as one potential risk factor for noncompliance. We examined whether there was empirical evidence to support this concern during the COVID-19 pandemic in a large cross-national sample of 63,336 community respondents from 116 countries. Although boredom was higher in countries with more COVID-19 cases and in countries that instituted more stringent lockdowns, such boredom did not predict longitudinal within-person decreases in social distancing behavior (or vice versa; n = 8,031) in early spring and summer of 2020. Overall, we found little evidence that changes in boredom predict individual public health behaviors (handwashing, staying home, self-quarantining, and avoiding crowds) over time, or that such behaviors had any reliable longitudinal effects on boredom itself. In summary, contrary to concerns, we found little evidence that boredom posed a public health risk during lockdown and quarantine. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the PREDIMED-Plus randomized clinical trial: Effects on the interventions, participants follow-up, and adiposity.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the implementation of most ongoing clinical trials worldwide including the PREDIMED-Plus study. The PREDIMED-Plus is an ongoing, multicenter, controlled intervention trial, aimed at weight-loss and cardiovascular disease prevention, in which participants were randomized (1:1 ratio) to an intervention group (energy-reduced Mediterranean diet, promotion of physical activity, and behavioral support) or to a control group (Mediterranean diet with usual care advice). When the pandemic began, the trial was in the midst of the planned intervention. The objective of this report was to examine the effects of the pandemic on the delivery of the intervention and to describe the strategies established to mitigate the possible adverse effects of the pandemic lockdown on data collection and adiposity. Methods: We assessed the integrity of the PREDIMED-Plus trial during 5 identified periods of the COVID-19 pandemic determined according to restrictions dictated by the Spanish government authorities. A standardized questionnaire was delivered to each of the 23 PREDIMED-Plus recruiting centers to collected data regarding the trial integrity. The effect of the restrictions on intervention components (diet, physical activity) was evaluated with data obtained in the three identified lockdown phases: pre lockdown, lockdown proper, and post lockdown. Results: During the lockdown (March/2020-June/2021), 4,612 participants (48% women, mean age 65y) attended pre-specified yearly follow-up visits to receive lifestyle recommendations and obtain adiposity measures. The overall mean (SD) of the proportions reported by each center showed that 40.4% (25.4) participants had in-person visits, 39.8% (18.2) participants were contacted by telephone and 35% (26.3) by electronic means. Participants' follow-up and data collection rates increased across lockdown periods (from ≈10% at onset to ≈80% at the end). Compared to pre-lockdown, waist circumference increased during (0.75 cm [95% CI: 0.60-0.91]) and after (0.72 cm [95% CI: 0.56-0.89]) lockdown. Body weight did not change during lockdown (0.01 kg [95% CI: -0.10 to 0.13) and decreased after lockdown (-0.17 kg [95% CI: -0.30 to -0.04]). Conclusion: Mitigating strategies to enforce the intervention and patient's follow-up during lockdown have been successful in preserving the integrity of the trial and ensuring its continuation, with minor effects on adiposity. Clinical trial registration: https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN89898870, identifier ISRCTN89898870.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the PREDIMED-Plus randomized clinical trial: Effects on the interventions, participants follow-up, and adiposity

