Racial-ethnic disparities in psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States: the role of experienced discrimination and perceived racial bias.

BACKGROUND: Research on mental health disparities by race-ethnicity in the United States (US) during COVID-19 is limited and has generated mixed results. Few studies have included Asian Americans as a whole or by subgroups in the analysis. METHODS: Data came from the 2020 Health, Ethnicity, and Pandemic Study, based on a nationally representative sample of 2,709 community-dwelling adults in the US with minorities oversampled. The outcome was psychological distress. The exposure variable was race-ethnicity, including four major racial-ethnic groups and several Asian ethnic subgroups in the US. The mediators included experienced discrimination and perceived racial bias toward one's racial-ethnic group. Weighted linear regressions and mediation analyses were performed. RESULTS: Among the four major racial-ethnic groups, Hispanics (22%) had the highest prevalence of severe distress, followed by Asians (18%) and Blacks (16%), with Whites (14%) having the lowest prevalence. Hispanics' poorer mental health was largely due to their socioeconomic disadvantages. Within Asians, Southeast Asians (29%), Koreans (27%), and South Asians (22%) exhibited the highest prevalence of severe distress. Their worse mental health was mainly mediated by experienced discrimination and perceived racial bias. CONCLUSIONS: Purposefully tackling racial prejudice and discrimination is necessary to alleviate the disproportionate psychological distress burden in racial-ethnic minority groups.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on young people from black and mixed ethnic groups' mental health in West London: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted vulnerable groups' physical and mental health, especially young people and minority ethnic groups, yet little is known about the crux of their experiences and what support they would like. To address this gap, this qualitative study aims to uncover the effect of the COVID-19 outbreak on young people with ethnic minority backgrounds' mental health, how this changed since the end of lockdown and what support they need to cope with these issues. DESIGN: The study utilised semi-structured interviews to conduct a phenomenological analysis. SETTING: Community centre in West London, England. PARTICIPANTS: Ten 15 min in-person semistructured interviews were conducted with young people aged 12-17 years old from black and mixed ethnic groups who regularly attend the community centre. RESULTS: Through Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, results indicated that the participants' mental health was negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, with feelings of loneliness being the most common experience. However, positive effects were concurrently observed including improved well-being and better coping strategies post lockdown, which is a testament to the young people's resilience. That said, it is clear that young people from minority ethnic backgrounds lacked support during the COVID-19 pandemic and would now need psychological, practical and relational assistance to cope with these challenges. CONCLUSIONS: While future studies would benefit from a larger ethnically diverse sample, this is a start. Study findings have the potential to inform future government policies around mental health support and access for young people from ethnic minority groups, notably prioritising support for grassroots initiatives during times of crisis.

The role of identity in the experiences of dementia care workers from a minority ethnic background during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Care home staff working during the COVID-19 pandemic experienced higher levels of stress and increased workloads. People from diverse ethnic backgrounds were disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study explored the identity experiences of care home staff from diverse ethnic backgrounds in the context of working during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Fourteen semistructured interviews were conducted between May 2021 and April 2022 with ethnic minority care home staff in England, who worked during the pandemic. Participants were recruited using convenience and theoretical sampling. Interviews were conducted via telephone or online platforms. A social constructivist grounded theory methodology was utilised in analysing the data. FINDINGS: Participants described five key processes which facilitated or hindered the impact that their experiences had on their identity: dealing with uncertainty and transitioning into a COVID-19 world; difficult emotions; experiences of discrimination and racism; the response from the care home and societal systems; and the personal vs collective responsibility. When participants' physical and psychological needs went unmet by support structures within the care home and/or society, they experienced a sense of injustice, lack of control and being unvalued or discriminated against by others. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance of recognising the unique needs of staff from diverse ethnic backgrounds working in care homes and adapting working practices to improve impact on identity, job satisfaction and staff retention. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: One care home worker was involved in developing the topic guide and helping to interpret the findings.

