State and Federal Legislators' Responses on Social Media to the Mental Health and Burnout of Health Care Workers Throughout the COVID-19 Pandemic: Natural Language Processing and Sentiment Analysis.

Background: Burnout and the mental health burden of the COVID-19 pandemic have disproportionately impacted health care workers. The links between state policies, federal regulations, COVID-19 case counts, strains on health care systems, and the mental health of health care workers continue to evolve. The language used by state and federal legislators in public-facing venues such as social media is important, as it impacts public opinion and behavior, and it also reflects current policy-leader opinions and planned legislation. Objective: The objective of this study was to examine legislators' social media content on Twitter and Facebook throughout the COVID-19 pandemic to thematically characterize policy makers' attitudes and perspectives related to mental health and burnout in the health care workforce. Methods: Legislators' social media posts about mental health and burnout in the health care workforce were collected from January 2020 to November 2021 using Quorum, a digital database of policy-related documents. The total number of relevant social media posts per state legislator per calendar month was calculated and compared with COVID-19 case volume. Differences between themes expressed in Democratic and Republican posts were estimated using the Pearson chi-square test. Words within social media posts most associated with each political party were determined. Machine-learning was used to evaluate naturally occurring themes in the burnout- and mental health-related social media posts. Results: A total of 4165 social media posts (1400 tweets and 2765 Facebook posts) were generated by 2047 unique state and federal legislators and 38 government entities. The majority of posts (n=2319, 55.68%) were generated by Democrats, followed by Republicans (n=1600, 40.34%). Among both parties, the volume of burnout-related posts was greatest during the initial COVID-19 surge. However, there was significant variation in the themes expressed by the 2 major political parties. Themes most correlated with Democratic posts were (1) frontline care and burnout, (2) vaccines, (3) COVID-19 outbreaks, and (4) mental health services. Themes most correlated with Republican social media posts were (1) legislation, (2) call for local action, (3) government support, and (4) health care worker testing and mental health. Conclusions: State and federal legislators use social media to share opinions and thoughts on key topics, including burnout and mental health strain among health care workers. Variations in the volume of posts indicated that a focus on burnout and the mental health of the health care workforce existed early in the pandemic but has waned. Significant differences emerged in the content posted by the 2 major US political parties, underscoring how each prioritized different aspects of the crisis.

Partisan differences in Twitter language among US legislators during the COVID-19 pandemic: Cross-sectional study