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the implementation of most ongoing clinical trials worldwide including the PREDIMED-Plus study. The PREDIMED-Plus is an ongoing, multicenter, controlled intervention trial, aimed at weight-loss and cardiovascular disease prevention, in which participants were randomized (1:1 ratio) to an intervention group (energy-reduced Mediterranean diet, promotion of physical activity, and behavioral support) or to a control group (Mediterranean diet with usual care advice). When the pandemic began, the trial was in the midst of the planned intervention. The objective of this report was to examine the effects of the pandemic on the delivery of the intervention and to describe the strategies established to mitigate the possible adverse effects of the pandemic lockdown on data collection and adiposity. Methods We assessed the integrity of the PREDIMED-Plus trial during 5 identified periods of the COVID-19 pandemic determined according to restrictions dictated by the Spanish government authorities. A standardized questionnaire was delivered to each of the 23 PREDIMED-Plus recruiting centers to collected data regarding the trial integrity. The effect of the restrictions on intervention components (diet, physical activity) was evaluated with data obtained in the three identified lockdown phases: pre lockdown, lockdown proper, and post lockdown. Results During the lockdown (March/2020-June/2021), 4,612 participants (48% women, mean age 65y) attended pre-specified yearly follow-up visits to receive lifestyle recommendations and obtain adiposity measures. The overall mean (SD) of the proportions reported by each center showed that 40.4% (25.4) participants had in-person visits, 39.8% (18.2) participants were contacted by telephone and 35% (26.3) by electronic means. Participants' follow-up and data collection rates increased across lockdown periods (from ≈10% at onset to ≈80% at the end). Compared to pre-lockdown, waist circumference increased during (0.75 cm [95% CI: 0.60–0.91]) and after (0.72 cm [95% CI: 0.56–0.89]) lockdown. Body weight did not change during lockdown (0.01 kg [95% CI: –0.10 to 0.13) and decreased after lockdown (-0.17 kg [95% CI: –0.30 to –0.04]). Conclusion Mitigating strategies to enforce the intervention and patient's follow-up during lockdown have been successful in preserving the integrity of the trial and ensuring its continuation, with minor effects on adiposity. Clinical trial registration https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN89898870, identifier ISRCTN89898870.

Trust in scientific information mediates associations between conservatism and coronavirus responses in the U.S., but few other nations.

U.S.-based research suggests conservatism is linked with less concern about contracting coronavirus and less preventative behaviors to avoid infection. Here, we investigate whether these tendencies are partly attributable to distrust in scientific information, and evaluate whether they generalize outside the U.S., using public data and recruited representative samples across three studies (Ntotal = 34,710). In Studies 1 and 2, we examine these relationships in the U.S., yielding converging evidence for a sequential indirect effect of conservatism on compliance through scientific (dis)trust and infection concern. In Study 3, we compare these relationships across 19 distinct countries. Although the relationships between trust in scientific information about the coronavirus, concern about coronavirus infection, and compliance are consistent cross-nationally, the relationships between conservatism and trust in scientific information are not. These relationships are strongest in North America. Consequently, the indirect effects observed in Studies 1-2 only replicate in North America (the U.S. and Canada) and in Indonesia. Study 3 also found parallel direct and indirect effects on support for lockdown restrictions. These associations suggest not only that relationships between conservatism and compliance are not universal, but localized to particular countries where conservatism is more strongly related to trust in scientific information about the coronavirus pandemic.

Correction: Politicization of COVID-19 health-protective behaviors in the United States: Longitudinal and cross-national evidence.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256740.].

COVID-19 stressors and health behaviors: A multilevel longitudinal study across 86 countries.

Anxiety associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and home confinement has been associated with adverse health behaviors, such as unhealthy eating, smoking, and drinking. However, most studies have been limited by regional sampling, which precludes the examination of behavioral consequences associated with the pandemic at a global level. Further, few studies operationalized pandemic-related stressors to enable the investigation of the impact of different types of stressors on health outcomes. This study examined the association between perceived risk of COVID-19 infection and economic burden of COVID-19 with health-promoting and health-damaging behaviors using data from the PsyCorona Study: an international, longitudinal online study of psychological and behavioral correlates of COVID-19. Analyses utilized data from 7,402 participants from 86 countries across three waves of assessment between May 16 and June 13, 2020. Participants completed self-report measures of COVID-19 infection risk, COVID-19-related economic burden, physical exercise, diet quality, cigarette smoking, sleep quality, and binge drinking. Multilevel structural equation modeling analyses showed that across three time points, perceived economic burden was associated with reduced diet quality and sleep quality, as well as increased smoking. Diet quality and sleep quality were lowest among respondents who perceived high COVID-19 infection risk combined with high economic burden. Neither binge drinking nor exercise were associated with perceived COVID-19 infection risk, economic burden, or their interaction. Findings point to the value of developing interventions to address COVID-related stressors, which have an impact on health behaviors that, in turn, may influence vulnerability to COVID-19 and other health outcomes.

