Role of Parents' Perceived Risk and Responsibility in Deciding on Children's COVID-19 Vaccination.

OBJECTIVES: We examined associations between parents' reports for whether their children had been vaccinated against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and parents' perceptions of the vaccine's long-term risk, as well as their own sense of responsibility on deciding to vaccinate or not vaccinate their children. METHODS: During the period when the Omicron variant was dominant (February-March 2022), we surveyed parents from a nationally representative, probability-based Internet panel about vaccination of their school-aged children, perceptions that the vaccine's long-term risk exceeds risks without vaccination (henceforth: comparative long-term risk), their tendency to feel more responsible if their child became sick from vaccination than when unvaccinated (henceforth: anticipated responsibility), and their own vaccination status. We used multivariate analyses to assess associations of children's COVID-19 vaccination with parental comparative long-term risk perceptions, anticipated responsibility, parents' vaccination status, and demographics. RESULTS: Among 1715 parent respondents (71% of eligible), 45% perceived vaccine-related comparative long-term risk and 18% perceived greater anticipated responsibility from vaccination than no vaccination. After accounting for parental vaccination, parents who were more concerned about comparative long-term risk and who reported greater anticipated responsibility were 6% (95% confidence interval, -0.09 to -0.03; P < .001) and 15% (95% confidence interval, -0.19 to -0.11; P < .001) less likely to have vaccinated their children, respectively. Findings were driven by vaccinated parents. CONCLUSIONS: Parents' perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine's long-term comparative risk and their greater anticipated responsibility for children getting sick if vaccinated (versus not) were associated with lower vaccine uptake among children of vaccinated parents.

Regular Cannabis Use During the First Year of the Pandemic: Studying Trajectories Rather Than Prevalence.

INTRODUCTION: Cannabis use in the U.S. rose early in the COVID-19 pandemic, but it is unclear whether that rise was temporary or permanent. This study estimated the nature and sociodemographic correlates of U.S. adult subpopulations regularly using cannabis by examining weekly trajectories of use during the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: Data came from the Understanding America Study, a nationally representative panel of U.S. adults (N=8,397; March 10, 2020-March 29, 2021). A growth mixture model was deployed to identify subgroups with similar regular cannabis use. Sociodemographic correlates of subgroups were examined using multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Four cannabis-use groups were identified. Most participants did not regularly use cannabis (no regular use; 81.7%). The other groups increased regular use until April 2020 but then diverged. Some (7.1%) decreased thereafter, whereas others (3.4%) maintained their elevated use until October 26, 2020 before decreasing. The last group (7.7%) sustained their elevated use throughout. Individuals aged between 18 and 39 years, unmarried, living in poverty, without a college degree, and with longer unemployment or underemployment spells had higher odds of being in the other groups with more weekly use than in the no-regular-use group. CONCLUSIONS: The analyses revealed population subgroups with prolonged regular cannabis use and a disproportionate concentration of socioeconomically vulnerable members of society in these subgroups. These findings elucidate important heterogeneity in the subpopulations using cannabis, highlighting the urgent need to tailor public health programs for subgroups that may have unique service needs.

School-Age Children's Wellbeing and School-Related Needs During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic and related school closures may have disrupted school-related supports and services important to children's wellbeing. However, we lack national data about US children's wellbeing and family priorities for school-related services. We sought to determine 1) children's social-emotional wellbeing and 2) needs and priorities for school-based services in the 2021-2022 school year among a US sample of parents of school-aged children. METHODS: In June 2021, we surveyed 1504 parents of children enrolling in grades K-12 in the 2021-2022 school year participating in the Understanding America Study, a nationally representative probability-based Internet panel of families completing regular internet-based surveys (Response rate to this survey was 79.2%). Parents completed the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire and reported their needs for school-related services regarding "support getting healthcare", "mental wellness support", "food, housing, legal or transportation support", and "learning supports and enrichment." Weighted regressions examined associations among wellbeing, needs, and sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Approximately one-quarter of children had deficits in hyperactivity (26.1%), one-third in peer problems (32.6%), and 40% in prosocial areas. Most parents (83.5%) reported a school-related need, with 77% reporting learning supports and enrichment needs and 57% reporting mental wellness needs. The highest priority needs were for tutoring, socialization, increased instructional time, coping with stress, and physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: US school children have high social-emotional and school-related needs. Investments in schools are urgently needed, particularly for learning supports and mental wellness, to meet the high demand for services and parents' priorities to support child health and wellbeing.

