Mediating effect of resilience between social support and compassion fatigue among intern nursing and midwifery students during COVID-19: a cross-sectional study.

AIMS: To examine the mediating effect of resilience between social support and compassion fatigue among intern nursing and midwifery students during COVID-19. BACKGROUND: Compassion fatigue has become exceedingly common among intern nursing and midwifery students, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Social support and resilience can help intern nursing and midwifery students control their negative emotions, reduce compassion fatigue, and increase their well-being. However, the mediating effect of resilience between social support and compassion fatigue remains unclear. DESIGN: A multicentre cross-sectional survey. METHODS: A total of 307 intern nursing and midwifery students were recruited from November 2020 to February 2021 in tertiary grade A hospitals in China. Structural equation modelling was applied to analyse the mediating effects of resilience between social support and compassion fatigue. The Social Support Rating Scale, the 10-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, and the Chinese version of the Compassion Fatigue Short Scale were used to collect data. The hypothetical path model was tested by using IBM SPSS version 26.0 and AMOS version 26.0 software. RESULTS: Intern nursing and midwifery students had moderate compassion fatigue. Social support positively affected resilience (ß = 0.514, p < 0.01). Social support negatively affected compassion fatigue (ß = - 0.310, p < 0.01), while resilience negatively affected compassion fatigue (ß = - 0.283, p < 0.01). Resilience played a mediating role between social support and compassion fatigue. CONCLUSION: Social support can directly affect the compassion fatigue of intern nursing and midwifery students during COVID-19 and indirectly through resilience. Stronger resilience can reduce compassion fatigue. Accordingly, resilience-based interventions should be developed to reduce compassion fatigue.

Contextualized impacts of an infodemic on vaccine hesitancy: The moderating role of socioeconomic and cultural factors.

This study examines how perceived information overload and misinformation affect vaccine hesitancy and how this is moderated by structural and cultural factors. By applying and extending the fundamental cause theory, this study proposes a contextualized impact model to analyze a cross-national survey of 6034 residents in six societies in Asia, Europe and North America in June 2021. The study finds that (1) Older and highly-educated participants were less susceptible to COVID-19 information overload and belief in vaccine misinformation. (2) Perceived information overload led to an increase in vaccine acceptance and uptake, whereas belief in vaccine misinformation caused a decrease. (3) The structural differentiation of vaccine hesitancy was salient and higher socioeconomic status could buffer the negative impact of misinformation on vaccine acceptance. (4) Cultural factors such as collectivism and authoritarian mentality also served as buffers against the misinformation that reduced vaccine acceptance and uptake. These findings add nuanced footnotes to the fundamental causes theory and contribute to the discussion on the global recovery from the infodemic. Besides fact-checking and improving individual information literacy, effective and long-term information management and health policies must pay attention to stratified information gaps across socioeconomic groups, and to contextualize the communication and intervention strategies in different cultures.

Stratified changes in emotional distress during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from a longitudinal survey of residents in Hubei province, China.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on individuals' emotional wellbeing and mental health. However, little research has examined emotional resilience during the pandemic. This study investigated the changes in emotional distress among residents in Hubei, the epicenter of the pandemic in China during the early stage of the pandemic, and we examined the sociodemographic differences in their emotional recovery. METHODS: We undertook a two-wave panel survey of 3816 residents aged ≥18 in Hubei, China. The baseline survey was conducted during early February 2020, the peak of the outbreak. The follow-up survey was carried out when the pandemic was mainly under control. The data enabled us to investigate the within-person changes in COVID-19-related negative emotions. Mixed-effect regression models with a random effect for participants were used to accommodate repeated measures. RESULTS: Respondents reported high levels of emotional distress at the peak of the pandemic and experienced a decline in emotional distress when the pandemic was under control. Moreover, respondents aged 35-49, with a college education or above, were employed, and having better self-rated health experienced a more substantial decrease in negative emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: This study identified vulnerable populations who may experience prolonged emotional distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in China. The results suggest that respondents who aged over 50, with no college education, were not employed, and with worse self-rated health were less resilient during the COVID-19 pandemic in China.