Background: As policy makers continue to shape the national and local responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, the information they choose to share and how they frame their content provide key insights into the public and health care systems. Objective: We examined the language used by the members of the US House and Senate during the first 10 months of the COVID-19 pandemic and measured content and sentiment based on the tweets that they shared. Methods: We used Quorum (Quorum Analytics Inc) to access more than 300,000 tweets posted by US legislators from January 1 to October 10, 2020. We used differential language analyses to compare the content and sentiment of tweets posted by legislators based on their party affiliation. Results: We found that health care-related themes in Democratic legislators' tweets focused on racial disparities in care (odds ratio [OR] 2.24, 95% CI 2.22-2.27;P<.001), health care and insurance (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.7-1.77;P<.001), COVID-19 testing (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.12-1.19;P<.001), and public health guidelines (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.22-1.29;P<.001). The dominant themes in the Republican legislators' discourse included vaccine development (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.47-1.55;P<.001) and hospital resources and equipment (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.18-1.25). Nonhealth care-related topics associated with a Democratic affiliation included protections for essential workers (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.52-1.59), the 2020 election and voting (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.27-1.35), unemployment and housing (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.24-1.31), crime and racism (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.18-1.26), public town halls (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.16-1.23), the Trump Administration (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.19-1.26), immigration (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.12-1.19), and the loss of life (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.35-1.42). The themes associated with the Republican affiliation included China (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.85-1.92), small business assistance (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.23-1.3), congressional relief bills (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.2-1.27), press briefings (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.19-1.26), and economic recovery (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.16-1.23). Conclusions: Divergent language use on social media corresponds to the partisan divide in the first several months of the course of the COVID-19 public health crisis. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Partisan Differences in Legislators' Discussion of Vaccination on Twitter During the COVID-19 Era: Natural Language Processing Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 era has been characterized by the politicization of health-related topics. This is especially concerning given evidence that politicized discussion of vaccination may contribute to vaccine hesitancy. No research, however, has examined the content and politicization of legislator communication with the public about vaccination during the COVID-19 era. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine vaccine-related tweets produced by state and federal legislators during the COVID-19 era to (1) describe the content of vaccine-related tweets; (2) examine the differences in vaccine-related tweet content between Democrats and Republicans; and (3) quantify (and describe trends over time in) partisan differences in vaccine-related communication. METHODS: We abstracted all vaccine-related tweets produced by state and federal legislators between February 01, 2020, and December 11, 2020. We used latent Dirichlet allocation to define the tweet topics and used descriptive statistics to describe differences by party in the use of topics and changes in political polarization over time. RESULTS: We included 14,519 tweets generated by 1463 state legislators and 521 federal legislators. Republicans were more likely to use words (eg, "record time," "launched," and "innovation") and topics (eg, Operation Warp Speed success) that were focused on the successful development of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Democrats used a broader range of words (eg, "anti-vaxxers," "flu," and "free") and topics (eg, vaccine prioritization, influenza, and antivaxxers) that were more aligned with public health messaging related to the vaccine. Polarization increased over most of the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Republican and Democratic legislators used different language in their Twitter conversations about vaccination during the COVID-19 era, leading to increased political polarization of vaccine-related tweets. These communication patterns have the potential to contribute to vaccine hesitancy.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Child and Adolescent Mental Health Policy and Practice Implementation.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the 2019 coronavirus pandemic on the mental health of millions worldwide has been well documented, but its impact on prevention and treatment of mental and behavioral health conditions is less clear. The COVID-19 pandemic also created numerous challenges and opportunities to implement health care policies and programs under conditions that are fundamentally different from what has been considered to be usual care. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on implementation of evidence-based policy and practice by State Mental Health Authorities (SMHA) for prevention and treatment of mental health problems in children and adolescents. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 SMHA representatives of 21 randomly selected states stratified by coronavirus positivity rate and rate of unmet services need. Data analysis with SMHA stakeholders used procedures embedded in the Rapid Assessment Procedure-Informed Community Ethnography methodology. Results: The need for services increased during the pandemic due primarily to family stress and separation from peers. States reporting an increase in demand had high coronavirus positivity and high unmet services need. The greatest impacts were reduced out-of-home services and increased use of telehealth. Barriers to telehealth services included limited access to internet and technology, family preference for face-to-face services, lack of privacy, difficulty using with young children and youth in need of substance use treatment, finding a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant platform, training providers and clients, and reimbursement challenges. Policy changes to enable reimbursement, internet access, training, and provider licensing resulted in substantially fewer appointment cancellations or no-shows, greater family engagement, reduction in travel time, increased access for people living in remote locations, and increased provider communication and collaboration. States with high rates of coronavirus positivity and high rates of unmet need were most likely to continue use of telehealth post-pandemic. Despite these challenges, states reported successful implementation of policies designed to facilitate virtual services delivery with likely long-term changes in practice. Conclusions: Policy implementation during the pandemic provided important lessons for planning and preparedness for future public health emergencies. Successful policy implementation requires ongoing collaboration among policy makers and with providers.

Impacts of COVID-19 on Mental Health Safety Net Services for Youths: A National Survey of Agency Officials.