Influence of Perceived Adolescent Vaccination Desire on Parent Decision for Adolescent COVID-19 Vaccination.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the influence of adolescents' desire for COVID-19 vaccination on their parents' vaccination decision for their adolescent. METHODS: We surveyed an internet-based panel of 1,051 parents of 1,519 adolescents aged 11-18 years from February to March 2021 about their adolescent's desire for COVID-19 vaccination and whether they consider this desire in their vaccination decision for the adolescent. We used multivariable Poisson regression to assess associations with parent-stated likelihood of adolescent vaccination. RESULTS: A total of 58.3% of parents reported that they and their adolescents had the same vaccination desire; similarly, 58.3% considered their adolescent's desire in their vaccination decision. These latter parents were more likely to vaccinate their adolescent than parents who did not consider their adolescent's desire (adjusted risk ratio = 1.25 [95% confidence interval = 1.05-1.50]). DISCUSSION: Most parents considered their adolescent's desire for COVID-19 vaccination. These parents were more likely to state that they will have their adolescent receive a COVID-19 vaccine.

Remote Work and the Heterogeneous Impact of COVID-19 on Employment and Health

This paper examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on employment and respiratory health for remote workers (i.e. those who can work from home) and non-remote workers in the United States. Using a large, nationally-representative, high-frequency panel dataset from March through July of 2020, we show that job losses were up to three times as large for non-remote workers. This gap is larger than the differential job losses for women, African Americans, Hispanics, or workers without college degrees. Non-remote workers also experienced relatively worse respiratory health, which likely occurred because it was more difficult for non-remote workers to protect themselves. Grouping workers by pre-pandemic household income shows that job losses and, to a lesser extent, health losses were highest among non-remote workers from low-income households, exacerbating existing disparities. Finally, we show that lifting non-essential business closures did not substantially increase employment.

COVID-19 vaccines and mental distress.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic brought about large increases in mental distress. The uptake of COVID-19 vaccines is expected to significantly reduce health risks, improve economic and social outcomes, with potential benefits to mental health. PURPOSE: To examine short-term changes in mental distress following the receipt of the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. METHODS: Participants included 8,003 adults from the address-based sampled, nationally representative Understanding America Study (UAS), surveyed at regular intervals between March 10, 2020, and March 31, 2021 who completed at least two waves of the survey. Respondents answered questions about COVID-19 vaccine status and self-reported mental distress as measured with the four-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4). Fixed-effects regression models were used to identify the change in PHQ-4 scores and categorical indicators of mental distress resulting from the application of the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. RESULTS: People who were vaccinated between December 2020 and March 2021 reported decreased mental distress levels in the surveys conducted after receiving the first dose. The fixed-effects estimates show an average effect of receiving the vaccine equivalent to 4% of the standard deviation of PHQ-4 scores (p-value<0.01), a reduction in 1 percentage point (4% reduction from the baseline level) in the probability of being at least mildly depressed, and of 0.7 percentage points (15% reduction from the baseline level) in the probability of being severely depressed (p-value = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Getting the first dose of COVID-19 resulted in significant improvements in mental health, beyond improvements already achieved since mental distress peaked in the spring of 2020.

Parents' Intentions and Perceptions About COVID-19 Vaccination for Their Children: Results From a National Survey.

OBJECTIVES: Assess the degree to which US parents are likely to have their children get coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and identify parental concerns about the vaccines. METHODS: In February 2021 to March 2021, we surveyed parent members of a nationally representative probability-based Internet panel of ∼9000 adults regarding their intent to have their children receive a COVID-19 vaccination, perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines for children, and trust in sources of information about COVID-19 vaccines for children. We used descriptive and multivariate analyses to evaluate parent-stated likelihood of having their children get a COVID-19 vaccine and to assess the association between likelihood of child COVID-19 vaccination and child age, parent demographics, and parental perceptions about COVID-19 vaccines. RESULTS: Altogether, 1745 parents responded (87% of eligible parents, 3759 children). Likelihood of child COVID-19 vaccination was as follows: very likely (28%), somewhat likely (18%), somewhat unlikely (9%), very unlikely (33%), and unsure (12%). The stated likelihood of child vaccination was greater among parents of older children (P < .001) as well as among parents who had a bachelor's degree or higher education (P < .001), had already received or were likely to receive a COVID-19 vaccine (P < .001), or had Democratic affiliation (P < .001); variations existed by race and ethnicity (P = .04). Parental concerns centered around vaccine safety and side effects. A key trusted source of information about COVID-19 vaccines for children was the child's doctor. CONCLUSIONS: Less than one-half of US participants report that they are likely to have their child receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Pediatric health care providers have a major role in promoting and giving COVID-19 vaccination for children.