Establishing evidence to inform culturally competent mental health services: A mixed methods study protocol.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has exacerbated the significant and longstanding mental health inequalities for ethnic minorities, who were less likely to access mental health support in primary care but more likely to end up in crisis care compared to the majority ethnic group. Services were poorly offered and accessed to respond to the increased mental health challenges. AIM: To 1) establish evidence on which changes to mental health services provided in response to COVID-19 are beneficial for ethnic minorities who experience mental health difficulties in the North of England, and 2) to inform what and how culturally competent mental health services should be routinely provided. METHODS: A mixed methods approach comprising 1) a rapid review to map services and models of care designed or adjusted for mental health during the pandemic, 2) an observational study of retrospective routine data to assess changes to mental health services and associated outcomes, 3) qualitative interviews to understand experiences of seeking care and factors associated with high-quality service provision, and 4) a Delphi study to establish consensus on key features of culturally competent services. From the selected areas in the North of England, adults from ethnic minorities who experience mental health difficulties will be identified from the primary, community and secondary care services and local ethnic minority communities. DISCUSSION: This study will identify ways to tackle health inequalities and contribute to mental health service recovery post pandemic by providing practice recommendations on equitable and effective services to ensure culturally competent and high-quality care. A list of services and features on what and how mental health services will be provided. Working with study collaborators and public and patient involvement partners, the study findings will be widely disseminated through presentations, conferences and publications and will inform the subsequent funding application for intervention development and evaluation.

Do racial and ethnic disparities in following stay-at-home orders influence COVID-19 health outcomes? A mediation analysis approach.

Racial/ethnic disparities are among the top-selective underlying determinants associated with the disproportional impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on human mobility and health outcomes. This study jointly examined county-level racial/ethnic differences in compliance with stay-at-home orders and COVID-19 health outcomes during 2020, leveraging two-year geo-tracking data of mobile devices across ~4.4 million point-of-interests (POIs) in the contiguous United States. Through a set of structural equation modeling, this study quantified how racial/ethnic differences in following stay-at-home orders could mediate COVID-19 health outcomes, controlling for state effects, socioeconomics, demographics, occupation, and partisanship. Results showed that counties with higher Asian populations decreased most in their travel, both in terms of reducing their overall POIs' visiting and increasing their staying home percentage. Moreover, counties with higher White populations experienced the lowest infection rate, while counties with higher African American populations presented the highest case-fatality ratio. Additionally, control variables, particularly partisanship, median household income, percentage of elders, and urbanization, significantly accounted for the county differences in human mobility and COVID-19 health outcomes. Mediation analyses further revealed that human mobility only statistically influenced infection rate but not case-fatality ratio, and such mediation effects varied substantially among racial/ethnic compositions. Last, robustness check of racial gradient at census block group level documented consistent associations but greater magnitude. Taken together, these findings suggest that US residents' responses to COVID-19 are subject to an entrenched and consequential racial/ethnic divide.

Editorial.

It is impossible to write this editorial without recognizing that we are living in challenging times. Unprecedented changes in how, when, where, and with whom we work have occurred in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to the threat to human life, the pandemic is expected to increase poverty and deepen preexisting inequalities for vulnerable groups such as women (United Nations, 2020) and individuals living in poorer countries (United Nations Development Programme, 2020). In the United States, the pandemic has disproportionately negatively affected racial and ethnic minority group members (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/health-equity/race-ethnicity.html). For example, in the United States infection and mortality rates are especially high among African Americans (Yancy, 2020). These sobering realities, along with the recent deaths of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, and Breonna Taylor, and so many others, are vivid and wrenching reminders of longstanding social injustice and systematic racism, both in the United States and around the globe. When preparing my candidate statement and vision for the journal, a global pandemic and widespread social protest were the furthest thing from my mind. However, several aspects of my vision for JAP are highly relevant to the current context. This includes increasing representation and supporting diversity, as well as improving the translation of our science for the public good. Other elements of my vision for the journal include enhancing the review process and promoting open science. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Time trends, factors associated with, and reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: A massive online survey of US adults from January-May 2021.

