Gender Discrepancies in SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic Related Beliefs, Attitudes, and Practices.

Objectives: International studies suggest that males may be less likely to adhere to SARS-CoV-2 transmission mitigation efforts than females. However, there is a paucity of research in this field in the United States. The primary aim of this study was to explore the relationship of binary gender identity (female/male) with beliefs, attitudes, and pandemic-related practices in the early stages of the pandemic. Methods: This study is based on a cross-sectional, voluntary response survey. Patients who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 between March 5 and June 7, 2020 were invited to participate. All patients were tested within a large community healthcare system that serves patients through eight hospitals and hundreds of clinics across Washington State. Bivariate associations between gender and various demographics were tested using Chi-squared and Student's t-tests. We examined associations between gender and pandemic-related beliefs, attitudes, and practices using multivariable logistic regression, accounting for potential confounding factors. Results: Females were more likely than males to agree that they (aOR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.14-2.00) or their families (aOR = 1.75, 95% CI 1.31-2.33) were threatened by SARS-CoV-2, or that their own behavior could impact transmission (aOR = 2.17, 95% CI 1.49-3.15). Similarly, females were more likely to agree that social distancing (aOR = 1.72, 95% CI 1.19-2.46), handwashing (aOR = 3.27, 95% CI 2.06-5.21), and masking (aOR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.02-1.94) were necessary to slow SARS-CoV-2 spread. Females were significantly less likely to visit outside of their social distancing circle (aOR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.47-0.81), but among those who did, practices of social distancing (aOR = 1.41, 95% CI 0.89-2.23), remaining outdoors (aOR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.56-1.40), and masking (aOR = 1.19, 95% CI 0.74-1.93) were comparable to males, while females practiced handwashing more than males (aOR = 2.11, 95% CI 1.33-3.34). Conclusions: Our study suggests that gender disparate beliefs, attitudes, and practices existed in the early stages of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Efforts should be tailored to encourage males to engage with mitigation efforts in ongoing pandemic-related public health campaigns.

Determinants of Social Distancing Among South Africans From 12 Days Into the COVID-19 Lockdown: A Cross Sectional Study.

Introduction: Social or physical distancing has been an effective measure for reducing the spread of COVID-19 infections. Investigating the determinants of adherence to social distancing can inform public health strategies to improve the behaviour. However, there is a lack of data in various populations. This study investigates the degree to which South Africans complied with social distancing during the country's COVID-19 lockdown and identifies the determinants associated with being in close contact with large numbers of people. Materials and Methods: Data was collected from a South African national online survey on a data free platform, supplemented with telephone interviews. The survey was conducted from 8 to 29 April 2020. The primary outcome was the number of people that participants came into close contact with (within a 2-metre distance) the last time they were outside their home during the COVID-19 lockdown. Multivariate multinomial regression investigated the socio-demographic, psychosocial and household environmental determinants associated with being in contact with 1-10, 11-50 and more than 50 people. Results: Of the 17,563 adult participants, 20.3% reported having not left home, 50.6% were in close physical distance with 1-10 people, 21.1% with 11-50 people, and 8.0% with >50 people. Larger household size and incorrect knowledge about the importance of social distancing were associated with being in contact with >50 people. Male gender, younger age and being in the White and Coloured population groups were significantly associated with being in contact with 1-10 people but not with larger numbers of people. Employment, at least secondary school education, lack of self-efficacy in being able to protect oneself from infection, and moderate or high risk perception of becoming infected, were all associated with increased odds of close contact with 1-10, 11-50, and >50 people relative to remaining at home. Conclusion: The findings identify subgroups of individuals that are less likely to comply with social distancing regulations. Public health communication, interventions and policy can be tailored to address these determinants of social distancing.