The role of trust in the likelihood of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine: Results from a national survey.

High acceptance of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines is instrumental to ending the pandemic. Vaccine acceptance by subgroups of the population depends on their trust in COVID-19 vaccines. We surveyed a probability-based internet panel of 7832 adults from December 23, 2020-January 19, 2021 about their likelihood of getting a COVID-19 vaccine and the following domains of trust: an individual's generalized trust, trust in COVID-19 vaccine's efficacy and safety, trust in the governmental approval process and general vaccine development process for COVID-19 vaccines, trust in their physician about COVID-19, and trust in other sources about COVID-19. We included identified at-risk subgroups: healthcare workers, older adults (65-74-year-olds and ≥ 75-year-olds), frontline essential workers, other essential workers, and individuals with high-risk chronic conditions. Of 5979 respondents, only 57.4% said they were very likely or somewhat likely to get a COVID-19 vaccine. More hesitant respondents (p < 0.05) included: women, young adults (18-49 years), Blacks, individuals with lower education, those with lower income, and individuals without high-risk chronic conditions. Lack of trust in the vaccine approval and development processes explained most of the demographic variation in stated vaccination likelihood, while other domains of trust explained less variation. We conclude that hesitancy for COVID-19 vaccines is high overall and among at-risk subgroups, and hesitancy is strongly tied to trust in the vaccine approval and development processes. Building trust is critical to ending the pandemic.

Likelihood of COVID-19 vaccination by subgroups across the US: post-election trends and disparities.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately impacted older individuals, those with lower educational attainment, and Black and Hispanic populations, yet vaccine hesitancy remains prevalent. Because widespread uptake of COVID-19 vaccines is critical to end the pandemic, addressing vaccine hesitancy is an important public health priority. Between April 1, 2020 and March 16, 2021, we have repeatedly surveyed a nationally representative online panel of adults and have tracked their stated likelihood of getting COVID-19 vaccinations. We present new evidence that in recent months disparities in self-reported likelihood of COVID-19 vaccination have narrowed by race/ethnicity, with an increasing proportion of Black individuals and Hispanic individuals indicating that they are likely to get a vaccine. At the same time, younger adults have progressively become less likely than older adults to state they will get a COVID-19 vaccine. Most vaccine-hesitant individuals are concerned about both vaccine efficacy and safety and do not trust the vaccine development or vaccine approval process. We conclude that outreach efforts to minority populations may be achieving their objectives in raising confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, but special outreach efforts are needed to address both vaccine hesitancy among younger adults and mistrust in the vaccine development and approval process.

Trajectories of Mental Distress Among U.S. Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Cross-sectional studies have found that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has negatively affected population-level mental health. Longitudinal studies are necessary to examine trajectories of change in mental health over time and identify sociodemographic groups at risk for persistent distress. PURPOSE: To examine the trajectories of mental distress between March 10 and August 4, 2020, a key period during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Participants included 6,901 adults from the nationally representative Understanding America Study, surveyed at baseline between March 10 and 31, 2020, with nine follow-up assessments between April 1 and August 4, 2020. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to examine the association between date and self-reported mental distress (measured with the four-item Patient Health Questionnaire) among U.S. adults overall and among sociodemographic subgroups defined by sex, age, race/ethnicity, household structure, federal poverty line, and census region. RESULTS: Compared to March 11, the odds of mental distress among U.S. adults overall were 1.84 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.65-2.07) times higher on April 1 and 1.92 (95% CI = 1.62-2.28) times higher on May 1; by August 1, the odds of mental distress had returned to levels comparable to March 11 (odds ratio [OR] = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.66-0.96). Females experienced a sharper increase in mental distress between March and May compared to males (females: OR = 2.29, 95% CI = 1.85-2.82; males: OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.15-2.02). CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the trajectory of mental health symptoms during an unprecedented pandemic, including the identification of populations at risk for sustained mental distress.