Predictors of adherence to public health behaviors for fighting COVID-19 derived from longitudinal data.

The present paper examines longitudinally how subjective perceptions about COVID-19, one's community, and the government predict adherence to public health measures to reduce the spread of the virus. Using an international survey (N = 3040), we test how infection risk perception, trust in the governmental response and communications about COVID-19, conspiracy beliefs, social norms on distancing, tightness of culture, and community punishment predict various containment-related attitudes and behavior. Autoregressive analyses indicate that, at the personal level, personal hygiene behavior was predicted by personal infection risk perception. At social level, social distancing behaviors such as abstaining from face-to-face contact were predicted by perceived social norms. Support for behavioral mandates was predicted by confidence in the government and cultural tightness, whereas support for anti-lockdown protests was predicted by (lower) perceived clarity of communication about the virus. Results are discussed in light of policy implications and creating effective interventions.

Using machine learning to identify important predictors of COVID-19 infection prevention behaviors during the early phase of the pandemic.

Before vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) became available, a set of infection-prevention behaviors constituted the primary means to mitigate the virus spread. Our study aimed to identify important predictors of this set of behaviors. Whereas social and health psychological theories suggest a limited set of predictors, machine-learning analyses can identify correlates from a larger pool of candidate predictors. We used random forests to rank 115 candidate correlates of infection-prevention behavior in 56,072 participants across 28 countries, administered in March to May 2020. The machine-learning model predicted 52% of the variance in infection-prevention behavior in a separate test sample-exceeding the performance of psychological models of health behavior. Results indicated the two most important predictors related to individual-level injunctive norms. Illustrating how data-driven methods can complement theory, some of the most important predictors were not derived from theories of health behavior-and some theoretically derived predictors were relatively unimportant.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes in a cohort of oncologic patients with COVID-19 during the first year of the pandemic in Mexico.

BACKGROUND: Literature on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in cancer patients is scarce in Latin America. This population seems to have a higher risk for adverse outcomes. This study aims to correlate clinical characteristics with outcomes in patients with cancer. METHODS: We included all patients with cancer and confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection from April 19 to December 31, 2020, at the Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia, Mexico. Clinical information was obtained from medical and epidemiological records. For the association between variables and hospitalization, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and mortality, univariate and multivariate logistic regression were performed; odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Four hundred thirty-three patients were included; 268 (62%) were female, the median age was 55 years. One hundred thirty-five (31%), 131 (30%), and 93 (21%) patients had obesity, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus (DM), respectively. Three hundred forty-one (79%) had solid cancer. One hundred seventy (39%) had advanced cancer. Two hundred (46%) patients were hospitalized. Age (p < 0.01), male gender (p = 0.03), hematological malignancies (HM) (p = 0.04) and advanced cancer (p = 0.03) increased the risk for hospital admission. Forty-five (10%) patients required IMV. Age (p = 0.02); DM (p = 0.04); high C-reactive protein (p < 0.01), and lactate dehydrogenase (p = 0.03) were associated with IMV. Mortality within 30 days after diagnosis was 18% (76 cases). Associated characteristics were age (p = 0.04) and low albumin (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, patients with cancer showed higher mortality, need for hospitalization, and IMV compared with other non-cancer cohorts. We did not find an increased risk in mortality for HM. Although our cohort was younger than others previously reported, age was a strong predictor of adverse outcomes. Variables associated with IMV and death were similar to those previously described in cancer patients with COVID-19.

Concern with COVID-19 pandemic threat and attitudes towards immigrants: The mediating effect of the desire for tightness.

