Rural-Urban Differences in Vaccination and Hesitancy Rates and Trust: US COVID-19 Trends and Impact Survey on a Social Media Platform, May 2021-April 2022.

Objectives. To analyze rural-urban differences in COVID-19 vaccination uptake, hesitancy, and trust in information sources in the United States. Methods. We used data from a large survey of Facebook users. We computed the vaccination, hesitancy, and decline rates and the trust proportions among individuals hesitant toward COVID-19 information sources for rural and urban regions in each state from May 2021 to April 2022. Results. In 48 states with adequate data, on average, two thirds of states showed statistically significant differences in monthly vaccination rates between rural and urban regions, with rural regions having a lower vaccination rate at all times. Far fewer states showed statistically significant differences when comparing monthly hesitancy and decline rates for urban versus rural regions. Doctors and health professionals received the highest level of trust. Friends and family were also among the most trusted sources in rural areas where the vaccination uptake was low. Conclusions. Rural-urban difference in hesitancy rates among those still unvaccinated was much smaller than the rural-urban difference in vaccination rates, suggesting that access to vaccines may be another contributor to the lower vaccination rates in rural areas. (Am J Public Health. 2023;113(6):680-688. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307274).

Assessing COVID-19 pandemic policies and behaviours and their economic and educational trade-offs across US states from Jan 1, 2020, to July 31, 2022: an observational analysis.

BACKGROUND: The USA struggled in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, but not all states struggled equally. Identifying the factors associated with cross-state variation in infection and mortality rates could help to improve responses to this and future pandemics. We sought to answer five key policy-relevant questions regarding the following: 1) what roles social, economic, and racial inequities had in interstate variation in COVID-19 outcomes; 2) whether states with greater health-care and public health capacity had better outcomes; 3) how politics influenced the results; 4) whether states that imposed more policy mandates and sustained them longer had better outcomes; and 5) whether there were trade-offs between a state having fewer cumulative SARS-CoV-2 infections and total COVID-19 deaths and its economic and educational outcomes. METHODS: Data disaggregated by US state were extracted from public databases, including COVID-19 infection and mortality estimates from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation's (IHME) COVID-19 database; Bureau of Economic Analysis data on state gross domestic product (GDP); Federal Reserve economic data on employment rates; National Center for Education Statistics data on student standardised test scores; and US Census Bureau data on race and ethnicity by state. We standardised infection rates for population density and death rates for age and the prevalence of major comorbidities to facilitate comparison of states' successes in mitigating the effects of COVID-19. We regressed these health outcomes on prepandemic state characteristics (such as educational attainment and health spending per capita), policies adopted by states during the pandemic (such as mask mandates and business closures), and population-level behavioural responses (such as vaccine coverage and mobility). We explored potential mechanisms connecting state-level factors to individual-level behaviours using linear regression. We quantified reductions in state GDP, employment, and student test scores during the pandemic to identify policy and behavioural responses associated with these outcomes and to assess trade-offs between these outcomes and COVID-19 outcomes. Significance was defined as p<0·05. FINDINGS: Standardised cumulative COVID-19 death rates for the period from Jan 1, 2020, to July 31, 2022 varied across the USA (national rate 372 deaths per 100 000 population [95% uncertainty interval [UI] 364-379]), with the lowest standardised rates in Hawaii (147 deaths per 100 000 [127-196]) and New Hampshire (215 per 100 000 [183-271]) and the highest in Arizona (581 per 100 000 [509-672]) and Washington, DC (526 per 100 000 [425-631]). A lower poverty rate, higher mean number of years of education, and a greater proportion of people expressing interpersonal trust were statistically associated with lower infection and death rates, and states where larger percentages of the population identify as Black (non-Hispanic) or Hispanic were associated with higher cumulative death rates. Access to quality health care (measured by the IHME's Healthcare Access and Quality Index) was associated with fewer total COVID-19 deaths and SARS-CoV-2 infections, but higher public health spending and more public health personnel per capita were not, at the state level. The political affiliation of the state governor was not associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 death rates, but worse COVID-19 outcomes were associated with the proportion of a state's voters who voted for the 2020 Republican presidential candidate. State governments' uses of protective mandates were associated with lower infection rates, as were mask use, lower mobility, and higher vaccination rate, while vaccination rates were associated with lower death rates. State GDP and student reading test scores were not associated with state COVD-19 policy responses, infection rates, or death rates. Employment, however, had a statistically significant relationship with restaurant closures and greater infections and deaths: on average, 1574 (95% UI 884-7107) additional infections per 10 000 population were associated in states with a one percentage point increase in employment rate. Several policy mandates and protective behaviours were associated with lower fourth-grade mathematics test scores, but our study results did not find a link to state-level estimates of school closures. INTERPRETATION: COVID-19 magnified the polarisation and persistent social, economic, and racial inequities that already existed across US society, but the next pandemic threat need not do the same. US states that mitigated those structural inequalities, deployed science-based interventions such as vaccination and targeted vaccine mandates, and promoted their adoption across society were able to match the best-performing nations in minimising COVID-19 death rates. These findings could contribute to the design and targeting of clinical and policy interventions to facilitate better health outcomes in future crises. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, J Stanton, T Gillespie, J and E Nordstrom, and Bloomberg Philanthropies.