Mental Distress in the United States at the Beginning of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Objectives. To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental distress in US adults.Methods. Participants were 5065 adults from the Understanding America Study, a probability-based Internet panel representative of the US adult population. The main exposure was survey completion date (March 10-16, 2020). The outcome was mental distress measured via the 4-item version of the Patient Health Questionnaire.Results. Among states with 50 or more COVID-19 cases as of March 10, each additional day was significantly associated with an 11% increase in the odds of moving up a category of distress (odds ratio = 1.11; 95% confidence interval = 1.01, 1.21; P = .02). Perceptions about the likelihood of getting infected, death from the virus, and steps taken to avoid infecting others were associated with increased mental distress in the model that included all states. Individuals with higher consumption of alcohol or cannabis or with history of depressive symptoms were at significantly higher risk for mental distress.Conclusions. These data suggest that as the COVID-19 pandemic continues, mental distress may continue to increase and should be regularly monitored. Specific populations are at high risk for mental distress, particularly those with preexisting depressive symptoms.

Know your epidemic, know your response: Early perceptions of COVID-19 and self-reported social distancing in the United States.

As COVID-19 is rapidly unfolding in the United States, it is important to understand how individuals perceive the health and economic risks of the pandemic. In the absence of a readily available medical treatment, any strategy to contain the virus in the US will depend on the behavioral response of US residents. In this paper, we study individual's perceptions on COVID-19 and social distancing during the week of March 10-16, 2020, a week when COVID-19 was officially declared to be a pandemic by WHO and when new infections in the US were more than doubling every three days. Using a nationally representative sample of 5,414 respondents 18+ years of age from the Understanding America Study (UAS), we find that perceptions about COVID-19 health risks and economic consequences in the US population were largely pessimistic and highly variable by age and education. US residents who are young and do not have a college degree perceived a lower risk of getting infected but a higher probability of running out of money than others. Most individuals reported taking some steps to distance themselves from others but important differences emerge by gender and by source of information on COVID-19. Using state and day fixed-effect regressions, we show that perceptions of the health risks closely followed the number of COVID-19 cases in the country, and perceptions of the economic consequences and the prevalence of social distancing were driven upwards by both national and state-level cases. Unless addressed by effective health communication that reaches individuals across all social strata, variations in perceptions about COVID-19 epidemic raise concerns about the ability of the US to implement and sustain the widespread and restrictive policies that are required to curtail the pandemic.

Associations Between Media Exposure and Mental Distress Among U.S. Adults at the Beginning of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Exposure to disaster-related media may be a risk factor for mental distress, but this has not been examined in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study assesses whether exposure to social and traditional media during the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with mental distress among U.S. adults. METHODS: Data came from the Understanding America Study, conducted with a cross-sectional, nationally representative sample of adults who completed surveys online. Participants included 6,329 adults surveyed between March 10 and March 31, 2020. Regression analyses examined the associations of (1) self-reported average time spent on social media in a day (hours) and (2) number of traditional media sources (radio, TV, and newspaper) consulted to learn about COVID-19 with self-reported mental distress (4-item Patient Health Questionnaire). Data were analyzed in April 2020. RESULTS: Participants responding at later survey dates reported more time spent on social media (ß=0.02, 95% CI=0.01, 0.03), a greater number of traditional media sources consulted to learn about COVID-19 (ß=0.01, 95% CI=0.01, 0.02), and greater mental distress (ß=0.07, 95% CI=0.04, 0.09). Increased time spent on social media and consulting a greater number of traditional media sources to learn about COVID-19 were independently associated with increased mental distress, even after adjusting for potential confounders (social media: ß=0.14, 95% CI=0.05, 0.23; traditional media: ß=0.14, 95% CI=0.08, 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to a greater number of traditional media sources and more hours on social media was modestly associated with mental distress during the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S.

Tracking the Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on American Households

Since March 10, 2020, we have been tracking effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on respondents to the nationally representative Understanding America Study (UAS). After an initial survey that covered March 10-31, 2020, we launched tracking surveys every two weeks. Every day, about 500 respondents are invited to take the survey for a total of about 7,000 respondents over a two-week period. Results are shared in a variety of ways. About 3,000 graphs are updated every night, with the corresponding tab-delimited text files available for download. The underlying micro-data are available for registered researchers after the end of each four-week field period. The paper describes the set-up of the tracking survey, lists the main topics covered and highlights a number or early results. Our ambition is to keep tracking the experiences of U.S. households for as along as the pandemic lasts.