IMPORTANCE: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has become a leading barrier to increasing the US vaccination rate. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate time trends in COVID-19 vaccine intent during the US vaccine rollout, and identify key factors related to and self-reported reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in May 2021. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: A COVID-19 survey was offered to US adult Facebook users in several languages yielding 5,088,772 qualifying responses from January 6 to May 31, 2021. Data was aggregated by month. Survey weights matched the sample to the age, gender, and state profile of the US population. EXPOSURE: Demographics, geographic factors, political/COVID-19 environment, health status, beliefs, and behaviors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: "If a vaccine to prevent COVID-19 were offered to you today, would you choose to get vaccinated." Hesitant was defined as responding probably or definitely would not choose to get vaccinated (versus probably or definitely would, or already vaccinated). RESULTS: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy decreased by one-third from 25.4% (95%CI, 25.3, 25.5) in January to 16.6% (95% CI, 16.4, 16.7) in May, with relatively large decreases among participants with Black, Pacific Islander or Hispanic race/ethnicity and ≤high school education. Independent risk factors for vaccine hesitancy in May (N = 525,644) included younger age, non-Asian race, < 4 year college degree, living in a more rural county, living in a county with higher Trump vote share in the 2020 election, lack of worry about COVID-19, working outside the home, never intentionally avoiding contact with others, and no past-year flu vaccine. Differences in hesitancy by race/ethnicity varied by age (e.g., Black adults more hesitant than White adults <35 years old, but less hesitant among adults ≥45 years old). Differences in hesitancy by age varied by race/ethnicity. Almost half of vaccine hesitant respondents reported fear of side effects (49.2% [95%CI, 48.7, 49.7]) and not trusting the COVID-19 vaccine (48.4% [95%CI, 48.0, 48.9]); over one-third reported not trusting the government, not needing the vaccine, and waiting to see if safe. Reasons differed by degree of vaccine intent and by race/ethnicity. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy varied by demographics, geography, beliefs, and behaviors, indicating a need for a range of messaging and policy options to target high-hesitancy groups.

COVID-19 Vaccine Decision-making Factors in Racial and Ethnic Minority Communities in Los Angeles, California.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has had disproportionate effects on racial and ethnic minority communities, where preexisting clinical and social conditions amplify health and social disparities. Many of these communities report lower vaccine confidence and lower receipt of the COVID-19 vaccine. Understanding factors that influence the multifaceted decision-making process for vaccine uptake is critical for narrowing COVID-19-related disparities. Objective: To examine factors that members of multiethnic communities at high risk for COVID-19 infection and morbidity report as contributing to vaccine decision-making. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study used community-engaged methods to conduct virtual focus groups from November 16, 2020, to January 28, 2021, with Los Angeles County residents. Potential participants were recruited through email, video, and telephone outreach to community partner networks. Focus groups were stratified by self-identified race and ethnicity as well as age. Transcripts were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Themes were categorized by contextual, individual, and vaccine-specific influences using the World Health Organization's Vaccine Hesitancy Matrix categories. Results: A total of 13 focus groups were conducted with 70 participants (50 [71.4%] female) who self-identified as American Indian (n = 17 [24.3%]), Black/African American (n = 17 [24.3%]), Filipino/Filipina (n = 11 [15.7%]), Latino/Latina (n = 15 [21.4%]), or Pacific Islander (n = 10 [14.3%]). A total of 39 participants (55.7%) were residents from high-poverty zip codes, and 34 (48.6%) were essential workers. The resulting themes included policy implications for equitable vaccine distribution: contextual influences (unclear and unreliable information, concern for inequitable access or differential treatment, references to mistrust from unethical research studies, accessibility and accommodation barriers, eligibility uncertainty, and fears of politicization or pharmaceutical industry influence); social and group influences (inadequate exposure to trusted messengers or information, altruistic motivations, medical mistrust, and desire for autonomy); and vaccination-specific influences (need for vaccine evidence by subpopulation, misconceptions on vaccine development, allocation ambiguity, vaccination safety preferences, the importance of perceiving vaccine equity, burden of vaccine scheduling, cost uncertainty, and desire for practitioner recommendation). Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, participants reported a number of factors that affected their vaccine decision-making, including concern for inequitable vaccine access. Participants endorsed policy recommendations and strategies to promote vaccine confidence. These results suggest that support of informed deliberation and attainment of vaccine equity will require multifaceted, multilevel policy approaches that improve COVID-19 vaccine knowledge, enhance trust, and address the complex interplay of sociocultural and structural barriers to vaccination.