Quantifying the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on gender equality on health, social, and economic indicators: a comprehensive review of data from March, 2020, to September, 2021.

BACKGROUND: Gender is emerging as a significant factor in the social, economic, and health effects of COVID-19. However, most existing studies have focused on its direct impact on health. Here, we aimed to explore the indirect effects of COVID-19 on gender disparities globally. METHODS: We reviewed publicly available datasets with information on indicators related to vaccine hesitancy and uptake, health care services, economic and work-related concerns, education, and safety at home and in the community. We used mixed effects regression, Gaussian process regression, and bootstrapping to synthesise all data sources. We accounted for uncertainty in the underlying data and modelling process. We then used mixed effects logistic regression to explore gender gaps globally and by region. FINDINGS: Between March, 2020, and September, 2021, women were more likely to report employment loss (26·0% [95% uncertainty interval 23·8-28·8, by September, 2021) than men (20·4% [18·2-22·9], by September, 2021), as well as forgoing work to care for others (ratio of women to men: 1·8 by March, 2020, and 2·4 by September, 2021). Women and girls were 1·21 times (1·20-1·21) more likely than men and boys to report dropping out of school for reasons other than school closures. Women were also 1·23 (1·22-1·23) times more likely than men to report that gender-based violence had increased during the pandemic. By September 2021, women and men did not differ significantly in vaccine hesitancy or uptake. INTERPRETATION: The most significant gender gaps identified in our study show intensified levels of pre-existing widespread inequalities between women and men during the COVID-19 pandemic. Political and social leaders should prioritise policies that enable and encourage women to participate in the labour force and continue their education, thereby equipping and enabling them with greater ability to overcome the barriers they face. FUNDING: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Impact of the Salud Mesoamerica Initiative on delivery care choices in Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua.

BACKGROUND: The Salud Mesoamérica Initiative (SMI) is a public-private collaboration aimed to improve maternal and child health conditions in the poorest populations of Mesoamerica through a results-based aid mechanism. We assess the impact of SMI on the staffing and availability of equipment and supplies for delivery care, the proportion of institutional deliveries, and the proportion of women who choose a facility other than the one closest to their locality of residence for delivery. METHODS: We used a quasi-experimental design, including baseline and follow-up measurements between 2013 and 2018 in intervention and comparison areas of Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Honduras. We collected information on 8754 births linked to the health facility closest to the mother's locality of residence and the facility where the delivery took place (if attended in a health facility). We fit difference-in-difference models, adjusting for women's characteristics (age, parity, education), household characteristics, exposure to health promotion interventions, health facility level, and country. RESULTS: Equipment, inputs, and staffing of facilities improved after the Initiative in both intervention and comparison areas. After adjustment for covariates, institutional delivery increased between baseline and follow-up by 3.1 percentage points (ß = 0.031, 95% CI -0.03, 0.09) more in intervention areas than in comparison areas. The proportion of women in intervention areas who chose a facility other than their closest one to attend the delivery decreased between baseline and follow-up by 13 percentage points (ß = - 0.130, 95% CI -0.23, - 0.03) more than in the comparison group. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that women in intervention areas of SMI are more likely to go to their closest facility to attend delivery after the Initiative has improved facilities' capacity, suggesting that results-based aid initiatives targeting poor populations, like SMI, can increase the use of facilities closest to the place of residence for delivery care services. This should be considered in the design of interventions after the COVID-19 pandemic may have changed health and social conditions.