Infodemic, Institutional Trust, and COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: A Cross-National Survey.

The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by a massive infodemic. Yet limited studies have quantified the impact of the COVID-19 infodemic on vaccine hesitancy. This study examined the effect of perceived information overload (IO) and misinformation on vaccine willingness and uptake within a cross-national context. It also investigated how trust in multiple institutions affected vaccine outcomes and moderated the relationship between the infodemic and vaccine attitude and behavior. A cross-national online survey of residents, representative of the general population aged ≥18 in six Asian and Western jurisdictions, was conducted in June 2021. The results showed that perceived IO was positively associated with COVID-19 vaccine willingness and uptake. Belief in misinformation was negatively associated with vaccine willingness and uptake. Institutional trust may increase vaccine willingness and uptake. Moreover, trust in the government and civil societies tended to strengthen the positive effect of IO and reduce the negative impact of misinformation on vaccine willingness and uptake. The relationship between belief in misinformation and getting vaccinated against COVID-19 was unexpectedly stronger among those with a higher level of trust in healthcare professionals. This study contributes to a better understanding of the main and interactive effect of the infodemic and institutional trust on vaccine outcomes during a pandemic.

Stratified Impacts of the Infodemic During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-sectional Survey in 6 Asian Jurisdictions.

BACKGROUND: Although timely and accurate information during the COVID-19 pandemic is essential for containing the disease and reducing mental distress, an infodemic, which refers to an overabundance of information, may trigger unpleasant emotions and reduce compliance. Prior research has shown the negative consequences of an infodemic during the pandemic; however, we know less about which subpopulations are more exposed to the infodemic and are more vulnerable to the adverse psychological and behavioral effects. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine how sociodemographic factors and information-seeking behaviors affect the perceived information overload during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also investigated the effect of perceived information overload on psychological distress and protective behavior and analyzed the socioeconomic differences in the effects. METHODS: The data for this study were obtained from a cross-national survey of residents in 6 jurisdictions in Asia in May 2020. The survey targeted residents aged 18 years or older. A probability-based quota sampling strategy was adopted to ensure that the selected samples matched the population's geographical and demographic characteristics released by the latest available census in each jurisdiction. The final sample included 10,063 respondents. Information overload about COVID-19 was measured by asking the respondents to what extent they feel overwhelmed by news related to COVID-19. The measure of psychological distress was adapted from the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5 (DSM-5). Protective behaviors included personal hygienic behavior and compliance with social distancing measures. RESULTS: Younger respondents and women (b=0.20, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.26) were more likely to perceive information overload. Participants self-perceived as upper or upper-middle class (b=0.19, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.30) and those with full-time jobs (b=0.11, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.17) tended to perceive higher information overload. Respondents who more frequently sought COVID-19 information from newspapers (b=0.12, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.14), television (b=0.07, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.09), and family and friends (b=0.11, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.14) were more likely to feel overwhelmed. In contrast, obtaining COVID-19 information from online news outlets and social media was not associated with perceived information overload. There was a positive relationship between perceived information overload and psychological distress (b=2.18, 95% CI 2.09 to 2.26). Such an association was stronger among urban residents, full-time employees, and those living in privately owned housing. The effect of perceived information overload on protective behavior was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings revealed that respondents who were younger, were female, had a higher socioeconomic status (SES), and had vulnerable populations in the household were more likely to feel overwhelmed by COVID-19 information. Perceived information overload tended to increase psychological distress, and people with higher SES were more vulnerable to this adverse psychological consequence. Effective policies and interventions should be promoted to target vulnerable populations who are more susceptible to the occurrence and negative psychological influence of perceived information overload.