Changes of Exercise, Screen Time, Fast Food Consumption, Alcohol, and Cigarette Smoking during the COVID-19 Pandemic among Adults in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on multiple lifestyle changes among adults in the United States (USA). METHODS: We conducted a survey, the Health, Ethnicity, and Pandemic (HEAP) Study, in October 2020 among USA adults. Participants were selected from the United States using 48 sampling strata, including age, race, ethnicity, education, and gender, and were asked to report five lifestyle behaviors (i.e., exercise time, screen time, fast-food meal consumption, alcohol drinking, and cigarette smoking) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The associations of sociodemographic factors with each lifestyle change were estimated using weighted multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: All 2709 HEAP participants were included in this study. Compared to pre-pandemic, the time spent on exercise decreased (32.06 vs. 38.65 min/day; p < 0.001) and screen time increased (6.79 vs. 5.06 h/day; p < 0.001) during the pandemic. The percentage of individuals who reported consuming fast-food meals ≥3 times/week decreased from 37.7% before the pandemic to 33.3% during the pandemic. The percentage of heavy drinkers (≥5 times/week) increased from 20.9% before the pandemic to 25.7% during the pandemic. Among smokers, heavy smoking (≥11 cigarettes/day) increased from 5.8% before the pandemic to 7.9% during the pandemic. We also identified subgroups who were more vulnerable to adverse influences from the pandemic, including racial/ethnic minority groups and young adults. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic had negative impacts on multiple lifestyle behaviors among Americans. Mitigating such negative impacts of COVID-19 requires effective interventions, particularly for some vulnerable subgroups.

Changes in Mammography Use by Women's Characteristics During the First 5 Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to a near-total cessation of mammography services in the United States in mid-March 2020. It is unclear if screening and diagnostic mammography volumes have recovered to prepandemic levels and whether use has varied by women's characteristics. METHODS: We collected data on 461 083 screening mammograms and 112 207 diagnostic mammograms conducted during January 2019 through July 2020 at 62 radiology facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. We compared monthly screening and diagnostic mammography volumes before and during the pandemic stratified by age, race and ethnicity, breast density, and family history of breast cancer. RESULTS: Screening and diagnostic mammography volumes in April 2020 were 1.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.5% to 2.4%) and 21.4% (95% CI = 18.7% to 24.4%) of the April 2019 prepandemic volumes, respectively, but by July 2020 had rebounded to 89.7% (95% CI = 79.6% to 101.1%) and 101.6% (95% CI = 93.8% to 110.1%) of the July 2019 prepandemic volumes, respectively. The year-to-date cumulative volume of screening and diagnostic mammograms performed through July 2020 was 66.2% (95% CI = 60.3% to 72.6%) and 79.9% (95% CI = 75.4% to 84.6%), respectively, of year-to-date volume through July 2019. Screening mammography rebound was similar across age groups and by family history of breast cancer. Monthly screening mammography volume in July 2020 for Black, White, Hispanic, and Asian women reached 96.7% (95% CI = 88.1% to 106.1%), 92.9% (95% CI = 82.9% to 104.0%), 72.7% (95% CI = 56.5% to 93.6%), and 51.3% (95% CI = 39.7% to 66.2%) of the July 2019 prepandemic volume, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a strong overall rebound in mammography volume by July 2020, the rebound lagged among Asian and Hispanic women, and a substantial cumulative deficit in missed mammograms accumulated, which may have important health consequences.

