ABSTRACT
COVID-19 and the resulting measures to curb the spread of the virus have significantly changed our lives, including our nutritional choices. In this rapid scoping review an overview is provided of what psychological factors may be associated with peoples' eating behaviour during COVID-19 restrictions. Relevant literature was identified using PubMed, PsycInfo, CINAHL and MEDLINE databases from 2019 onwards. For included studies, information on study characteristics, eating behaviours, and psychological factors were extracted. 118 articles were included, representing 30 countries. Findings indicated that most people consumed more and unhealthy food in times of COVID-19 restrictions, while some consumed less but often for the wrong reasons. Several psychological factors, related to (1) affective reactions, (2) anxiety, fear and worriers, (3) stress and (4) subjective and mental wellbeing were found to be associated with this increase in food consumption. These outcomes may help to be better inform future interventions, and with that, to be better prepared in case of future lockdown scenarios.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Communicable Disease Control , Anxiety , Databases, FactualABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of technology for communication and social interactions. Especially for children in low-income families-a vulnerable population suffering from health and digital disparities-the situation worsened during the pandemic. Earlier studies in times of COVID-19 suggested that the children in Korea who usually do homework and dine at community childcare centers (CCCCs, free after-school care places) need to learn more about how to eat healthily and how to interact with others using digital technology. Therefore, to reduce these children's health and digital inequalities, an interactive live and online cooking program was developed and provided to 313 children and 95 staff members at the 29 CCCCs located in the southern provinces in South Korea. The aim of the current study was to explore the experiences of children and staff with the program. After surveying their experiences, a high degree of satisfaction was found (children: 3.60 ± 0.10; staff: 3.63 ± 0.08 points out of 4.00). Aspects that needed improvement in the program were related to (in)experience in online technology, the frequency and timing of the cooking classes, and the communication between the centers and (online) chefs. In addition, in a word cloud analysis, terms such as 'fun', 'delicious', and 'want' were highlighted for children, and terms such as 'participating' and 'preparation' dominantly appeared for the staff. In the analysis of negative experiences, terms related to environmental factors such as 'sound', 'hear', and 'voice' were highlighted. This novel but preliminary approach for children from low-income families, by integrating cooking with digital technology, indicates that with enough digital support, the CCCCs are a promising platform to promote healthy eating and digital literacy. Optimizing and disseminating these strategies during this pandemic period, and future pandemics, could be beneficial to keep children in their communities healthy, and ultimately reduce socioeconomic health disparities.
ABSTRACT
In this White Paper, we outline recommendations from the perspective of health psychology and behavioural science, addressing three research gaps: (1) What methods in the health psychology research toolkit can be best used for developing and evaluating digital health tools? (2) What are the most feasible strategies to reuse digital health tools across populations and settings? (3) What are the main advantages and challenges of sharing (openly publishing) data, code, intervention content and design features of digital health tools? We provide actionable suggestions for researchers joining the continuously growing Open Digital Health movement, poised to revolutionise health psychology research and practice in the coming years. This White Paper is positioned in the current context of the COVID-19 pandemic, exploring how digital health tools have rapidly gained popularity in 2020-2022, when world-wide health promotion and treatment efforts rapidly shifted from face-to-face to remote delivery. This statement is written by the Directors of the not-for-profit Open Digital Health initiative (n = 6), Experts attending the European Health Psychology Society Synergy Expert Meeting (n = 17), and the initiative consultant, following a two-day meeting (19-20th August 2021).
