Working from home and intimate partner violence among cis-women during the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence from a global, cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) may have been exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. This analysis aimed to determine how employment disruption during COVID-19, including working from home, was associated with IPV experience among cis-gendered women. METHODS: The International Sexual Health and Reproductive health (I-SHARE) study is a cross-sectional online survey implemented in 30 countries during the pandemic. Samples used convenience, online panel, and population-representative methods. IPV was a pre-specified primary outcome, measured using questions from a validated World Health Organisation instrument. Conditional logistic regression modelling was used to quantify the associations between IPV and changes to employment during COVID-19, adjusted for confounding. RESULTS: 13,416 cis-gender women, aged 18-97, were analysed. One third were from low and middle income countries, and two thirds from high income countries. The majority were heterosexual (82.7%), educated beyond secondary-level (72.4%) and childless (62.7%). During COVID-19 33.9% women worked from home, 14.6% lost employment, and 33.1% continued to work on-site. 15.5% experienced some form of IPV. Women working from home experienced greater odds of IPV than those working on-site (adjusted OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.12-1.74, p = 0.003). This finding was robust independent of sampling strategy and country income. The association was primarily driven by an increase in psychological violence, which was more prevalent than sexual or physical violence. The association was stronger in countries with high gender inequality. CONCLUSIONS: Working from home may increase IPV risk globally. Workplaces offering working from home should collaborate with support services and research interventions to strengthen resiliency against IPV.

Intimate Partner Violence During COVID-19 Restrictions: A Study of 30 Countries From the I-SHARE Consortium.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) causes substantial physical and psychological trauma. Restrictions introduced in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including lockdowns and movement restrictions, may exacerbate IPV risk and reduce access to IPV support services. This cross-sectional study examines IPV during COVID-19 restrictions in 30 countries from the International Sexual HeAlth and REproductive Health (I-SHARE) study conducted from July 20th, 2020, to February, 15th, 2021. IPV was a primary outcome measure adapted from a World Health Organization multicountry survey. Mixed-effects modeling was used to determine IPV correlates among participants stratified by cohabitation status. The sample included 23,067 participants from 30 countries. A total of 1,070/15,336 (7.0%) participants stated that they experienced IPV during COVID-19 restrictions. A total of 1,486/15,336 (9.2%) participants stated that they had experienced either physical or sexual partner violence before the restrictions, which then decreased to 1,070 (7.0%) after the restrictions. In general, identifying as a sexual minority and experiencing greater economic vulnerability were associated with higher odds of experiencing IPV during COVID-19 restrictions, which were accentuated among participants who were living with their partners. Greater stringency of COVID-19 restrictions and living in urban or semi-urban areas were associated with lower odds of experiencing IPV in some settings. The I-SHARE data suggest a substantial burden of IPV during COVID-19 restrictions. However, the restrictions were correlated with reduced IPV in some settings. There is a need for investing in specific support systems for survivors of IPV during the implementation of restrictions designed to contain infectious disease outbreaks.

Evaluating and volunteering for crowdsourced interventions: Cross-sectional data on COVID-19 safety from a University Survey.

Despite many innovative ideas generated in response to COVID-19, few studies have examined community preferences for these ideas. Our study aimed to determine university community members' preferences for three novel ideas identified through a crowdsourcing open call at the University of North Carolina (UNC) for making campus safer in the pandemic, as compared to existing (i.e. pre-COVID-19) resources. An online survey was conducted from March 30, 2021 -May 6, 2021. Survey participants included UNC students, staff, faculty, and others. The online survey was distributed using UNC's mass email listserv and research directory, departmental listservs, and student text groups. Collected data included participant demographics, COVID-19 prevention behaviors, preferences for finalist ideas vs. existing resources in three domains (graduate student supports, campus tours, and online learning), and interest in volunteering with finalist teams. In total 437 survey responses were received from 228 (52%) staff, 119 (27%) students, 78 (18%) faculty, and 12 (3%) others. Most participants were older than age 30 years (309; 71%), women (332, 78%), and white (363, 83.1%). Five participants (1%) were gender minorities, 66 (15%) identified as racial/ethnic minorities, and 46 (10%) had a disability. Most participants preferred the finalist idea for a virtual campus tour of UNC's lesser-known history compared to the existing campus tour (52.2% vs. 16.0%). For graduate student supports, 41.4% of participants indicated no preference between the finalist idea and existing supports; for online learning resources, the existing resource was preferred compared to the finalist idea (41.6% vs. 30.4%). Most participants agreed that finalists' ideas would have a positive impact on campus safety during COVID-19 (81.2%, 79.6%, and 79.2% for finalist ideas 1, 2 and 3 respectively). 61 (14.1%) participants indicated interest in volunteering with finalist teams. Together these findings contribute to the development and implementation of community-engaged crowdsourced campus safety interventions during COVID-19.