Disparities in Learning Mode Access Among K-12 Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic, by Race/Ethnicity, Geography, and Grade Level - United States, September 2020-April 2021.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, schools across the United States began transitioning to virtual learning during spring 2020. However, schools' learning modes varied during the 2020-21 school year across states as schools transitioned at differing times back to in-person learning, in part reflecting updated CDC guidance. Reduced access to in-person learning is associated with poorer learning outcomes and adverse mental health and behavioral effects in children (1-3). Data on the learning modes available in 1,200 U.S. public school districts (representing 46% of kindergarten through grade 12 [K-12] public school enrollment) from all 50 states and the District of Columbia during September 2020-April 2021 were matched with National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) demographic data. Learning mode access was assessed for K-12 students during the COVID-19 pandemic, over time and by student race/ethnicity, geography, and grade level group. Across all assessed racial/ethnic groups, prevalence of virtual-only learning showed more variability during September-December 2020 but declined steadily from January to April 2021. During January-April 2021, access to full-time in-person learning for non-Hispanic White students increased by 36.6 percentage points (from 38.0% to 74.6%), compared with 31.1 percentage points for non-Hispanic Black students (from 32.3% to 63.4%), 23.0 percentage points for Hispanic students (from 35.9% to 58.9%) and 30.6 percentage points for students of other races/ethnicities (from 26.3% to 56.9%). In January 2021, 39% of students in grades K-5 had access to full-time in-person learning compared with 33% of students in grades 6-8 and 30% of students in grades 9-12. Disparities in full-time in-person learning by race/ethnicity existed across school levels and by geographic region and state. These disparities underscore the importance of prioritizing equitable access to this learning mode for the 2021-22 school year. To increase equitable access to full-time in-person learning for the 2021-22 school year, school leaders should focus on providing safety-optimized in-person learning options across grade levels. CDC's K-12 operational strategy presents a pathway for schools to safely provide in-person learning through implementing recommended prevention strategies, increasing vaccination rates for teachers and older students with a focus on vaccine equity, and reducing community transmission (4).

E-Mentoring Female Underrepresented Public Health Student Researchers: Supporting a More Diverse Postpandemic Workforce.

Within higher education, underrepresented students continue to face inequalities and discrimination, with unique challenges surfacing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mentoring through formal or informal channels is one way to offer assistance to such students. During COVID-19 lockdowns, as classes and work moved online, mentoring also transitioned online. Electronic mentoring, or e-mentoring, was implemented formally by some universities and informally by independent researchers. This article describes the informal mentoring experiences of the lead author with 8 female student researchers, 6 of whom were mentored online. The students represented different racial and ethnic backgrounds, offering a collection of e-mentoring case studies during the pandemic. These independent field reports should not be assumed to represent any of the students' 6 universities, but they are a sample of what can be achieved by invested e-mentors. By sharing these anecdotal experiences, the authors call on all researchers of underrepresented groups to consider e-mentoring to support underrepresented student researchers and diversify the public health research field.

Structural Racism and the COVID-19 Experience in the United States.

The long, fallacious history of attributing racial disparities in public health outcomes to biological inferiority or poor decision making persists in contemporary conversations about the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the disproportionate impacts of this pandemic on communities of color, it is essential for scholars, practitioners, and policymakers to focus on how structural racism drives these disparate outcomes. In May and June 2020, we conducted a 6-state online survey to examine racial/ethnic differences in exposure to COVID-19, risk mitigation behaviors, risk perceptions, and COVID-19 impacts. Results show that Black and Hispanic individuals were more likely than White respondents to experience factors associated with structural racism (eg, living in larger households, going to work in person, using public transportation) that, by their very nature, increase the likelihood of exposure to COVID-19. Controlling for other demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, non-White respondents were equally or more likely than White respondents to take protective actions against COVID-19, including keeping distance from others and wearing masks. Black and Hispanic respondents also perceived higher risks of dying of the disease and of running out of money due to the pandemic, and 40% of Black respondents reported knowing someone who had died of COVID-19 at a time when the US death toll had just surpassed 100,000 people. To manage the current pandemic and prepare to combat future health crises in an effective, equitable, and antiracist manner, it is imperative to understand the structural factors perpetuating racial inequalities in the COVID-19 experience.

