Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Logos et Praxis ; 20(2), 2021.
Article in Russian | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1754024

ABSTRACT

The author considers the situation associated with coronavirus pandemic and its possible consequences for social cultural processes. The difficulty in risk analysis is that the risk is between objective and subjective, between rational and irrational, between social and existential. The logic of uniqueness gives way to the logic of ambiguity, which finds its expression in the connection of the risk society with the cosmopolitism. Ulrich Beck's concept of the cosmopolitan turn of modern civilization is updated, which is revealed through the concepts of "danger", "social inequality" and through the existentials "fear", "uncertainty", which indicate the social vulnerability of modern society. We are talking about the need to distinguish between risk and danger, about their complex relationship in modern conditions. Global risks include the coronovirus pandemic: risk has become a global hazard from which future risks and crises originate. The reflexivity of the unknown and the methodological cosmopolitanism – point to a global change in the society in the 21st century, whose priority is security. Cosmopolitanism is expressed in social delocalization, which includes three dimensions: spatial, temporal, and social. Risks have symbolic and existential content and include life guidelines, traditions and cultural norms. The coronavirus was a challenge to the intellectual sphere of society. The author focuses on the transformation of risks in the field of science and education. Self-isolation and social distance initiate the active introduction of distance education and media education. Attempts are being made to identify possible risks resulting from the introduction of media technologies in the educational system. The concept of the multiplicity of interpretations of riskogenics allows us to understand the prospects for the transformation of the global risk society in a pandemic situation.Alternate : Ð’ статье рассматриваются ситуация, связанная с пандемией коронавируса в мировом обществе риска, и ее возможные последствия для социокультурных процессов. Трудность в социально-философском анализе риска заключается в том, что риск находится между субъективным и объективным, между рациональным и иррациональным, между социальным и экзистенциальным. Логика однозначности уступает место логике многозначности, которая находит свое выражение в соединении общества риска с космополитизмом. Актуализируется концепция У. Бека о космополитическом повороте современной цивилизации, это раскрывается через понятия «опасность», «социальное неравенство» и через экзистенциалы «страх», «неуверенность», которые свидетельствуют о социальной уязвимости современного общества. Речь идет о необходимости различения риска и опасности, о их сложной взаимосвязи в современных условиях. К глобальным рискам относится пандемия коронавируса: риск стал глобальной опасностью, из которой берут начало будущие риски и кризисы. Рефлексивность неизвестного и методологический космополитизм мополитизм выражается в социальной делокализации, которая включает три измерения: пространств µÐ½Ð½Ð¾Ðµ, темпоральное и социальное. Риски обладают символическим и экзистенциальным содержанием и включают жизненные ориентиры, традиции и нормы культуры. Коронавирус явился вызовом интеллектуальной сфере общества. Автор акцентирует внимание на трансформации рисков в области науки и образования. Самоизоляция и социальная дистанция инициируют активное внедрение дистанционного образования и медиаобразования. Предпринимаются попытки выявления возможных рисков в результате внедрения медиатехнологий в образовательную систему. Представление о множественности трактовок рискогенности позволяет осмыслить перспективы трансформации мирового общества риска в ситуации пандемии.

2.
JMIR Form Res ; 6(1): e32764, 2022 Jan 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1662528

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As health care systems shift to greater use of telemedicine and digital tools, an individual's digital health literacy has become an important skillset. The Veterans Health Administration (VA) has invested resources in providing digital health care; however, to date, no study has compared the digital health skills and preparedness of veterans receiving care in the VA to veterans receiving care outside the VA. OBJECTIVE: The goal of the research was to describe digital health skills and preparedness among veterans who receive care within and outside the VA health care system and examine whether receiving care in the VA is associated with digital preparedness (reporting more than 2 digital health skills) after accounting for demographic and social risk factors. METHODS: We used cross-sectional data from the 2016-2018 National Health Interview Survey to identify veterans (aged over 18 years) who obtain health care either within or outside the VA health care system. We used multivariable logistic regression models to examine the association of sociodemographic (age, sex, race, ethnicity), social risk factors (economic instability, disadvantaged neighborhood, low educational attainment, and social isolation), and health care delivery location (VA and non-VA) with digital preparedness. RESULTS: Those who received health care within the VA health care system (n=3188) were younger (age 18-49 years: 33.3% [95% CI 30.7-36.0] vs 24.2% [95% CI 21.9-26.5], P<.01), were more often female (34.7% [95% CI 32.0-37.3] vs 6.6% [95% CI 5.5-7.6], P<.01) and identified as Black (13.1% [95% CI 11.2-15.0] vs 10.2% [95% CI 8.7-11.8], P<.01), and reported greater economic instability (8.3% [95% CI 6.9-9.8] vs 5.5% [95% CI 4.6-6.5], P<.01) and social isolation (42.6% [95% CI 40.3-44.9] vs 35.4% [95% CI 33.4-37.5], P<.01) compared to veterans who received care outside the VA (n=3393). Veterans who obtained care within the VA reported more digital health skills than those who obtained care outside the VA, endorsing greater rates of looking up health information on the internet (51.8% [95% CI 49.2-54.4] vs 45.0% [95% CI 42.6-47.3], P<.01), filling a prescription using the internet (16.2% [95% CI 14.5-18.0] vs 11.3% [95% CI 9.6-13.0], P<.01), scheduling a health care appointment on the internet (14.1% [95% CI 12.4-15.8] vs 11.6% [95% CI 10.1-13.1], P=.02), and communicating with a health care provider by email (18.0% [95% CI 16.1-19.8] vs 13.3% [95% CI 11.6-14.9], P<.01). Following adjustment for sociodemographic and social risk factors, receiving health care from the VA was the only characteristic associated with higher odds (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.36, 95% CI 1.12-1.65) of being digitally prepared. CONCLUSIONS: Despite these demographic disadvantages to digital uptake, veterans who receive care in the VA reported more digital health skills and appear more digitally prepared than veterans who do not receive care within the VA, suggesting a positive, system-level influence on this cohort.

