COVID-19 through the lens of mental health in India: Present status and future directions

This book provides an in-depth understanding of the impact of COVID-19 on the psychological health of people and communities in India. Focusing on the current discourse on Mental Health literacy in India, the book also analyses COVID-19-specific health beliefs and their convergences and divergences with COVID-19 protocols and advisories. It discusses the impact of the pandemic on survivors of COVID-19 including their quality of life, psychological well-being, and coping mechanisms while tackling loneliness, loss, and grief. It explores the psychological and social challenges which children have faced during the pandemic and offers techniques to address and adequately manage Mental Health challenges. Grounded in theoretical and empirical research, this book will be of interest to students, teachers, and researchers of psychology, social psychology, Mental Health and wellness studies, and sociology. It will also be useful for academicians, social workers, healthcare workers, and psychologists. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Resilience as a moderator between anxiety sensitivity and health anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has been described as a collective trauma both in the U.S. and the world at large (Watson et al., 2020), requiring individuals and systems to rapidly adapt and re-adapt to constant change. Research literature has established the pandemic has resulted in numerous negative mental health consequences with anxiety and associated constructs being the most common response to the pandemic (Goldbach et al., 2020;Wang et al., 2020). The current study sought to identify the relationship between resilience, anxiety sensitivity, and health anxiety during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, the present study utilized moderation analyses to examine the influence of resilience on the relationship between anxiety sensitivity and health anxiety. At this time, no known study has examined resilience as a moderator for anxiety sensitivity and health anxiety in terms of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results of the study indicated resilience significantly moderated the relationship between physical and cognitive anxiety sensitivity and health anxiety, but this was not the case with the social anxiety sensitivity subscale. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Financial resilience of two-worker households from a health perspective

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the significant impact of health conditions on household finance. Traditional measures of financial resilience ignored households' ability to adjust to labor income disruptions. We proposed a more comprehensive two-tier measure of financial resilience by accounting for nonlabor income and spending adjustments in the face of income loss associated with health situations. Using this measure, we evaluated the financial resilience of two-worker households with members having COVID-19 health risk conditions and other mental and physical chronic diseases. Our findings showed that households with cancer patients were more financially resilient yet those having obese members were less financially resilient. Decomposition of the financial resilience measure revealed differences in financial resources allocation-households with cancer patients allocated more wealth to noncash financial assets, whereas households with obese members saved less and spent more. Our findings shed light on financial planning practices and public policies of emergency assistance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Influence of sociodemographic characteristics on knowledge and attitudes about COVID-19 in northern Iraq

Objective: Targeted public health campaigns are important in countries where health resources are limited. This is especially the case for countries such as Iraq since decades of sanctions, war and armed conflict have depleted the health system. The current study investigated the influence of sociodemographic characteristics on attitudes towards the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) relating to knowledge and behaviors held by people living in North Iraq. Method: A cross-sectional survey, conducted from 21st March to 12th April 2020, used an online platform. Multivariate analyses were used to examine the relationship between sociodemographic factors and respondents' knowledge, attitude and behavioral practices in response to COVID-19. Results: Respondents with better self-reported health were most likely to report sleep impairment (OR = 2.32,1.49-3.68) impaired eating (OR = 1.84, 1.17-2.95) fear in response to social media news on COVID-19 (OR = 1.92, 1.32-2.81) and were more likely to practice COVID-19 prevention measures (OR= 1.08, 1.01-1.14). On the other hand, those with better self-reported health (OR = 0.4;0.27-0.59) were less likely to report good knowledge on COVID-19 whereas those with higher levels of education (OR= 3.59, 1.29-10.2) claimed to have higher knowledge of COVID-19. Men believed that war was more frightening than COVID-19 (OR = 1.91, 1.33-2.75) compared to woman. Conclusion: Self-reported health and type of employment were the sociodemographic factors most frequently noted to influence knowledge, attitude and behaviors toward COVID-19 amongst the northern Iraqi population. In a country where health resources are scare and stretched because of a history of sanctions and prolonged war and community violence, these results provide directions for targeted approaches to support public health campaigns. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Parents' Attitudes toward COVID-19 Vaccination: A Study from Two Centers in Istanbul