Ethnic and minority group differences in engagement with COVID-19 vaccination programmes - at Pandemic Pace; when vaccine confidence in mass rollout meets local vaccine hesitancy.

Israel, the UK, the USA, and some other wealthier countries lead in the implementation of COVID-19 vaccine mass vaccination programmes. Evidence from these countries indicates that their ethnic minorities could be as disproportionately disadvantaged in COVID-19 vaccines roll-out as they were affected by COVID-19-related serious illnesses. Their disadvantage is linked to their lower social status and fewer social goods compared with dominant population groups.Albeit limited by methodology, early studies attribute lower uptake of COVID-19 amongst ethnic minorities to the wider determinants of vaccine uptake, hesitancy or lack of vaccine confidence, including lower levels of trust and greater concerns about vaccine safety. Early sentinel studies are needed in all early adopter countries.One emerging theme among those of reproductive age in minority communities concerns a worry regarding COVID-19 vaccine's potential adverse effect on fertility. Respected professional groups reassure this is not a credible rationale. Drug and vaccine regulators use understandable, cautious and conditional language in emergency licencing of new gene-based vaccines. Technical assessments on whether there is any potential genotoxicity or reproductive toxicity should be more emphatic.From a public health perspective, sentinel studies should identify such community concerns and act early to produce convincing explanations and evidence. Local public health workforces need to be diverse, multiskilled, and able to engage well with minorities and vulnerable groups. The local Directors of Public Health in the UK are based in each local government area and have a remit and opportunity to stimulate speedy action to increase vaccine uptake.During the rapid Pandemic Pace of the vaccines roll-out, extra efforts to minimise uptake variations are likely to achieve improvements in the next year or two. We expect variations will not disappear however, given that underlying inequalities persist in less inclusive social systems.

Suicidal ideation among university students during the COVID-19 pandemic: Identifying at-risk subgroups.

Given concerns of increased suicide risk among university students during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study examined rates of lifetime and past-year suicidal ideation (SI) among university students in Fall 2020 (vs. two earlier semesters), overall and across gender, racial/ethnic background, and sexual identity. Participants included 1700 university students enrolled in a general education psychology course in Fall 2020, Fall 2014, or Fall 2013. Rates of SI were not significantly higher in Fall 2020 versus the earlier semesters and did not differ across racial/ethnic background. However, rates of SI in Fall 2020 were significantly higher among sexual minority than heterosexual students.

From Diversity and Inclusion to Antiracism in Medical Training Institutions.

The glaring racial inequities in the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the devastating loss of Black lives at the hands of police and racist vigilantes have catalyzed a global reckoning about deeply rooted systemic racism in society. Many medical training institutions in the United States have participated in this discourse by denouncing racism, expressing solidarity with people of color, and reexamining their diversity and inclusion efforts. Yet, the stagnant progress in recruiting, retaining, and supporting racial/ethnic minority trainees and faculty at medical training institutions is well documented and reflects unaddressed systemic racism along the academic pipeline. In this article, the authors draw upon their experiences as early-career physicians of color who have led and supported antiracism efforts within their institutions to highlight key barriers to achieving meaningful progress. They describe common pitfalls of diversity and inclusion initiatives and call for an antiracist approach to systems change. The authors then offer 9 recommendations that medical training institutions can implement to critically examine and address racist structures within their organizations to actualize racial equity and justice.

COVID-19 awareness, knowledge and perception towards digital health in an urban multi-ethnic Asian population.