Update on SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence: regional and worldwide.

BACKGROUND: With limited vaccine supplies, an informed position on the status of SARS-CoV-2 infection in people can assist the prioritization of vaccine deployment. OBJECTIVES: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the global and regional SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalences around the world. DATA SOURCES: We systematically searched peer-reviewed databases (PubMed, Embase and Scopus), and preprint servers (medRxiv, bioRxiv and SSRN) for articles published between 1 January 2020 and 30 March 2021. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Population-based studies reporting the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in the general population were included. PARTICIPANTS: People of different age groups, occupations, educational levels, ethnic backgrounds and socio-economic status from the general population. INTERVENTIONS: There were no interventions. METHODS: We used the random-effects meta-analyses and empirical Bayesian method to estimate the pooled seroprevalence and conducted subgroup and meta-regression analyses to explore potential sources of heterogeneity as well as the relationship between seroprevalence and socio-demographics. RESULTS: We identified 241 eligible studies involving 6.3 million individuals from 60 countries. The global pooled seroprevalence was 9.47% (95% CI 8.99-9.95%), although the heterogeneity among studies was significant (I2 = 99.9%). We estimated that ∼738 million people had been infected with SARS-CoV-2 (as of December 2020). Highest and lowest seroprevalences were recorded in Central and Southern Asia (22.91%, 19.11-26.72%) and Eastern and South-eastern Asia (1.62%, 1.31-1.95%), respectively. Seroprevalence estimates were higher in males, persons aged 20-50 years, in minority ethnic groups living in countries or regions with low income and human development indices. CONCLUSIONS: The present study indicates that the majority of the world's human population was still highly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection in mid-2021, emphasizing the need for vaccine deployment to vulnerable groups of people, particularly in developing countries, and for the implementation of enhanced preventive measures until 'herd immunity' to SARS-CoV-2 has developed.

A Generation at Risk: The Impacts of Lebanon's Escalating Humanitarian Crisis on Children.

Lebanon is in the midst of a rapidly escalating, unprecedented humanitarian crisis that is plunging the country deep into poverty and threatens population well-being, economic development, social welfare and national and regional stability. The dire situation is due to the compounding effects of the August 2020 Beirut blast, massive economic collapse and the COVID-19 pandemic, in a setting of longstanding entrenched political corruption and a dysfunctional, mismanaged crisis response by the state. This current emergency occurs on the background of a turbulent history and complex regional geopolitical context - including the Syrian refugee crisis, the ongoing influence of foreign actors and their local proxies, the United-States-imposed sanctions, endemic corruption, a culture of nepotism and entitlement among the political dynasties, dysfunctional power-sharing and deep-seated sectarian divides. With over half the population now living in poverty, a generation of children are among those at risk. This Perspective provides a brief overview of Lebanon's current complex humanitarian crisis, discusses the impacts of the evolving situation on youth and proposes a suite of recommendations to mitigate the effects.

US Health Care Spending by Race and Ethnicity, 2002-2016.