Objective Vaccination is an important measure for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In the present study, we aimed to evaluate parents' attitudes toward vaccinating themselves and their children. We also searched whether information about the multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a severe complication of COVID-19, could change parents' decisions on vaccinating their children. Methods A questionnaire form consisting of sociodemographic features, COVID-19 vaccination practices, and knowledge about MIS-C was applied to parents of children attending Bezmialem Vakıf University Hospital from March through June 2022. Factors affecting vaccine hesitancy were evaluated. Results Among 383 parents, COVID-19 history was present in 248 (64.8%), and 165 (43.1%) were hesitant to vaccinate themselves. The number of cases where both parents had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine was 256/354 (72.3%). The most common reasons for vaccine hesitancy were vaccines being new in 53/165 (32.1%) and fears of side effects in 95/165 (57.6%). Parents' hesitation toward vaccination of their children with the COVID-19 vaccine was highest for the 0 to 6 age group (78.9%) (73.6% in the 6–12 age group, and 47.3% in the 12–18 age group). In total, 365/383 (95.3%) parents did not have an opinion about MIS-C. After information was given, 62.5% of the 302 participants who opposed vaccinating children under 6 years changed their decision to have their children vaccinated. Conclusion Although routine childhood vaccinations were performed in 99% of children, more than half of parents were hesitant to vaccinate their children with the COVID-19 vaccine. The majority did not have an opinion about MIS-C. Briefings by pediatricians about complications of COVID-19 will help avoid vaccine hesitancy. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Journal of Pediatric Infectious Diseases is the property of Thieme Medical Publishing Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Complementary or Competing Frames? The Impact of Economic and Public Health Messages on COVID-19 Attitudes

The American reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic is polarized, with conservatives often less willing to engage in risk-mitigation strategies such as mask-wearing and vaccination. COVID-19 narratives are also polarized, as some conservative elites focus on the economy over public health. In this registered report, we test whether combining economic and public health messages can persuade individuals to increase support for COVID-19 risk mitigation. We present preliminary evidence that the combination of messages is complementary, rather than competing or polarizing. When given a message emphasizing COVID-19's negative health and economic effects in a pilot study, conservatives increased their support for a broad range of risk-mitigation strategies, while liberals maintained high levels of support. A preregistered larger-n follow-up study, however, failed to replicate this effect. While complementary frames may be a promising way to persuade voters on some issues, they may also struggle to overcome high levels of existing polarization.

Ansiedad, creencias y Covid-19 en dos periodos de la pandemia en Brasil: un estudio comparativo

This research compared evocations regarding the term "coronavirus" during two different periods in the Covid-19 pandemic in Brazil in 2020-March (beginning of the pandemic in the country) and June (Brazil as the epicenter of the pandemic)-, considering the presence or absence of anxiety symptoms in participants. The methodology adopted the free evocation technique and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-2) symptom scale. The sample was composed of 5,961 women and 1,153 men. Participant selection was relegated to convenience sampling by means of an online questionnaire. Results showed that the coronavirus had differential impacts among the groups that were assessed and according to the time of data collection. In general, in March, people with anxiety symptoms had a more catastrophic view of the future, while people without those symptoms had a less unfavorable repertoire to adjust to the situation. In June, both groups reported a negative view of the scenario, indicating a decrease or exhaustion in their capacity for psychological adjustment. This suggests the possibility of an increase of some conditions that result in adaptive impairment, exhaustion, and mental illness. Finally, it is important to understand people's beliefs about the coronavirus at different times of the pandemic because it is a favorable period for the emergence and/or intensification of mental disorders. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) (Spanish) Esta investigacion comparo evocaciones sobre el termino "coronavirus" en dos periodos diferentes durante la pandemia de COVID-19 en Brasil - en marzo (inicio de la pandemia en el pais) y en junio (Brasil como epicentro de la pandemia) de 2020. Se considero la presencia o la ausencia de sintomas de ansiedad en los participantes. En los metodos, se utilizo la tecnica de evocacion libre y la escala de sintomas de Trastorno de Ansiedad Generalizada (GAD-2). En total, 5961 mujeres y 1153 hombres participaron en el estudio. La seleccion de los participantes se realizo mediante una muestra de conveniencia com un cuestionario online. Los resultados mostraron que el coronavirus se sintio de manera diferente entre los grupos que fueron evaluados y segun el momento de la recoleccion de los datos. En general, en marzo, las personas con sintomas de ansiedad tenian una vision mas catastrofica del futuro, mientras que las personas sin esos sintomas evidenciaban un repertorio menos desfavorable para ajustarse a la situacion. En junio, ambos grupos reportaron una vision negativa del escenario, lo que indica una disminucion o agotamiento en la capacidad de ajuste psicologico. Esto sugiere la posibilidad de un aumento de algunas condiciones que resultan en deterioro adaptativo, agotamiento y enfermedad mental. Finalmente, es importante comprender las creencias sobre el coronavirus en diferentes momentos de la pandemia, porque es un periodo favorable para la aparicion y/o intensificacion de los trastornos mentales. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Exploring Clinician Attitudes Towards Treating Eating Disorders: Bridging Counselor Training Gaps