Participatory approaches to delivering clinical sexually transmitted infections services: a narrative review.

Although sexual health programming and clinical sexually transmitted infections (STIs) services have traditionally been developed through 'top-down' approaches, there is emerging evidence that participatory approaches benefit the development and implementation of such services. Although other studies have already highlighted the benefits of participation in research and implementation of clinical STIs services delivery, this narrative review focuses on how community participation in clinical STIs services delivery has been operationalised and on the various aspects of clinical STIs services delivery in which participatory processes have been implemented. A PubMed search was conducted in January 2022 using the search terms that reflected the topic of participatory processes in clinical STIs services delivery to identify relevant papers. Only peer-reviewed papers published in English were reviewed, and no timeframe was selected. After reviewing existing studies, we identified how community participation has been incorporated across stages of clinical STIs service delivery, including planning, developing, delivering, evaluating, and scaling up, as well as gaps and challenges faced in implementing such approaches. This review highlighted how a wide range of participatory processes characterised by varying depths of participation have been used in the above processes. Challenges such as funding, socio-cultural barriers, technical barriers and the digital divide, issues of quality assurance, and standardising the measurement of participation remain, which may impede the uptake of participatory processes in clinical STIs services.

Digital sexually transmitted infection and HIV services across prevention and care continuums: evidence and practical resources.

Increased demand for sexual health services (including prevention and treatment) have spurred the development of digital STI/HIV services. Earlier advances in testing technologies opened the door for self-testing and self-sampling approaches, in line with broader self-care strategies. Advances in HIV management mean that many people are living well with HIV and no longer need intensive in-person monitoring, whereas those at-risk of HIV are recommended to have regular asymptomatic STI screening and pre-exposure prophylaxis. This narrative review examines the evidence and implications of digital STI/HIV services, focused on promoting testing, facilitating testing, clinical management and referrals, partner services, and prevention. We have used a prevention and care continuum to structure the review to increase utility to policy as well as practice. Digital STI/HIV services can be interwoven into existing clinical pathways to enhance face-to-face services or standalone digital STI/HIV services. A growing evidence base, including randomised controlled trials and observational studies, should help inform strategies for designing effective digital STI/HIV services. However, most studies to date have focused on high-income countries and people with smartphones, despite a substantial burden of STI/HIV in low- and middle-income countries. There are also important differences between digital STI and HIV services that require careful consideration. We discuss digital STI/HIV service evidence and implications to inform research and programs in this exciting field.

Effectiveness of a pay-it-forward intervention compared with user-paid vaccination to improve influenza vaccine uptake and community engagement among children and older adults in China: a quasi-experimental pragmatic trial.

BACKGROUND: China has low seasonal influenza vaccination rates among priority populations. In this study, we aimed to evaluate a pay-it-forward strategy to increase influenza vaccine uptake in rural, suburban, and urban settings in China. METHODS: We performed a quasi-experimental pragmatic trial to examine the effectiveness of a pay-it-forward intervention (a free influenza vaccine and an opportunity to donate financially to support vaccination of other individuals) to increase influenza vaccine uptake compared with standard-of-care user-paid vaccination among children (aged between 6 months and 8 years) and older people (≥60 years) in China. Recruitment took place in the standard-of-care group until the expected sample size was reached and then in the pay-it-forward group in primary care clinics from a rural site (Yangshan), a suburban site (Zengcheng), and an urban site (Tianhe). Participants were introduced to the influenza vaccine by project staff using a pamphlet about influenza vaccination and were either asked to pay out-of-pocket at the standard market price (US$8·5-23·2; standard-of-care group) or to donate any amount anonymously (pay-it-forward group). Participants had to be eligible to receive an influenza vaccine and to have not received an influenza vaccine in the past year. The primary outcome was vaccine uptake. Secondary outcomes were vaccine confidence and costs (from the health-care provider perspective). Regression methods compared influenza vaccine uptake and vaccine confidence between the two groups. This trial is registered with ChiCTR, ChiCTR2000040048. FINDINGS: From Sept 21, 2020, to March 3, 2021, 300 enrolees were recruited from patients visiting three primary care clinics. 55 (37%) of 150 people in the standard-of-care group (40 [53%] of 75 children and 15 [20%] of 75 older adults) and 111 (74%) of 150 in the pay-it-forward group (66 [88%] of 75 children and 45 [60%] of 75 older adults) received an influenza vaccine. People in the pay-it-forward group were more likely to receive an influenza vaccine compared with those in the standard-of-care group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 6·7 [95% CI 2·7-16·6] among children and 5·0 [2·3-10·8] among older adults). People in the pay-it-forward group had greater confidence in vaccine safety (aOR 2·2 [95% CI 1·2-3·9]), importance (3·1 [1·6-5·9]), and effectiveness (3·1 [1·7-5·7]). In the pay-it-forward group, 107 (96%) of 111 participants donated money for subsequent vaccinations. The pay-it-forward group had a lower economic cost (calculated as the cost without subtraction of donations) per person vaccinated (US$45·60) than did the standard-of-care group ($64·67). INTERPRETATION: The pay-it-forward intervention seemed to be effective in improving influenza vaccine uptake and community engagement. Our data have implications for prosocial interventions to enhance influenza vaccine uptake in countries where influenza vaccines are available for a fee. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the UK National Institute for Health Research.

Prioritizing syphilis control: Now is the time for action.

Syphilis control programs and research received fewer resources and attention compared to HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in the pre-pandemic era. The neglect of syphilis within comprehensive STI control efforts may be related to diagnostic (poor diagnostics), historical (legacies of racism in research), public health (limited partner services), and social problems (limited public engagement). At the same time, there are increasingly compelling reasons to prioritize syphilis control programs and research by harnessing lessons learned and advances during COVID-19. The closure of many STI facilities has accelerated new syphilis diagnostic pathways (e.g., syphilis self-testing), providing new ways for people to be screened outside of clinics. COVID-19 has underlined health inequities that fuel syphilis transmission, providing an opportunity to reckon with the historical legacy of racism that is linked to syphilis research. COVID-19 partner tracing efforts have also contributed to additional resources for partner services which may enhance syphilis control efforts. Finally, COVID-19 has demonstrated the importance of public engagement, making the case for greater public involvement in syphilis control and prevention programs. Urgent action is needed to prioritize syphilis control in a wide range of settings.

Crowdfunding for health research: a qualitative evidence synthesis and a pilot programme.

BACKGROUND: Many low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) researchers have disadvantages when applying for research grants. Crowdfunding may help LMIC researchers to fund their research. Crowdfunding organises large groups of people to make small contributions to support a research study. This manuscript synthesises global qualitative evidence and describes a Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR) crowdfunding pilot for LMIC researchers. METHODS: Our global systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis searched six databases for qualitative data. We used a thematic synthesis approach and assessed our findings using the GRADE-CERQual approach. Building on the review findings, we organised a crowdfunding pilot to support LMIC researchers and use crowdfunding. The pilot provided an opportunity to assess the feasibility of crowdfunding for infectious diseases of poverty research in resource-constrained settings. RESULTS: Nine studies were included in the qualitative evidence synthesis. We identified seven findings which we organised into three broad domains: public engagement strategies, correlates of crowdfunding success and risks and mitigation strategies. Our pilot data suggest that crowdfunding is feasible in diverse LMIC settings. Three researchers launched crowdfunding campaigns, met their goals and received substantial monetary (raising a total of US$26 546 across all three campaigns) and non-monetary contributions. Two researchers are still preparing for the campaign launch due to COVID-19-related difficulties. CONCLUSION: Public engagement provides a foundation for effective crowdfunding for health research. Our evidence synthesis and pilot data provide practical strategies for LMIC researchers to engage the public and use crowdfunding. A practical guide was created to facilitate these activities across multiple settings.

Interventions to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation: protocol for a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The duration and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic depends in a large part on individual and societal actions which is influenced by the quality and salience of the information to which they are exposed. Unfortunately, COVID-19 misinformation has proliferated. To date, no systematic efforts have been made to evaluate interventions that mitigate COVID-19-related misinformation. We plan to conduct a scoping review that seeks to fill several of the gaps in the current knowledge of interventions that mitigate COVID-19-related misinformation. METHODS: A scoping review focusing on interventions that mitigate COVID-19 misinformation will be conducted. We will search (from January 2020 onwards) MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Africa-Wide Information, Global Health, WHO Global Literature on Coronavirus Disease Database, WHO Global Index Medicus, and Sociological Abstracts. Gray literature will be identified using Disaster Lit, Google Scholar, Open Science Framework, governmental websites, and preprint servers (e.g., EuropePMC, PsyArXiv, MedRxiv, JMIR Preprints). Study selection will conform to Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual 2020 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. Only English language, original studies will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Data analysis will involve quantitative (e.g., frequencies) and qualitative (e.g., content and thematic analysis) methods. DISCUSSION: Original research is urgently needed to design interventions to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation. The planned scoping review will help to address this gap. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATIONS: Systematic Review Registration: Open Science Framework (osf/io/etw9d).

Sexual satisfaction and sexual behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic: results from the International Sexual Health And REproductive (I-SHARE) health survey in Luxembourg.

AIM: To identify the impact of COVID-19 measures on sexual behaviors and sexual satisfaction in Luxembourg residents. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of adults (> 18 years of age) residing in Luxembourg, while COVID-19 restrictions were in place. The survey was available from January 15 to February 12, 2021 in four languages (French, German, English and Portuguese). Survey questions focused on masturbation, cuddling, condom use, sex frequency, sexting, cybersex, watching porn, and sexual satisfaction. RESULTS: 557 volunteers completed the survey (35.5% men, 64.3% women). Sexual satisfaction and sexual problems variables were assessed on 4-point Likert scales (0 = not at all/never to 3 = very/often). Sexual problems increased during the COVID-19 measures while sexual satisfaction decreased compared to before the introduction of COVID-19 restrictions (assessed retrospectively). Factors associated with increased odds of sexual satisfaction included having a steady relationship before COVID-19 restrictions, engaging in sexting, reporting good mental health and not altering alcohol intake. CONCLUSIONS: The context of the COVID-19 pandemic and the measures implemented in Luxembourg affected sexual behaviors and sexual satisfaction. Sexual and reproductive health care centers and health professionals in general should take these results into consideration when providing care. Recommendations on the importance of sexual health for general wellbeing and behaviors associated with sexual satisfaction should be offered and possibilities to experience sexuality while reducing contamination risks be discussed.

Youth social innovation during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines: a quantitative and qualitative descriptive analyses from a crowdsourcing open call and online hackathon

Introduction Young people have played a pivotal role as part of the COVID-19 response, including developing health messages and social innovations. Social innovation in health engages multiple stakeholders in linking social change and health improvement. The study examined the feasibility of youth ideas and innovations to address the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic using quantitative and qualitative descriptive analyses. Methods In partnership with the WHO, academic institutions, youth organisations and civil society groups, we conducted a crowdsourcing open call among Filipino youth (15–30 years old) using a structured Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases/Social Innovation in Health Initiative process. The open call had three categories: youth voices to cocreate the post-COVID-19 world (entries were texts, images, videos and music), youth-led COVID-19 social innovations, and youth-led social innovations not related to COVID-19. Each submission was evaluated by three independent judges. Finalists were selected in each of the categories alongside four grand winners. All finalists were invited to attend a 1 day online civic hackathon. Results We received a total of 113 entries (youth voices to cocreate the post-COVID world=76;youth-led COVID-19 social innovations=17;youth-led social innovations not related to COVID-19=20). Twelve entries focused on youth mental health during the pandemic. The online hackathon provided the participants mentorship for further development of their ideas. Finalists were able to produce draft health communication campaigns and improved social innovations. Conclusion Many Filipino youth created exceptional entries in response to the open call. This suggests the feasibility of including youth voices in strategic planning processes. A global youth social innovation call is recommended.

Sexual and reproductive health during COVID-19 — the I-SHARE multi-country survey

Reliable information about sexual and reproductive health and service access during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are essential. The International Sexual Health and Reproductive Health (I-SHARE) study is led by a multi-country consortium that adopts an open science approach to achieve this goal. Future work will be needed to assess changes in sexual and reproductive health during the lifting of COVID-19 restrictions.