Tightening social norms is thought to be adaptive for dealing with collective threat yet it may have negative consequences for increasing prejudice. The present research investigated the role of desire for cultural tightness, triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic, in increasing negative attitudes towards immigrants. We used participant-level data from 41 countries (N = 55,015) collected as part of the PsyCorona project, a cross-national longitudinal study on responses to COVID-19. Our predictions were tested through multilevel and SEM models, treating participants as nested within countries. Results showed that people's concern with COVID-19 threat was related to greater desire for tightness which, in turn, was linked to more negative attitudes towards immigrants. These findings were followed up with a longitudinal model (N = 2,349) which also showed that people's heightened concern with COVID-19 in an earlier stage of the pandemic was associated with an increase in their desire for tightness and negative attitudes towards immigrants later in time. Our findings offer insight into the trade-offs that tightening social norms under collective threat has for human groups.

Nutritional status in patients with COVID-19 and cancer: the experience of the National Cancer Institute in Mexico.

INTRODUCTION: Background: nutritional status might vary according to different underlying illnesses such as cancer or infectious diseases, including COVID-19. In this context, data from developing countries remain scarce. Objectives: the objective of this study was to assess the nutritional status and outcomes of Mexican cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at a tertiary care center. Methods: this was a retrospective study including 121 consecutive cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at the National Cancer Institute, Mexico City, during four months. Results: the most frequent oncological diagnoses were gynecological (19 %) and hematological (17 %). Most patients were overweight (35 %). In the univariate analysis, ≥ 65 years, intubation, hypoalbuminemia, high creatinine, lymphopenia, nutrition-impact symptoms, and ECOG 2-4 were statistically associated with lower survival. The median survival of the cohort was 41 days. Conclusions: to our best knowledge, this is the first study of its kind performed in Mexico, and as other studies from other regions, our results might aid in identifying cancer patients most at risk for severe COVID-19, and could be potentially useful to enhance public health messaging on self-isolation and social distancing among Mexican cancer patients.

INTRODUCCIÓN: Antecedentes: el estado nutricional puede variar según las diferentes enfermedades subyacentes, como el cáncer o las enfermedades infecciosas, por ejemplo, la COVID-19. En este contexto, los datos de los países en desarrollo siguen siendo escasos. Objetivos: el objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar el estado nutricional y los resultados de pacientes mexicanos con cáncer diagnosticados de COVID-19 en un centro de atención terciaria. Métodos: se trata de un estudio retrospectivo que incluyó a 121 pacientes consecutivos con cáncer diagnosticados de COVID-19 en el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer de la Ciudad de México durante cuatro meses. Resultados: los diagnósticos oncológicos más frecuentes fueron los ginecológicos (19 %) y hematológicos (17 %). La mayoría de los pacientes tenían sobrepeso (35 %) y obesidad (31 %). En el análisis univariado, ≥ 65 años, intubación, hipoalbuminemia, creatinina alta, linfopenia, síntomas de impacto nutricional y ECOG 2-4 se asociaron estadísticamente con una menor supervivencia. La mediana de supervivencia de la cohorte fue de 41 días. Conclusiones: hasta donde sabemos, este es el primer estudio de este tipo realizado en México y, al igual que otros estudios de otras regiones, nuestros resultados podrían ayudar a identificar a los pacientes con cáncer y mayor riesgo de COVID-19 grave; también podrían ser potencialmente útiles para mejorar los mensajes de salud sobre el autoaislamiento y el distanciamiento social entre los pacientes mexicanos con cáncer.

Politicization of COVID-19 health-protective behaviors in the United States: Longitudinal and cross-national evidence.

During the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, U.S. conservative politicians and the media downplayed the risk of both contracting COVID-19 and the effectiveness of recommended health behaviors. Health behavior theories suggest perceived vulnerability to a health threat and perceived effectiveness of recommended health-protective behaviors determine motivation to follow recommendations. Accordingly, we predicted that-as a result of politicization of the pandemic-politically conservative Americans would be less likely to enact recommended health-protective behaviors. In two longitudinal studies of U.S. residents, political conservatism was inversely associated with perceived health risk and adoption of health-protective behaviors over time. The effects of political orientation on health-protective behaviors were mediated by perceived risk of infection, perceived severity of infection, and perceived effectiveness of the health-protective behaviors. In a global cross-national analysis, effects were stronger in the U.S. (N = 10,923) than in an international sample (total N = 51,986), highlighting the increased and overt politicization of health behaviors in the U.S.