Eating disorder (ED) clinicians may face various challenges in practice, including burnout and feelings of incompetence. Several deficits may contribute to these challenges, such as graduate education and treatment gaps. In this study, 109 interdisciplinary clinicians were surveyed regarding their personal attitudes, experiences, and challenges in treating EDs. Among the various results, quantitative and qualitative findings highlighted the lack of graduate education as the primary challenge to effectively treating EDs, as well as the need for more ED research and culturally responsive care. Recommendations to enhance ED education and counselor training are provided, including managing countertransference and advocating for specialized coursework. Lastly, critical directions for future research are discussed.

Framing, risk perception and social health campaigns: A neuroscientific analysis

Health authorities have widely used social health campaigns to improve the attitudes and healthy behaviours of the population. During the COVID-19 pandemic, they became an essential tool in increasing compliance with health measures, especially among the young population, a particularly reluctant group. The aim of this study was to analyse the effectiveness of different campaigns in improving young people's intention to change their behaviour towards compliance with health measures. For this purpose, an experimental study was conducted using neurophysiological tools (electroencephalogram and galvanic skin response) as well as self-reported data from a questionnaire. The experiment analysed three health campaigns with different narrative frames and emotions in the messages. The results showed different degrees of persuasive effectiveness depending on the framing, emotions used, and level of intensity of such emotions. Overall, it was concluded that negative framing strategies and high levels of intensity worked effectively. The influence of the perceived risk declared by the participants on the impact of the different campaigns was also analysed. In this case, for the most difficult target to activate, subjects with low perceived risk, negative and low-intensity framing strategies were revealed to be the most effective. Implications for the design of campaigns were derived, and limitations and future lines of research were addressed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance worldwide: a rapid review

Background: While vaccines are acknowledged as one of the most successful public health measures, an increasing number of people doubt the safety or necessity of vaccines. We aimed to assess and identify the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination acceptance worldwide. Materials and Methods: In this review, a systemic search of online databases (Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CIVILICA, and Google Scholar search engine) was conducted for related studies with no time limit up to December 2021. Results: The percentage of individuals willing to receive a COVID-19 vaccine across worldwide studies ranged from 23.1% to 92%. Willingness to vaccinate was dependent on factors such as male gender, older age groups (aged 65 or older), race (Asian race), higher income, ethnicity (Hispanic ethnicity), specialists' recommendations, access barriers (location of vaccine delivery, relative cost, time and distance to access vaccine), and a higher level of education. Hesitancy was mostly driven by vaccine safety concerns, perceived effectiveness, distrust in health officials or public health experts to ensure vaccine safety, lack of vaccine offer or lack of communication from trusted providers and community, vaccine characteristics (i.e., ways the vaccine will be administered and where the vaccine is made), and speed of vaccine development and was associated with fear of known or unknown long-term side effects. Conclusion: The top three reasons people agree to vaccinate were "to protect themselves and others", "belief in vaccination and science", and "to help stop the virus spread". Willingness to vaccinate differed by age, gender, race, income status, ethnicity, specialists' recommendations, access barriers (including the location of vaccine delivery, relative cost, time, and distance to access a vaccine), and education.

Without a mask: Judgments of Corona virus exposure as a function of inter personal distance

In order to minimize the risk of infection during the Covid-19 pandemic, people are recommended to keep interpersonal distance (e.g., 1 m, 2 m, 6 feet), wash their hands frequently, limit social contacts and sometimes to wear a face mask. We investigated how people judge the protective effect of interpersonal distance against the Corona virus. The REM model, based on earlier empirical studies, describes how a person's virus exposure decreases with the square of the distance to another person emitting a virus in a face to face situation. In a comparison with model predictions, most participants underestimated the protective effect of moving further away from another person. Correspondingly, most participants were not aware of how much their exposure would increase if they moved closer to the other person. Spectral analysis of judgments showed that a linear ratio model with the independent variable = (initial distance)/(distance to which a person moves) was the most frequently used judgment rule. It leads to insensitivity to change in exposure compared with the REM model. The present study indicated a need for information about the effects of keeping interpersonal distance and about the importance of virus carrying aerosols in environments with insufficient air ventilation. Longer conversations emitting aerosols in a closed environment may lead to ambient concentrations of aerosols in the air that no distance can compensate for. The results of the study are important for risk communications in countries where people do not wear a mask and when authorities consider removal of a recommendation or a requirement to wear a face mask. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Psychometric properties of the assessment of COVID-19 attitudes and behaviors

Developing psychometrically validated assessment tools to examine social and intergroup processes related to COVID-19 is fundamental for creating interventions that reduce the spread of this virus. Thus, this manuscript aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of a new measure, Assessment of COVID-19 Attitudes and Behaviors (ACAB), that assesses COVID-19-related attitudes (e.g., about physical distancing, xenophobia), behaviors (e.g., helping others versus prioritizing own needs), and beliefs (e.g., about others' roles in spreading COVID-19). We used exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA, CFA) to provide factor analytic support and Fisher's r-to-z transformation to provide construct validity evidence. EFA revealed and CFA confirmed a four-factor structure of social distancing adjustment, self-prioritization, prosocial behaviors, and belief in conspiracies. Fisher's r-to-z transformation provided evidence for the construct validity of the four factors. This psychometrically validated instrument will enhance social science researchers' ability to accurately identify and explicate psychological processes related to COVID-19. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Men's and women's endorsement of hegemonic masculinity and responses to COVID-19.

Using a gendered psychology of health approach, we examine the effects of the culturally idealized form of masculinity-hegemonic masculinity-for both men and women's health attitudes and behaviors. Using data collected across four studies (N = 805) during the COVID-19 pandemic, we found that stronger endorsement of hegemonic masculinity related to health attitudes antithetical to mitigation strategies (e.g. more engagement in risky behaviors, less support for federal mandates) and evaluations of how political leaders have responded to COVID-19. These effects did not differ by gender suggesting that hegemonic masculinity has implications for both men and women's health.

Erroneous Consonance. How inaccurate beliefs about physician opinion influence COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers have studied how Americans' attitudes toward health experts influence their health behaviors and policy opinions. Fewer, however, consider the potential gap between individual and expert opinion about COVID-19, and how that might shape health attitudes and behavior. This omission is notable, as discrepancies between individual and expert opinion could help explain why some Americans fail to take action to protect themselves and others from the virus. In novel demographically representative surveys of the US adult population (N = 5,482) and primary care physician subpopulations (PCPs; N = 625), we contrast the relationship between: (1) Americans' and (2) PCPs' preferences regarding who ought to be responsible for taking action to combat the spread of COVID-19, as well as (3) Americans' perceptions of PCP preferences ("PCP meta-opinion"). In the aggregate, we find that Americans are far less likely than PCPs to see a role for both private and state actors in taking action to combat COVID-19. Interestingly, though, this disjuncture is not reflected in individual-level PCP meta-opinion; as most Americans think that PCPs share their views on state and private intervention (τb = 0.44-0.49). However, this consonance is often erroneous, which we show can have problematic health consequences. Multivariate models suggest that Americans who both see little place for individual responsibility in taking action to stop viral spread and who think that PCPs share those views are significantly less likely to vaccinate against COVID-19. We conclude by discussing the public health benefits of efforts to bring public opinion in line with expert opinion.

COVID-19 and Vaccine Hesitancy: Could Health Literacy be the Solution?

Objective: Practices such as the use of masks, cleaning measures, and social distancing have come to the fore to prevent the Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In addition to this, the most important way to fight the pandemic seems to be vaccination. However, "vaccine hesitancy" is seen as an important obstacle to attempts to control the pandemic. With this study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of having inadequate or incorrect information, one of the possible determinants of attitudes towards the COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: The data of this descriptive study were collected via an online questionnaire from patients (N=496) involving Sociodemographic Data Form, Turkey Health Literacy Scale-32 and Anti-Vaccine Scale. Results: The data revealed that 7.5% of the participants would not be vaccinated and 14.3% were indecisive. We found a negative correlation between vaccine refusal and health literacy, thus confirming the main hypothesis of our study. Also, an increase in education years was a negative predictor of vaccine hesitation. Conclusion: Currently, the most important approach in fighting the pandemic is the vaccination of society. Having the right information is extremely important to fight vaccine refusal attitudes. The fight against vaccination requires joint efforts from governments and media resources, including social media. (English) [ FROM AUTHOR]

The Correlates & Public Health Consequences of Prospective Vaccine Hesitancy among Individuals Who Received COVID-19 Vaccine Boosters in the U.S.