The International Sexual Health And REproductive Health during COVID-19 (I-SHARE) Study: A Multicountry Analysis of Adults from 30 Countries Prior to and During the Initial Coronavirus Disease 2019 Wave.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence to date about changes to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) during the initial wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To address this gap, our team organized a multicountry, cross-sectional online survey as part of a global consortium. METHODS: Consortium research teams conducted online surveys in 30 countries. Sampling methods included convenience, online panels, and population-representative. Primary outcomes included sexual behaviors, partner violence, and SRH service use, and we compared 3 months prior to and during policy measures to mitigate COVID-19. We conducted meta-analyses for primary outcomes and graded the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: Among 4546 respondents with casual partners, condom use stayed the same for 3374 (74.4%), and 640 (14.1%) reported a decline. Fewer respondents reported physical or sexual partner violence during COVID-19 measures (1063 of 15 144, 7.0%) compared to before COVID-19 measures (1469 of 15 887, 9.3%). COVID-19 measures impeded access to condoms (933 of 10 790, 8.7%), contraceptives (610 of 8175, 7.5%), and human immunodeficiency virus/sexually transmitted infection (HIV/STI) testing (750 of 1965, 30.7%). Pooled estimates from meta-analysis indicate that during COVID-19 measures, 32.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.9%-42.1%) of people needing HIV/STI testing had hindered access, 4.4% (95% CI, 3.4%-5.4%) experienced partner violence, and 5.8% (95% CI, 5.4%-8.2%) decreased casual partner condom use (moderate certainty of evidence for each outcome). Meta-analysis findings were robust in sensitivity analyses that examined country income level, sample size, and sampling strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Open science methods are feasible to organize research studies as part of emergency responses. The initial COVID-19 wave impacted SRH behaviors and access to services across diverse global settings.

Expanding syphilis test uptake using rapid dual self-testing for syphilis and HIV among men who have sex with men in China: A multiarm randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Low syphilis testing uptake is a major public health issue among men who have sex with men (MSM) in many low- and middle-income countries. Syphilis self-testing (SST) may complement and extend facility-based testing. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and costs of providing SST on increasing syphilis testing uptake among MSM in China. METHODS AND FINDINGS: An open-label, parallel 3-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted between January 7, 2020 and July 17, 2020. Men who were at least 18 years of age, had condomless anal sex with men in the past year, reported not testing for syphilis in the last 6 months, and had a stable residence with mailing addresses were recruited from 124 cities in 26 Chinese provinces. Using block randomization with blocks of size 12, enrolled participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) into 3 arms: standard of care arm, standard SST arm, and lottery incentivized SST arm (1 in 10 chance to win US$15 if they had a syphilis test). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who tested for syphilis during the trial period and confirmed with photo verification and between arm comparisons were estimated with risk differences (RDs). Analyses were performed on a modified intention-to-treat basis: Participants were included in the complete case analysis if they had initiated at least 1 follow-up survey. The Syphilis/HIV Duo rapid test kit was used. A total of 451 men were enrolled. In total, 136 (90·7%, 136/150) in the standard of care arm, 142 (94·0%, 142/151) in the standard of SST arm, and 137 (91·3%, 137/150) in the lottery incentivized SST arm were included in the final analysis. The proportion of men who had at least 1 syphilis test during the trial period was 63.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 55.5% to 71.3%, p = 0.001) in the standard SST arm, 65.7% (95% CI: 57.7% to 73.6%, p = 0.0002) in the lottery incentivized SST arm, and 14.7% (95% CI: 8.8% to 20.7%, p < 0.001) in the standard of care arm. The estimated RD between the standard SST and standard of care arm was 48.7% (95% CI: 37.8% to 58.4%, p < 0.001). The majority (78.5%, 95% CI: 72.7% to 84.4%, p < 0.001) of syphilis self-testers reported never testing for syphilis. The cost per person tested was US$26.55 for standard SST, US$28.09 for the lottery incentivized SST, and US$66.19 for the standard of care. No study-related adverse events were reported during the study duration. Limitation was that the impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) restrictions may have accentuated demand for decentralized testing. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to standard of care, providing SST significantly increased the proportion of MSM testing for syphilis in China and was cheaper (per person tested). TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR1900022409.

Syphilis self-testing to expand test uptake among men who have sex with men: a theoretically informed mixed methods study in Zimbabwe.