'We are all in the same boat': How societal discontent affects intention to help during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a global health crisis. Consequently, many countries have adopted restrictive measures that caused a substantial change in society. Within this framework, it is reasonable to suppose that a sentiment of societal discontent, defined as generalized concern about the precarious state of society, has arisen. Literature shows that collectively experienced situations can motivate people to help each other. Since societal discontent is conceptualized as a collective phenomenon, we argue that it could influence intention to help others, particularly those who suffer from coronavirus. Thus, in the present study, we aimed (a) to explore the relationship between societal discontent and intention to help at the individual level and (b) to investigate a possible moderating effect of societal discontent at the country level on this relationship. To fulfil our purposes, we used data collected in 42 countries (N = 61,734) from the PsyCorona Survey, a cross-national longitudinal study. Results of multilevel analysis showed that, when societal discontent is experienced by the entire community, individuals dissatisfied with society are more prone to help others. Testing the model with longitudinal data (N = 3,817) confirmed our results. Implications for those findings are discussed in relation to crisis management. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.

What doesn't kill us makes us stronger: The COVID-19 pandemic transforms anonymous citizens into devoted actors

COVID-19 is transforming our lives. We could frame this illness by surrendering to disaster or striving to get over it. We suggest that the pandemic is converting 'some' citizens into devoted actors, individuals viscerally connected-fused-to a group who share a sacred value. Since devoted actors are willing to make costly self-sacrifices for their peers and convictions, the virus, instead of 'killing us', could well make us stronger. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved) Abstract (Spanish) El COVID-19 esta transformando nuestras vidas. Podemos afrontar la enfermedad rindiendonos al desastre o luchando para superarlo. En este articulo sugerimos que la pandemia esta transformando 'algunos' ciudadanos en actores devotos, personas conectadas visceralmente-fusionadas-con un grupo que comparte un valor sagrado. Dado que los actores devotos estan dispuestos a realizar sacrificios costosos por los miembros de su grupo y por sus convicciones, es muy probable que el virus, en lugar de 'matarnos', nos este haciendo mas fuertes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

Lockdown Lives: A Longitudinal Study of Inter-Relationships Among Feelings of Loneliness, Social Contacts, and Solidarity During the COVID-19 Lockdown in Early 2020.

We examine how social contacts and feelings of solidarity shape experiences of loneliness during the COVID-19 lockdown in early 2020. From the PsyCorona database, we obtained longitudinal data from 23 countries, collected between March and May 2020. The results demonstrated that although online contacts help to reduce feelings of loneliness, people who feel more lonely are less likely to use that strategy. Solidarity played only a small role in shaping feelings of loneliness during lockdown. Thus, it seems we must look beyond the current focus on online contact and solidarity to help people address feelings of loneliness during lockdown. Finally, online contacts did not function as a substitute for face-to-face contacts outside the home-in fact, more frequent online contact in earlier weeks predicted more frequent face-to-face contacts in later weeks. As such, this work provides relevant insights into how individuals manage the impact of restrictions on their social lives.

Lives versus Livelihoods? Perceived economic risk has a stronger association with support for COVID-19 preventive measures than perceived health risk.

This paper examines whether compliance with COVID-19 mitigation measures is motivated by wanting to save lives or save the economy (or both), and which implications this carries to fight the pandemic. National representative samples were collected from 24 countries (N = 25,435). The main predictors were (1) perceived risk to contract coronavirus, (2) perceived risk to suffer economic losses due to coronavirus, and (3) their interaction effect. Individual and country-level variables were added as covariates in multilevel regression models. We examined compliance with various preventive health behaviors and support for strict containment policies. Results show that perceived economic risk consistently predicted mitigation behavior and policy support-and its effects were positive. Perceived health risk had mixed effects. Only two significant interactions between health and economic risk were identified-both positive.