Supplemental "booster" vaccines may prove vital in combating variant waves of endemic COVID-19. Given relatively low levels of booster vaccine uptake, Americans' willingness to receive a second booster shot is unclear. In a demographically representative survey of N = 3950 US adults (limited to a "boosted" subsample of N = 1551 who had not yet received a second booster), 49% [95% CI: 47, 51] of Americans report having received an initial booster shot, while just 34% [33, 36] report that they would be "very likely" to do so again. Concerns about missing work to vaccinate (-10%; B = 0.53, p = 0.05) and being unconvinced that additional boosters will be necessary (-47%; B = 2.24, p < 0.01) are significantly and negatively associated with being very likely to receive a second COVID-19 booster. These findings can help inform discussions about policies aimed at increasing vaccine uptake in the U.S., and broaden researchers' understanding of vaccine reluctance among those who might otherwise hold positive views toward vaccination.

Good continence care: tips for nurses working in any setting: How to ask the right questions, assess symptoms and provide support before offering pads to patients with continence issues

The article offers tips for nurses on providing care for patients with continence issues. Topics discussed include the consequences of pressures on continence services, the lack of confidence among nurses in continence, tools used for initial assessment of bladder symptoms in adults, and the lack of services for younger patients with bladder and bowel issues in the Untied Kingdom.

Knowledge and Acceptance of COVID-19 (SARS CoV2) Vaccination among Foundation students in a College in Kedah, Malaysia

Introduction: To combat the COVID-19 pandemic, Malaysia started vaccination of front-liners and adults in the community. The latter group might have insufficient knowledge to accept COVID-19 vaccination, therefore this research was to assess the knowledge and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination among youths, specifically students in a Malaysian college. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 481 foundation students in Kolej MARA Kulim (KMKU). The minimum sample size, using Epi Info was 214. Students answered an online questionnaire using google form which included demographic data (age, gender) and ten questions on knowledge and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination. For knowledge questions, students answered "yes", "no" or "don't know", correct answer scoring 1. For acceptance questions, a 5-point Likert scale was used ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree". EXCEL and SPSS version 23 were used for analysis with Chi-square test done to test association (significant for p-value <0.05). Results: The response rate was 65.1% with 313 students, (45.4% males, and 54.6% females) aged 18-19 years. The majority (83.7%) had satisfactory to excellent knowledge scores (mean = 6.66 (SD=2.299, 95% CI 6.40-6.91), median = 7 (± IQR =3), while 16.3% obtained poor scores (≤ 4). The majority (90%) accepted vaccination. Higher knowledge scores were associated with higher acceptance rates in both genders (p-value= 0.000). Significantly more females (90.6%) than males (80.3%) had positive attitude towards vaccination (p-value = 0.009). Conclusions: The majority of the foundation students in KMKU were knowledgeable on COVID-19 vaccination and willing to receive the vaccination against the novel coronavirus. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Malaysian Journal of Medicine & Health Sciences is the property of Universiti Putra Malaysia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Vaccine Hesitancy: Some Concerns About Values and Trust, Comments on Vaccine Hesitancy by Maya J. Goldenberg

The debates regarding vaccine hesitancy and refusal, Goldenberg argues, do not represent a war on science. If those who hesitate about childhood or COVID-19 vaccines trusted scientists and public health experts, they would be ensuring that children and themselves receive appropriate vaccines, the mantra goes. Witness for instance the cases of people willing to take experimental treatments against COVID-19, such as monoclonal antibodies, while they refuse COVID-19 vaccines on grounds that vaccines are experimental. [Extracted from the article] Copyright of International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

The Attitude of Health Care Providers in Saudi Arabia to Covid-19 Vaccine and Implementing Preventive Measures

Aim: This study would be the first of its kind in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, mainly to evaluate the willingness of the community to be vaccinated against the COVID-19 virus, assess attitudes towards continuing to use protective measures after getting vaccinated, and to continue to monitor changes in the spread of the COVID 19 virus after implementation of vaccination. Method: This is a cross-sectional study, questionnaire- based survey. The study includes 302 participants from Makkah region of Saudi Arabia. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistical analysis. Result: Out of 302 participants in the research the age 21-30 was 44.4%. 61.6% of the respondents took the vaccine, and 95.4% of them want to keep using the protective measures after receiving the vaccine. Conclusion: Healthcare providers and co-workers are willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Still, we strongly recommend that healthcare providers need more preparation and an evidence-based approach to address the safety and efficacy of the vaccines in the community and build and maintain public trust in the vaccine. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Middle East Journal of Family Medicine is the property of Medi+WORLD International Pty. Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)