OBJECTIVES: Self-testing for STIs such as HIV and syphilis may empower sexual minorities and expand uptake of STI testing. While much is known about HIV self-testing (HIVST), less is known about syphilis self-testing, particularly in low-income settings. The objective of this study is to determine context-specific facilitators and barriers for self-testing and to assess the usability of syphilis self-testing in Zimbabwe among men who have sex with men (MSM). METHODS: This mixed methods study was conducted in Harare as part of a larger syphilis self-testing trial. The study included in-depth interviews (phase I) followed by usability testing and a second interview (phase II). In-depth interviews were conducted with MSM and key informants prior to syphilis self-testing. The same MSM then used the syphilis self-test, quantitatively assessed its usability and participated in a second in-depth interview. Phase I data were analysed using a thematic approach, guided by an adapted social ecological model conceptual framework. Phase II interviews were analysed using rapid assessment procedure methodology, and usability was assessed using a pre-established index, adapted from existing HIVST scales. RESULTS: Twenty MSM and 10 key informants were recruited for phase I in-depth interviews, and 16 of these MSM participated in phase II by completing a syphilis self-test kit. Facilitating factors for self-testing included the potential for increased privacy, convenience, autonomy, and avoidance of social and healthcare provider stigma. Barriers included the fear to test and uncertainty about linkage to care and treatment. Data from the Usability Index suggested high usability (89.6% on a 0-100 scale) among the men who received the self-test. CONCLUSIONS: MSM in Zimbabwe were willing to use syphilis self-test kits and many of the barriers and facilitators were similar to those observed for HIVST. Syphilis self-testing may increase syphilis test uptake among sexual minorities in Zimbabwe and other low-income and middle-income countries.

COVID-19 vaccine perceptions in the initial phases of US vaccine roll-out: an observational study on reddit.

BACKGROUND: Open online forums like Reddit provide an opportunity to quantitatively examine COVID-19 vaccine perceptions early in the vaccine timeline. We examine COVID-19 misinformation on Reddit following vaccine scientific announcements, in the initial phases of the vaccine timeline. METHODS: We collected all posts on Reddit (reddit.com) from January 1 2020 - December 14 2020 (n=266,840) that contained both COVID-19 and vaccine-related keywords. We used topic modeling to understand changes in word prevalence within topics after the release of vaccine trial data. Social network analysis was also conducted to determine the relationship between Reddit communities (subreddits) that shared COVID-19 vaccine posts, and the movement of posts between subreddits. RESULTS: There was an association between a Pfizer press release reporting 90% efficacy and increased discussion on vaccine misinformation. We observed an association between Johnson and Johnson temporarily halting its vaccine trials and reduced misinformation. We found that information skeptical of vaccination was first posted in a subreddit (r/Coronavirus) which favored accurate information and then reposted in subreddits associated with antivaccine beliefs and conspiracy theories (e.g. conspiracy, NoNewNormal). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings can inform the development of interventions where individuals determine the accuracy of vaccine information, and communications campaigns to improve COVID-19 vaccine perceptions, early in the vaccine timeline. Such efforts can increase individual- and population-level awareness of accurate and scientifically sound information regarding vaccines and thereby improve attitudes about vaccines, especially in the early phases of vaccine roll-out. Further research is needed to understand how social media can contribute to COVID-19 vaccination services.