OBJECTIVE: Mental health agencies provide critical safety net services for youths. No research has assessed impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on services these agencies provide or youths they serve. This study sought to characterize agency officials' perceptions of the pandemic's impacts on youths and challenges to providing youth services during the pandemic and to examine associations between these challenges and impacts. METHODS: Surveys were completed in September-October 2020 by 159 state or county mental health agency officials from 46 states. Respondents used 7-point scales (higher rating indicated more severe impact or challenge) to rate the pandemic's impact on youth mental health issues, general service challenges, and telepsychiatry service challenges across patient, provider, and financing domains. Multiple linear regression models estimated associations between service challenges (independent variables) and pandemic impacts (dependent variables). RESULTS: Most agency officials perceived the pandemic as having disproportionately negative mental health impacts on socially disadvantaged youths (serious impact, 72%; mean rating=5.85). Only 15% (mean=4.29) perceived the pandemic as having a seriously negative impact on receipt of needed youth services. Serious service challenges were related to youths' lack of reliable equipment or Internet access for telepsychiatry services (serious challenge, 59%; mean=5.47) and the inability to provide some services remotely (serious challenge, 42%, mean=4.72). In regression models, the inability to provide some services remotely was significantly (p≤0.01) associated with three of five pandemic impacts. CONCLUSIONS: Officials perceived the COVID-19 pandemic as exacerbating youth mental health disparities but as not having a dramatic impact on receipt of needed services.

The Other US Border: Health Insurance Coverage Among Latino Immigrants In Puerto Rico.

Puerto Rico is a US territory and a popular destination for Latino immigrants in the Caribbean. Even with few language and cultural barriers, however, many Latino immigrants in Puerto Rico are uninsured. Using data from the 2014-19 Puerto Rico Community Survey, we examined inequities in health insurance coverage for non-Puerto Rican Latinos ages 18-64 living in Puerto Rico according to citizenship status and Latino subgroup (Dominican, Cuban, Mexican, and other Latino). After controlling for potential confounders, we found that noncitizen Dominicans had a significantly lower probability of having any health insurance (57.2 percent) and having any private insurance (31.5 percent). Regardless of similarities in culture and language, Latino immigrants on the island, particularly Dominicans, experience major health insurance coverage inequities. Considering that Puerto Rico's immigration system is regulated by US federal statute, both federal and local policy makers should acknowledge and focus on reducing these immigrant disparities in health insurance coverage.

Partisan Differences in Twitter Language Among US Legislators During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: As policy makers continue to shape the national and local responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, the information they choose to share and how they frame their content provide key insights into the public and health care systems. OBJECTIVE: We examined the language used by the members of the US House and Senate during the first 10 months of the COVID-19 pandemic and measured content and sentiment based on the tweets that they shared. METHODS: We used Quorum (Quorum Analytics Inc) to access more than 300,000 tweets posted by US legislators from January 1 to October 10, 2020. We used differential language analyses to compare the content and sentiment of tweets posted by legislators based on their party affiliation. RESULTS: We found that health care-related themes in Democratic legislators' tweets focused on racial disparities in care (odds ratio [OR] 2.24, 95% CI 2.22-2.27; P<.001), health care and insurance (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.7-1.77; P<.001), COVID-19 testing (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.12-1.19; P<.001), and public health guidelines (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.22-1.29; P<.001). The dominant themes in the Republican legislators' discourse included vaccine development (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.47-1.55; P<.001) and hospital resources and equipment (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.18-1.25). Nonhealth care-related topics associated with a Democratic affiliation included protections for essential workers (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.52-1.59), the 2020 election and voting (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.27-1.35), unemployment and housing (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.24-1.31), crime and racism (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.18-1.26), public town halls (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.16-1.23), the Trump Administration (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.19-1.26), immigration (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.12-1.19), and the loss of life (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.35-1.42). The themes associated with the Republican affiliation included China (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.85-1.92), small business assistance (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.23-1.3), congressional relief bills (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.2-1.27), press briefings (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.19-1.26), and economic recovery (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.16-1.23). CONCLUSIONS: Divergent language use on social media corresponds to the partisan divide in the first several months of the course of the COVID-19 public health crisis.