Importance: Measuring health care spending by race and ethnicity is important for understanding patterns in utilization and treatment. Objective: To estimate, identify, and account for differences in health care spending by race and ethnicity from 2002 through 2016 in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This exploratory study included data from 7.3 million health system visits, admissions, or prescriptions captured in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2002-2016) and the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (2002-2012), which were combined with the insured population and notified case estimates from the National Health Interview Survey (2002; 2016) and health care spending estimates from the Disease Expenditure project (1996-2016). Exposure: Six mutually exclusive self-reported race and ethnicity groups. Main Outcomes and Measures: Total and age-standardized health care spending per person by race and ethnicity for each year from 2002 through 2016 by type of care. Health care spending per notified case by race and ethnicity for key diseases in 2016. Differences in health care spending across race and ethnicity groups were decomposed into differences in utilization rate vs differences in price and intensity of care. Results: In 2016, an estimated $2.4 trillion (95% uncertainty interval [UI], $2.4 trillion-$2.4 trillion) was spent on health care across the 6 types of care included in this study. The estimated age-standardized total health care spending per person in 2016 was $7649 (95% UI, $6129-$8814) for American Indian and Alaska Native (non-Hispanic) individuals; $4692 (95% UI, $4068-$5202) for Asian, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (non-Hispanic) individuals; $7361 (95% UI, $6917-$7797) for Black (non-Hispanic) individuals; $6025 (95% UI, $5703-$6373) for Hispanic individuals; $9276 (95% UI, $8066-$10 601) for individuals categorized as multiple races (non-Hispanic); and $8141 (95% UI, $8038-$8258) for White (non-Hispanic) individuals, who accounted for an estimated 72% (95% UI, 71%-73%) of health care spending. After adjusting for population size and age, White individuals received an estimated 15% (95% UI, 13%-17%; P < .001) more spending on ambulatory care than the all-population mean. Black (non-Hispanic) individuals received an estimated 26% (95% UI, 19%-32%; P < .001) less spending than the all-population mean on ambulatory care but received 19% (95% UI, 3%-32%; P = .02) more on inpatient and 12% (95% UI, 4%-24%; P = .04) more on emergency department care. Hispanic individuals received an estimated 33% (95% UI, 26%-37%; P < .001) less spending per person on ambulatory care than the all-population mean. Asian, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (non-Hispanic) individuals received less spending than the all-population mean on all types of care except dental (all P < .001), while American Indian and Alaska Native (non-Hispanic) individuals had more spending on emergency department care than the all-population mean (estimated 90% more; 95% UI, 11%-165%; P = .04), and multiple-race (non-Hispanic) individuals had more spending on emergency department care than the all-population mean (estimated 40% more; 95% UI, 19%-63%; P = .006). All 18 of the statistically significant race and ethnicity spending differences by type of care corresponded with differences in utilization. These differences persisted when controlling for underlying disease burden. Conclusions and Relevance: In the US from 2002 through 2016, health care spending varied by race and ethnicity across different types of care even after adjusting for age and health conditions. Further research is needed to determine current health care spending by race and ethnicity, including spending related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

U.S. Children "Learning Online" during COVID-19 without the Internet or a Computer: Visualizing the Gradient by Race/Ethnicity and Parental Educational Attainment.