Imatinib and methazolamide ameliorate COVID-19-induced metabolic complications via elevating ACE2 enzymatic activity and inhibiting viral entry.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) represents a systemic disease that may cause severe metabolic complications in multiple tissues including liver, kidney, and cardiovascular system. However, the underlying mechanisms and optimal treatment remain elusive. Our study shows that impairment of ACE2 pathway is a key factor linking virus infection to its secondary metabolic sequelae. By using structure-based high-throughput virtual screening and connectivity map database, followed with experimental validations, we identify imatinib, methazolamide, and harpagoside as direct enzymatic activators of ACE2. Imatinib and methazolamide remarkably improve metabolic perturbations in vivo in an ACE2-dependent manner under the insulin-resistant state and SARS-CoV-2-infected state. Moreover, viral entry is directly inhibited by these three compounds due to allosteric inhibition of ACE2 binding to spike protein on SARS-CoV-2. Taken together, our study shows that enzymatic activation of ACE2 via imatinib, methazolamide, or harpagoside may be a conceptually new strategy to treat metabolic sequelae of COVID-19.

Does education matter for psychological recovery amidst the COVID-19 pandemic? Evidence from a panel survey in Hubei, China.

OBJECTIVES: Little has been done to examine socioeconomic differences in the trajectory of psychological well-being during a disaster. This paper investigates educational differences in the changes in psychological well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic and explores the mechanisms of the differences. METHODS: The data were obtained from a unique two-wave panel survey conducted during the peak and waning phases of the pandemic in Hubei province, the epicenter of the pandemic in China. RESULTS: At the peak of the pandemic, individuals with different levels of education reported high and similar levels of psychological distress. As the pandemic subsided, the psychological well-being of people of all educational levels rebounded, but the recovery was greater and faster for those with tertiary education. Mediation analysis shows that neighborhood social support and evaluation of the performance of grassroots government partially explained the advantage of the more highly educated. CONCLUSION: This study reveals how social differentiation is translated into health disparities when a disaster strikes. It may also inform public policy by identifying segments of the population at heightened risk of psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic.

How to Balance Governance Efficiency and Privacy Protection? A Textual Analysis of the Privacy Policies of the COVID-19 Contact-Tracing App in China and Singapore

The COVID-19 pandemic has spawned the spread of contact-tracing applications such as China's "Health Code" and Singapore's "TraceTogether." Balancing efficiency and privacy ethics in data governance has become a common problem faced by all countries using digital tracing tools to control the pandemic. The laws of both China and Singapore stipulate that prior to collecting personal information, organizations and institutions must clearly inform individuals about the types of personal information collected and the rules for the use of personal information, and must obtain authorized user consent. This article analyzes the privacy policies of Health Code in China and TraceTogether in Singapore and identifies five potential problems in Health Code's privacy policies: the broad collection of personal information, multiple processing purposes, indeterminate storage time, ambiguous privacy policy content, and the ineffectiveness of informed consent, although Health Code has been deemed an efficient tool to fight against the pandemic. Singapore's TraceTogether adheres to the principles of minimum information collection, limited information processing purposes, minimum duration of information storage, openness and transparency of privacy policies, and informed consent. These two models for using big data in the fight against the pandemic in China and Singapore suggest that data governance needs to reconcile public interests and individual rights, and should balance governance efficiency and data ethics.

Changes in psychological wellbeing, attitude and information-seeking behaviour among people at the epicentre of the COVID-19 pandemic: a panel survey of residents in Hubei province, China.

While most research focuses on the clinical treatment of COVID-19, fewer studies have investigated individuals' responses towards this novel infectious disease. This study aims to report the temporal changes in individuals' psychological wellbeing, perceived discrimination, sociopolitical perceptions and information-seeking behaviours among the general public in Hubei, China. Data were obtained from a two-wave survey of 1902 respondents aged 18-80 in Hubei province during the peak and mitigation stages of the outbreak. The results showed that the prevalence of psychological distress dropped from over 75% to around 15% throughout the study period, but perceived discrimination remained stable. Female, middle-aged, well-educated respondents and those employed in government/public institutions/state-owned enterprises tended to report more distress. While respondents' attention on COVID-19 information kept high and stable, their sources of information diversified across different sociodemographic groups. Over time, people obtained more social support from neighbourhoods than from their friends and relatives or non-government organisations. Over 80% of respondents were satisfied with the performance of the central government, which was notably higher than their ratings on the local government and neighbourhood/village committees. The findings of this research are informative for formulating effective intervention strategies to tackle various psychosocial problems during COVID-19.