This study aimed to determine COVID-19-related awareness, knowledge, impact and preparedness among elderly Asians; and to evaluate their acceptance towards digital health services amidst the pandemic. 523 participants (177 Malays, 171 Indians, 175 Chinese) were recruited and underwent standardised phone interview during Singapore's lockdown period (07 April till 01 June 2020). Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to evaluate the associations between demographic, socio-economic, lifestyle, and systemic factors, with COVID-19 awareness, knowledge, preparedness, well-being and digital health service acceptance. The average perception score on the seriousness of COVID-19 was 7.6 ± 2.4 (out of 10). 75.5% of participants were aware that COVID-19 carriers can be asymptomatic. Nearly all (≥ 90%) were aware of major prevention methods for COVID-19 (i.e. wearing of mask, social distancing). 66.2% felt prepared for the pandemic, and 86.8% felt confident with government's handling and measures. 78.4% felt their daily routine was impacted. 98.1% reported no prior experience in using digital health services, but 52.2% felt these services would be helpful to reduce non-essential contact. 77.8% were uncomfortable with artificial intelligence software interpreting their medical results. In multivariable analyses, Chinese participants felt less prepared, and more likely felt impacted by COVID-19. Older and lower income participants were less likely to use digital health services. In conclusion, we observed a high level of awareness and knowledge on COVID-19. However, acceptance towards digital health service was low. These findings are valuable for examining the effectiveness of COVID-19 communication in Singapore, and the remaining gaps in digital health adoption among elderly.

Public Perspectives on COVID-19 Vaccine Prioritization.

Importance: As COVID-19 vaccine distribution continues, policy makers are struggling to decide which groups should be prioritized for vaccination. Objective: To assess US adults' preferences regarding COVID-19 vaccine prioritization. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study involved 2 independent, online surveys of US adults aged 18 years and older, 1 conducted by Gallup from September 14 to 27, 2020, and the other conducted by the COVID Collaborative from September 19 to 25, 2020. Samples were weighted to reflect sociodemographic characteristics of the US population. Exposures: Respondents were asked to prioritize groups for COVID-19 vaccine and to rank their prioritization considerations. Main Outcomes and Measures: The study assessed prioritization preferences and agreement with the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine's Preliminary Framework for Equitable Allocation of COVID-19 Vaccine. Results: A total of 4735 individuals participated, 2730 (1474 men [54.1%]; mean [SD] age, 59.2 [14.5] years) in the Gallup survey and 2005 (944 men [47.1%]; 203 participants [21.5%] aged 55-59 years) in the COVID Collaborative survey. In both the Gallup COVID-19 Panel and COVID Collaborative surveys, respondents listed health care workers (Gallup, 93.6% [95% CI, 91.2%-95.3%]; COVID Collaborative, 80.0% [95% CI, 78.0%-81.9%]) and adults of any age with serious comorbid conditions (Gallup, 78.6% [95% CI, 75.2%-81.7%]; COVID Collaborative, 72.9% [95% CI, 70.7%-74.9%]) among their 4 highest priority groups. Respondents of all political affiliations agreed with prioritizing Black, Hispanic, Native American, and other communities that have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19 (Gallup, 74.2% [95% CI, 70.6%-77.5%]; COVID Collaborative, 84.9% [95% CI, 83.1%-86.5%]), and COVID Collaborative respondents were willing to be preceded in line by teachers and childcare workers (92.5%; 95% CI, 91.2%-93.7%) and grocery workers (85.9%; 95% CI, 84.2%-87.5%). Older respondents in both surveys were significantly less likely than younger respondents to prioritize healthy adults aged 65 years and older among their 4 highest priority groups (Gallup, 23.7% vs 39.1% [χ2 = 2160.8; P < .001]; COVID Collaborative, 23.3% vs 28.8% [χ2 = 5.0198; P = .03]). COVID Collaborative respondents believed the 4 most important considerations for prioritization were preventing COVID-19 spread (78.4% [95% CI, 76.3%-80.3%]), preventing the most deaths (72.1% [95% CI, 69.9%-74.2%]), preventing long-term complications (68.9% [66.6%-71.9%]), and protecting frontline workers (63.8% [95% CI, 61.5%-66.1%]). Conclusions and Relevance: US adults broadly agreed with the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine's prioritization framework. Respondents endorsed prioritizing racial/ethnic communities that are disproportionately affected by COVID-19, and older respondents were significantly less likely than younger respondents to endorse prioritizing healthy people older than 65 years. This provides reason for caution about COVID-19 vaccine distribution plans that prioritize healthy adults older than a cutoff age without including those younger than that age with preexisting conditions, that aim solely to prevent the most deaths, or that give no priority to frontline workers or disproportionately affected communities.