Involuntary and patient-initiated delays in medical care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This paper uses data from a new, nationally representative survey to study delays in non-COVID-related medical care among US adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. We expand on prior research by taking a comprehensive look at the many reasons patients may have experienced delays in medical care and by studying the longer-run implications of these delays for patients' self-reported health, use of telemedicine, feelings of regret, and likelihood of delaying care again in the future. Classifying delays in care broadly as involuntary (those due to availability or "supply-side" constraints) or patient-initiated (those due to patient concerns or "demand-side" constraints), we document important differences across demographic groups in the propensity to delay care for these reasons. In contrast to most prior work on this topic, our analyses can disentangle differences in the likelihood of delaying care from differences in pre-pandemic care-seeking behavior. We also demonstrate that the types of medical care that were delayed during the pandemic differed based on whether the delay was involuntary or patient-initiated, as did the duration of the delays and their associations with self-reported health, telemedicine use, and feelings of regret.

Frames that matter: Increasing the willingness to get the Covid-19 vaccines.

Herd immunity against Covid-19 demands a high rate of vaccination, which may be challenging to meet given vaccine hesitancy in the U.S. How can Americans' willingness to get vaccinated be increased? Using a survey experiment, we apply seven framing treatments to a representative sample of 1642 U.S. residents that test ways to increase willingness: expert and political figure endorsements, demonstrations of receiving the vaccine, information about the vaccine's approval process, and information underscoring the pandemic's devastating economic impact. We find the approval process and the economy treatments increase the odds of higher vaccination willingness by 42% (p = 0.068) and 46% (p = 0.060), respectively. Additionally, we find suggestive evidence that the effectiveness of a message depends on whether a respondent finds the message/messenger credible. The study advances the understanding of vaccine hesitancy by demonstrating effective public health messaging strategy can facilitate greater acceptance of vaccination.