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Health Promotion , Global HealthABSTRACT
The process of developing a behavior change intervention can cover a long time period. However, in times of need, this development process has to be more efficient and without losing the scientific rigor. In this article, we describe the just-in-time, planned development of an online intervention in the field of higher education, promoting COVID-19 vaccination among university students, just before they were eligible for being vaccinated. We demonstrate how intervention development can happen fast but with sufficient empirical and theoretical support. In the developmental process, Intervention Mapping (IM) helped with decision-making in every step. We learned that the whole process is primarily depending on the trust of those in charge in the quality of the program developers. Moreover, it is about applying theory, not about theory-testing. As there was no COVID-19-related evidence available, evidence from related fields helped as did theoretical knowledge about change processes, next to having easy access to the target population and important stakeholders for informed qualitative and quantitative research. This project was executed under unavoidable time pressure. IM helped us with systematically developing an intervention, just-in-time to positively affect vaccine acceptance among university students.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although several COVID-19 vaccines are available, the current challenge is achieving high vaccine uptake. We aimed to explore university students' intention to get vaccinated and select the most relevant determinants/beliefs to facilitate informed decision making around COVID-19 vaccine uptake. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey with students (N = 434) from Maastricht University was conducted in March 2021. The most relevant determinants/beliefs of students' COVID-19 vaccine intention (i.e., determinants linked to vaccination intention, and with enough potential for change) were visualized using CIBER plots. RESULTS: Students' intention to get the COVID-19 vaccine was high (80%). Concerns about safety and side effects of the vaccine and trust in government, quality control, and the pharmaceutical industry were identified as the most relevant determinants of vaccine intention. Other determinants were risk perception, attitude, perceived norm, and self-efficacy beliefs. CONCLUSION: Our study identified several determinants of COVID-19 vaccine intention (e.g., safety, trust, risk perception, etc.) and helped to select the most relevant determinants/beliefs to target in an intervention to maximize COVID-19 vaccination uptake. Concerns and trust related to the COVID-19 vaccine are the most important targets for future interventions. Other determinants that were already positive (i.e., risk perception, attitudes, perceived norms, and self-efficacy) could be further confirmed.
ABSTRACT
Halfway through 2021 in the midst of a public health crisis, a new academic year was fast approaching. Dutch universities were preparing to reopen their campuses to students and personnel in a safe manner. As the vaccination uptake was increasing and societies were slowly reopening, inviting students and personnel to campus became the next step to "the new normal". To absorb this change seamlessly, it was considered important to investigate personnel's beliefs about returning to campus and their perceptions of a safe working environment. An online survey was conducted among personnel (N = 1965) of Maastricht University, the Netherlands. University personnel's beliefs about a safe return to campus were assessed. The data were collected between 11 June and 28 June 2021. This study showed that, while most personnel (94.7%) were already vaccinated or willing to do so, not all personnel did feel safe to return to campus in September 2021. Over half of the respondents (58%) thought that the university is a safe place to return to work when the new academic year starts. However, the remainder of personnel felt unsafe or were uncertain for various reasons such as meeting in large groups or becoming infected. Moreover, when returning to campus, employees stated that they would require some time to reacclimate to their former work culture. The group who felt relatively more unsafe indicated that returning in September was too risky and that they worried about being infected. They wanted the safety guidelines to still be in force. On the other hand, the "safe" group stated safely returning to be "certainly possible" and trusted that others would still stick to the prevention guidelines. The findings led to practical recommendations for the University Board as they were preparing for organizing research and teaching for the upcoming academic year in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. A brief intervention was developed: a webinar in which the data were linked to the board's plans for safe returning. This study demonstrates that university boards may use research among personnel to develop adequate measures promoting safety and feelings of safety among personnel in similar future situations.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: When reopening universities in times of COVID-19, students still have to adhere to COVID-19 behavioral guidelines. We explored what behavioral determinants (and underlying beliefs) related to the adherence to guidelines are both relevant and changeable, as input for future interventions. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted (Oct-Nov 2020), identifying behavioral determinants (and underlying beliefs) of university students' adherence to COVID-19-guidelines, including keeping 1.5 m distance, getting tested, and isolating (N = 255). RESULTS: Attitude, perceived norm, self-efficacy, and several beliefs (e.g., risk perception beliefs 'I am not afraid because I am young' [r = -0.33; p < .001]; attitudinal beliefs, e.g., 'I feel responsible for telling people to adhere to guidelines' [r = 0.37; p < .001]; self-efficacy beliefs, e.g., 'COVID-19-prevention guidelines are difficult to adhere to' [r = -0.30; p < .001]) were associated with intention to adhere to guidelines, and for those beliefs there was room for improvement, making them suitable as possible intervention targets. CONCLUSIONS: Students mostly adhere to COVID-19 guidelines, but there is room for improvement. Interventions need to enhance students' adherence behavior by targeting the most relevant determinants as identified in this study. Based on these findings, a small intervention was introduced targeting the determinants of students' adherence to guidelines.