Changes in legislator vaccine-engagement on Twitter before and after the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Widespread SARS-CoV-2 vaccine uptake will be critical to resolution of the COVID-19 pandemic. Politicians have the potential to impact vaccine sentiment and uptake through vaccine-related communication with the public. We used tweets (n = 6,201), abstracted from Quorum, a public affairs software platform, to examine changes in the frequency of vaccine-related communication by legislators on the social media platform, Twitter. We found an increase in vaccine-related tweets by legislators following the arrival of SARS-CoV-2 in the United States. In the pre-COVID-19 era the majority of vaccine-related tweets were generated by Democrat and state senators. The increase in tweets following the arrival of COVID-19, however, was greater among Republican and federal legislators than Democrat or state legislators. This suggests that legislators who were previously less engaged in public discussion of vaccination, became engaged following the arrival of SARS-CoV-2, which may have implications for COVID-19 vaccine uptake among their followers.

Linking Data on Constituent Health with Elected Officials' Opinions: Associations Between Urban Health Disparities and Mayoral Officials' Beliefs About Health Disparities in Their Cities.

Policy Points Mayoral officials' opinions about the existence and fairness of health disparities in their city are positively associated with the magnitude of income-based life expectancy disparity in their city. Associations between mayoral officials' opinions about health disparities in their city and the magnitude of life expectancy disparity in their city are not moderated by the social or fiscal ideology of mayoral officials or the ideology of their constituents. Highly visible and publicized information about mortality disparities, such as that related to COVID-19 disparities, has potential to elevate elected officials' perceptions of the severity of health disparities and influence their opinions about the issue. CONTEXT: A substantive body of research has explored what factors influence elected officials' opinions about health issues. However, no studies have assessed the potential influence of the health of an elected official's constituents. We assessed whether the magnitude of income-based life expectancy disparity within a city was associated with the opinions of that city's mayoral official (i.e., mayor or deputy mayor) about health disparities in their city. METHODS: The independent variable was the magnitude of income-based life expectancy disparity in US cities. The magnitude was determined by linking 2010-2015 estimates of life expectancy and median household income for 8,434 census tracts in 224 cities. The dependent variables were mayoral officials' opinions from a 2016 survey about the existence and fairness of health disparities in their city (n = 224, response rate 30.3%). Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for characteristics of mayoral officials (e.g., ideology) and city characteristics. FINDINGS: In cities in the highest income-based life expectancy disparity quartile, 50.0% of mayoral officials "strongly agreed" that health disparities existed and 52.7% believed health disparities were "very unfair." In comparison, among mayoral officials in cities in the lowest disparity quartile 33.9% "strongly agreed" that health disparities existed and 22.2% believed the disparities were "very unfair." A 1-year-larger income-based life expectancy disparity in a city was associated with 25% higher odds that the city's mayoral official would "strongly agree" that health disparities existed (odds ratio [OR] = 1.25; P = .04) and twice the odds that the city's mayoral official would believe that such disparities were "very unfair" (OR = 2.24; P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mayoral officials' opinions about health disparities in their jurisdictions are generally aligned with, and potentially influenced by, information about the magnitude of income-based life expectancy disparities among their constituents.

Aligning dissemination and implementation science with health policies to improve children's mental health.

The prevalence of mental health problems among children (ages 0-21) in the United States remains unacceptably high and, post-COVID-19, is expected to increase dramatically. Decades of psychological knowledge about effective treatments should inform the delivery of better services. Dissemination and implementation (D&I) science has been heralded as a solution to the persistent problem of poor quality services and has, to some extent, improved our understanding of the contexts of delivery systems that implement effective practices. However, there are few studies demonstrating clear, population-level impacts of psychological interventions on children. Momentum is growing among communities, cities, states, and some federal agencies to build "health in all policies" to address broad familial, social, and economic factors known to affect children's healthy development and mental health. These health policy initiatives offer a rare opportunity to repurpose D&I science, shifting it from a primary focus on evidence-based practice implementation, to a focus on policy development and implementation to support child and family health and well-being. This shift is critical as states develop policy responses to address the health and mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on already-vulnerable families. We provide a typology for building research on D&I and children's mental health policy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).