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has caused unprecedented disruptions to education in the United States, with a large proportion of schooling moving to online formats, which has the potential to exacerbate existing racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in learning. The authors visualize access to online learning technologies using data from the Household Pulse Survey from the early fall 2020 school period (August 19 to October 26). The authors find that 10.1 percent of children participating in online learning nationally did not have adequate access to the Internet and a computer. Rates of inadequate access varied nearly 20-fold across the gradient of parental race/ethnicity and education, from 1.9 percent for children of Asian parents with graduate degrees to 35.5 percent among children of Black parents with less than a high school education. These findings indicate alarming gaps in potential learning among U.S. children. Renewed investments in equitable access to distance-learning resources will be necessary to prevent widening racial/ethnic and class learning disparities.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence in the general population and high-risk occupational groups across 18 cities in Iran: a population-based cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Rapid increases in cases of COVID-19 were observed in multiple cities in Iran towards the start of the pandemic. However, the true infection rate remains unknown. We aimed to assess the seroprevalence of antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 18 cities of Iran as an indicator of the infection rate. METHODS: In this population-based cross-sectional study, we randomly selected and invited study participants from the general population (from lists of people registered with the Iranian electronic health record system or health-care centres) and a high-risk population of individuals likely to have close social contact with SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals through their occupation (from employee lists provided by relevant agencies or companies, such as supermarket chains) across 18 cities in 17 Iranian provinces. Participants were asked questions on their demographic characteristics, medical history, recent COVID-19-related symptoms, and COVID-19-related exposures. Iran Food and Drug Administration-approved Pishtaz Teb SARS-CoV-2 ELISA kits were used to detect SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG and IgM antibodies in blood samples from participants. Seroprevalence was estimated on the basis of ELISA test results and adjusted for population weighting (by age, sex, and city population size) and test performance (according to our independent validation of sensitivity and specificity). FINDINGS: From 9181 individuals who were initially contacted between April 17 and June 2, 2020, 243 individuals refused to provide blood samples and 36 did not provide demographic information and were excluded from the analysis. Among the 8902 individuals included in the analysis, 5372 had occupations with a high risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and 3530 were recruited from the general population. The overall population weight-adjusted and test performance-adjusted prevalence of antibody seropositivity in the general population was 17·1% (95% CI 14·6-19·5), implying that 4 265 542 (95% CI 3 659 043-4 887 078) individuals from the 18 cities included were infected by the end of April, 2020. The adjusted seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies varied greatly by city, with the highest estimates found in Rasht (72·6% [53·9-92·8]) and Qom (58·5% [37·2-83·9]). The overall population weight-adjusted and test performance-adjusted seroprevalence in the high-risk population was 20·0% (18·5-21·7) and showed little variation between the occupations included. INTERPRETATIONS: Seroprevalence is likely to be much higher than the reported prevalence of COVID-19 based on confirmed COVID-19 cases in Iran. Despite high seroprevalence in a few cities, a large proportion of the population is still uninfected. The potential shortcomings of current public health policies should therefore be identified to prevent future epidemic waves in Iran. FUNDING: Iranian Ministry of Health and Medical Education. TRANSLATION: For the Farsi translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence worldwide: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 has been arguably the most important public health concern worldwide in 2020, and efforts are now escalating to suppress or eliminate its spread. In this study we undertook a meta-analysis to estimate the global and regional seroprevalence rates in humans of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and to assess whether seroprevalence is associated with geographical, climatic and/or sociodemographic factors. METHODS: We systematically reviewed PubMed, Scopus, Embase, medRxiv and bioRxiv databases for preprints or peer-reviewed articles (up to 14 August 2020). Study eligibility criteria were population-based studies describing the prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 (IgG and/or IgM) serum antibodies. Participants were people from different socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds (from the general population), whose prior COVID-19 status was unknown and who were tested for the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 serum antibodies. We used a random-effects model to estimate pooled seroprevalence, and then extrapolated the findings to the global population (for 2020). Subgroup and meta-regression analyses explored potential sources of heterogeneity in the data, and relationships between seroprevalence and sociodemographic, geographical and/or climatic factors. RESULTS: In total, 47 studies involving 399 265 people from 23 countries met the inclusion criteria. Heterogeneity (I2 = 99.4%, p < 0.001) was seen among studies; SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in the general population varied from 0.37% to 22.1%, with a pooled estimate of 3.38% (95%CI 3.05-3.72%; 15 879/399 265). On a regional level, seroprevalence varied from 1.45% (0.95-1.94%, South America) to 5.27% (3.97-6.57%, Northern Europe), although some variation appeared to relate to the serological assay used. The findings suggested an association of seroprevalence with income levels, human development indices, geographic latitudes and/or climate. Extrapolating to the 2020 world population, we estimated that 263.5 million individuals had been exposed or infected at the time of this study. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence varied markedly among geographic regions, as might be expected early in a pandemic. Longitudinal surveys to continually monitor seroprevalence around the globe will be critical to support prevention and control efforts, and might indicate levels of endemic stability or instability in particular countries and regions.