Monetary incentives and peer referral in promoting secondary distribution of HIV self-testing among men who have sex with men in China: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Digital network-based methods may enhance peer distribution of HIV self-testing (HIVST) kits, but interventions that can optimize this approach are needed. We aimed to assess whether monetary incentives and peer referral could improve a secondary distribution program for HIVST among men who have sex with men (MSM) in China. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Between October 21, 2019 and September 14, 2020, a 3-arm randomized controlled, single-blinded trial was conducted online among 309 individuals (defined as index participants) who were assigned male at birth, aged 18 years or older, ever had male-to-male sex, willing to order HIVST kits online, and consented to take surveys online. We randomly assigned index participants into one of the 3 arms: (1) standard secondary distribution (control) group (n = 102); (2) secondary distribution with monetary incentives (SD-M) group (n = 103); and (3) secondary distribution with monetary incentives plus peer referral (SD-M-PR) group (n = 104). Index participants in 3 groups were encouraged to order HIVST kits online and distribute to members within their social networks. Members who received kits directly from index participants or through peer referral links from index MSM were defined as alters. Index participants in the 2 intervention groups could receive a fixed incentive ($3 USD) online for the verified test result uploaded to the digital platform by each unique alter. Index participants in the SD-M-PR group could additionally have a personalized peer referral link for alters to order kits online. Both index participants and alters needed to pay a refundable deposit ($15 USD) for ordering a kit. All index participants were assigned an online 3-month follow-up survey after ordering kits. The primary outcomes were the mean number of alters motivated by index participants in each arm and the mean number of newly tested alters motivated by index participants in each arm. These were assessed using zero-inflated negative binomial regression to determine the group differences in the mean number of alters and the mean number of newly tested alters motivated by index participants. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. We also conducted an economic evaluation using microcosting from a health provider perspective with a 3-month time horizon. The mean number of unique tested alters motivated by index participants was 0.57 ± 0.96 (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) in the control group, compared with 0.98 ± 1.38 in the SD-M group (mean difference [MD] = 0.41),and 1.78 ± 2.05 in the SD-M-PR group (MD = 1.21). The mean number of newly tested alters motivated by index participants was 0.16 ± 0.39 (mean ± SD) in the control group, compared with 0.41 ± 0.73 in the SD-M group (MD = 0.25) and 0.57 ± 0.91 in the SD-M-PR group (MD = 0.41), respectively. Results indicated that index participants in intervention arms were more likely to motivate unique tested alters (control versus SD-M: incidence rate ratio [IRR = 2.98, 95% CI = 1.82 to 4.89, p-value < 0.001; control versus SD-M-PR: IRR = 3.26, 95% CI = 2.29 to 4.63, p-value < 0.001) and newly tested alters (control versus SD-M: IRR = 4.22, 95% CI = 1.93 to 9.23, p-value < 0.001; control versus SD-M-PR: IRR = 3.49, 95% CI = 1.92 to 6.37, p-value < 0.001) to conduct HIVST. The proportion of newly tested testers among alters was 28% in the control group, 42% in the SD-M group, and 32% in the SD-M-PR group. A total of 18 testers (3 index participants and 15 alters) tested as HIV positive, and the HIV reactive rates for alters were similar between the 3 groups. The total costs were $19,485.97 for 794 testers, including 450 index participants and 344 alter testers. Overall, the average cost per tester was $24.54, and the average cost per alter tester was $56.65. Monetary incentives alone (SD-M group) were more cost-effective than monetary incentives with peer referral (SD-M-PR group) on average in terms of alters tested and newly tested alters, despite SD-M-PR having larger effects. Compared to the control group, the cost for one more alter tester in the SD-M group was $14.90 and $16.61 in the SD-M-PR group. For newly tested alters, the cost of one more alter in the SD-M group was $24.65 and $49.07 in the SD-M-PR group. No study-related adverse events were reported during the study. Limitations include the digital network approach might neglect individuals who lack internet access. CONCLUSIONS: Monetary incentives alone and the combined intervention of monetary incentives and peer referral can promote the secondary distribution of HIVST among MSM. Monetary incentives can also expand HIV testing by encouraging first-time testing through secondary distribution by MSM. This social network-based digital approach can be expanded to other public health research, especially in the era of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) ChiCTR1900025433.

Interventions to Mitigate COVID-19 Misinformation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The duration and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic depends largely on individual and societal actions which are influenced by the quality and salience of the information to which they are exposed. Unfortunately, COVID-19 misinformation has proliferated. Despite growing attempts to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation, there is still uncertainty regarding the best way to ameliorate the impact of COVID-19 misinformation. To address this gap, the current study uses a meta-analysis to evaluate the relative impact of interventions designed to mitigate COVID-19-related misinformation. We searched multiple databases and gray literature from January 2020 to September 2021. The primary outcome was COVID-19 misinformation belief. We examined study quality and meta-analysis was used to pool data with similar interventions and outcomes. 16 studies were analyzed in the meta-analysis, including data from 33378 individuals. The mean effect size of interventions to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation was positive, but not statistically significant [d = 2.018, 95% CI (-0.14, 4.18), p = .065, k = 16]. We found evidence of publication bias. Interventions were more effective in cases where participants were involved with the topic, and where text-only mitigation was used. The limited focus on non-U.S. studies and marginalized populations is concerning given the greater COVID-19 mortality burden on vulnerable communities globally. The findings of this meta-analysis describe the current state of the literature and prescribe specific recommendations to better address the proliferation of COVID-19 misinformation, providing insights helpful to mitigating pandemic outcomes.