4.
Probl Sotsialnoi Gig Zdravookhranenniiai Istor Med ; 29(6): 1451-1458, 2021 Nov.
Article in Russian | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1558965

ABSTRACT

The article considers essential theoretical methodological approaches of studying problematics of social capital presented in corresponding modern publications. The key results of conducted empirical studies were analyzed too. It is noted that in conditions of spread of COVID-19 pandemic, occurs increasing of risk of "social distancing" that affects intensification of psychological anxiety feeling and decreasing of level of interpersonal and institutional trust. The presented results testify that topic of social capital becomes one of the most important in the study of processes of pandemic course. The conducted studies permitted to identify relationships between various components of social capital and scale of pandemic spread, forms of population's counteraction to pandemic. The review of scientific publications on problematics of social capital and functioning of organizations in conditions of intensification of risks of pandemic spread and developing crisis processes in economics also permits to establish particular trends in respect of developing corresponding strategies of adaption to new reality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Social Capital , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Trust
5.
Eur Psychiatry ; 64(1): e20, 2021 03 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1123674

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Public health measures to curb SARS-CoV-2 transmission rates may have negative psychosocial consequences in youth. Digital interventions may help to mitigate these effects. We investigated the associations between social isolation, COVID-19-related cognitive preoccupation, worries, and anxiety, objective social risk indicators, and psychological distress, as well as use of, and attitude toward, mobile health (mHealth) interventions in youth. METHODS: Data were collected as part of the "Mental Health And Innovation During COVID-19 Survey"-a cross-sectional panel study including a representative sample of individuals aged 16-25 years (N = 666; Mage = 21.3; assessment period: May 5, 2020 to May 16, 2020). RESULTS: Overall, 38% of youth met criteria for moderate or severe psychological distress. Social isolation worries and anxiety, and objective risk indicators were associated with psychological distress, with evidence of dose-response relationships for some of these associations. For instance, psychological distress was progressively more likely to occur as levels of social isolation increased (reporting "never" as reference group: "occasionally": adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 9.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.3-19.1, p < 0.001; "often": aOR 22.2, CI 9.8-50.2, p < 0.001; "very often": aOR 42.3, CI 14.1-126.8, p < 0.001). There was evidence that psychological distress, worries, and anxiety were associated with a positive attitude toward using mHealth interventions, whereas psychological distress, worries, and anxiety were associated with actual use. CONCLUSIONS: Public health measures during pandemics may be associated with poor mental health outcomes in youth. Evidence-based digital interventions may help mitigate the negative psychosocial impact without risk of viral infection given there is an objective need and subjective demand.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Internet-Based Intervention/statistics & numerical data , Mental Health , Quarantine , Social Isolation/psychology , Stress, Psychological , Anxiety/prevention & control , Anxiety/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Quarantine/methods , Quarantine/psychology , SARS-CoV-2 , Stress, Psychological/etiology , Stress, Psychological/prevention & control , Telemedicine/methods , Young Adult
6.
J Gen Intern Med ; 36(7): 1951-1957, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1061194

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Social isolation is a known predictor of mortality that disproportionately affects vulnerable populations in the USA. Although experts began to recognize it as a public health crisis prior to 2020, the novel coronavirus pandemic has accelerated recognition of social isolation as a serious threat to health and well-being. OBJECTIVE: Examine patient experiences with screening and assistance for social isolation in primary care settings, and whether patient experiences with these activities are associated with the severity of reported social isolation. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey conducted in 2018. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (N = 251) were recruited from 3 primary care clinics in Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco. MAIN MEASURES: A modified version of the Berkman-Syme Social Network Index (SNI), endorsed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; items to assess for prior experiences with screening and assistance for social isolation. KEY RESULTS: In the sample population, 12.4% reported the highest levels of social isolation (SNI = 0/1), compared to 36.7%, 34.7%, and 16.3% (SNI = 2-4, respectively). Most patients had not been asked about social isolation in a healthcare setting (87.3%), despite reporting no discomfort with social isolation screening (93.9%). Neither discomfort with nor participation in prior screening for social isolation was associated with social isolation levels. Desire for assistance with social isolation (3.2%) was associated with a higher level of social isolation (AOR = 6.0, 95% CI, 1.3-28.8), as well as poor or fair health status (AOR = 9.1; 95% CI, 1.3-64.1). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, few patients reported being screened previously for social isolation in a primary care setting, despite low levels of discomfort with screening. Providers should consider broadening social isolation screening and referral practices in healthcare settings, especially among sicker and more isolated patients who express higher levels of interest in assistance with social isolation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Social Isolation , Adult , Chicago , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Patient Outcome Assessment , Primary Health Care , SARS-CoV-2 , San Francisco
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL