Combating Misinformation as a Core Function of Public Health

The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene determined that the spread of misinformation about Covid-19 was having a harmful health impact, particularly on communities of color with low vaccination rates. It established a dedicated Misinformation Response Unit to monitor messages containing dangerous misinformation presented on multiple media platforms, including social media, non-English media, and international sites, and proliferating in community forums. The Misinformation Response Unit and the Health Department collaborated with more than 100 community partners to tailor culturally appropriate, scientifically accurate messages to different populations. The Health Department and its partners were able to rapidly identify messages containing inaccurate information about Covid-19 vaccines, treatment, and other issues and to support the delivery of accurate information to various populations. Although the harms of misinformation and benefits of addressing the problem require additional evaluation, internal and external interviews suggested that the Misinformation Response Unit helped the Health Department counter misinformation and disseminate accurate scientific information to the community, thus improving health and vaccine equity during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine receipt at two integrated healthcare systems in New York City: a cross-sectional study of healthcare workers.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine receipt among healthcare workers and the role of vaccine confidence in decisions to vaccinate, and to better understand concerns related to COVID-19 vaccination. DESIGN: Cross-sectional anonymous survey among front-line, support service and administrative healthcare workers. SETTING: Two large integrated healthcare systems (one private and one public) in New York City during the initial roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccine. PARTICIPANTS: 1933 healthcare workers, including nurses, physicians, allied health professionals, environmental services staff, researchers and administrative staff. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was COVID-19 vaccine receipt during the initial roll-out of the vaccine among healthcare workers. RESULTS: Among 1933 healthcare workers who had been offered the vaccine, 81% had received the vaccine at the time of the survey. Receipt was lower among black (58%; OR: 0.14, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.2) compared with white (91%) healthcare workers, and higher among non-Hispanic (84%) compared with Hispanic (69%; OR: 2.37, 95% CI 1.8 to 3.1) healthcare workers. Among healthcare workers with concerns about COVID-19 vaccine safety, 65% received the vaccine. Among healthcare workers who agreed with the statement that the vaccine is important to protect family members, 86% were vaccinated. Of those who disagreed, 25% received the vaccine (p<0.001). In a multivariable analysis, concern about being experimented on (OR: 0.44, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.6), concern about COVID-19 vaccine safety (OR: 0.39, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.55), lack of influenza vaccine receipt (OR: 0.28, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.44), disagreeing that COVID-19 vaccination is important to protect others (OR: 0.37, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.52) and black race (OR: 0.38, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.59) were independently associated with COVID-19 vaccine non-receipt. Over 70% of all healthcare workers responded that they had been approached for vaccine advice multiple times by family, community members and patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrated high overall receipt among healthcare workers. Even among healthcare workers with concerns about COVID-19 vaccine safety, side effects or being experimented on, over 50% received the vaccine. Attitudes around the importance of COVID-19 vaccination to protect others played a large role in healthcare workers' decisions to vaccinate. We observed striking inequities in COVID-19 vaccine receipt, particularly affecting black and Hispanic workers. Further research is urgently needed to address issues related to vaccine equity and uptake in the context of systemic racism and barriers to care. This is particularly important given the influence healthcare workers have in vaccine decision-making conversations in their communities.

Using Public Deliberation to Set Priorities: The Case of COVID-19 Vaccine Access in New York City.

CONTEXT: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a record number of deaths in the United States and tremendous economic and personal strain. During 2020, in anticipation of a vaccine to slow the spread of disease, local and state governments in the United States developed plans for vaccine prioritization, given a limited initial supply. Recognizing the challenges inherent in prioritization, the New York City (NYC) health department sought guidance from members of the public about the fairest approach to early-stage vaccine distribution. OBJECTIVE: To solicit recommendations from NYC residents on priorities regarding vaccine access for essential worker occupations, considering risk factors and preferred approaches to fairness. IMPLEMENTATION: Five public deliberations were conducted with NYC residents (N = 91). Participants heard presentations on the COVID-19 vaccine, the local distribution of illness and death, and approaches to fairness in the context of deliberating on priorities for 6 essential worker occupations and 4 risk factors. Discussions were transcribed, and transcriptions were coded and analyzed using preidentified and emergent themes. Pre- and post-surveys, focused on factors relevant to prioritization, were administered during each public deliberation. RESULTS: Recommendations for prioritization emphasized risk of severe morbidity and mortality, and work and neighborhood conditions with fewer protections (eg, in-person work, exposure to many people). Participants prioritized elementary schoolteachers, grocery store workers, and bus drivers, underlying health conditions, and neighborhood of residence. Participants focused on equity, recognizing that those at highest risk were largely low-income populations of color and individuals living in low-resourced neighborhoods. CONCLUSIONS: Participants' focus on equity, and acknowledgment of racial and ethnic disparities, revealed a nuanced understanding of the broader determinants of health. Recommendations reinforced the NYC health department's approach to vaccine distribution. PUBLIC HEALTH IMPLICATIONS: Results from these public deliberations confirmed community support for approaches prioritizing health equity, recognizing both societal and personal factors affecting vulnerability to poor health.