An official website of the United States government
Background: The health belief model suggests that individuals' beliefs affect behaviors associated with health. This study examined whether Ohioans' pre-existing medical health diagnoses affected their belief about personal health risk and their compliance with social distancing during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Prior research examining physical and mental diagnoses and social distancing compliance is nearly nonexistent. We examined whether physical and mental health diagnoses influenced individuals' beliefs that their health is at risk and their adherence with social distancing guidelines. Methods: The study used longitudinal cohort data from the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) (n = 790), which surveyed Ohioans prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Dependent variables included belief that an individual's own health was at risk and social distancing compliance. Independent variables included physical and mental health diagnoses, pandemic-related factors (fear of COVID-19, political beliefs about the pandemic, friends social distance, family social distance, COVID-19 exposure), and sociodemographic variables (age, gender, race/ethnicity, educational level). Results: Individuals who had a pre-existing physical health diagnosis were more likely to believe that their personal health was at risk during the pandemic but were not more likely to comply with social distancing guidelines. In contrast, individuals who had a pre-existing mental health diagnosis were more compliant with social distancing guidelines but were not more likely to believe their personal health was at risk. Individuals who expressed greater fear of COVID-19 believed their health is more at risk than those who expressed lower levels of fear. Conclusion: Health considerations are important to account for in assessments of responses to the pandemic, beliefs about personal health risk, and social distancing behavior. Additional research is needed to understand the divergence in the findings regarding physical health, beliefs about personal health risk, and social distancing compliance. Further, research is needed to understand how mental health issues impact decision-making related to social distancing compliance.
more »
« less
Clinicians, cooks, and cashiers: Examining health equity and the COVID-19 risks to essential workers
In Spring/Summer 2020, most individuals living in the United States experienced several months of social distancing and stay-at-home orders because of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Clinicians, restaurant cooks, cashiers, transit operators, and other essential workers (EWs), however, continued to work outside the home during this time in order to keep others alive and maintain a functioning society. In the United States, EWs are often low-income persons of color who are more likely to face socioeconomic vulnerabilities, systemic racism, and health inequities. To assess the various impacts of COVID-19 on EWs, an online survey was distributed to a representative sample of individuals residing in six states during May/June 2020. The sample included 990 individuals who identified as EWs and 736 nonessential workers (NWs). We assessed differences between EW and NW respondents according to three categories related to health equity and social determinants of health: (1) demographics (e.g. race/ethnicity); (2) COVID-19 exposure risk pathways (e.g. ability to social distance); and (3) COVID-19 risk perceptions (e.g. perceived risk of contracting COVID-19). EWs were more likely to be Black or Hispanic than NWs and also had lower incomes and education levels on average. Unsurprisingly, EWs were substantially more likely to report working outside the home and less likely to report social distancing and wearing masks indoors as compared to NWs. EWs also perceived a slightly greater risk of contracting COVID-19. These findings, which we discuss in the context of persistent structural inequalities, systemic racism, and health inequities within the United States, highlight ways in which COVID-19 exacerbates existing socioeconomic vulnerabilities faced by EWs.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2030316
- PAR ID:
- 10231828
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Toxicology and Industrial Health
- Volume:
- 36
- Issue:
- 9
- ISSN:
- 0748-2337
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 689 to 702
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
COVID-19 variants continue to create public health danger impacting mortality and morbidity across the United States. The spillover effects of COVID-19 on the economy and social institutions pose a significant threat to broader wellbeing, including the food security of millions across the country. We aim to explore whether the context of place matters above and beyond individual and social vulnerabilities for food insecurity. To do so, we employ a multi-level framework using data from a survey of over 10,000 U.S. adults from March 2020 with American Community Survey (ACS) and John Hopkins COVID Dashboard county-level data. We find nearly two in five respondents were food insecure by March of 2020 with disparities across race, nativity, the presence of children in the home, unemployment, and age. Furthermore, we note that individuals living in more disadvantaged communities were more likely to report food insecurity above and beyond individual and social vulnerabilities. Overall, food insecurity is driven by complex, multi-level dynamics that remain a pressing public health concern for the current—but also future—public health crisis.more » « less
-
Nabi, Mohammad Hayatun (Ed.)BackgroundAlthough research shows that the Covid-19 pandemic has led to declines in mental health, the existing research has not identified the pathways through which this decline happens. AimsThe current study identifies the distinct pathways through which COVID-induced stressors (i.e., social distancing, disease risk, and financial stressors) trigger mental distress and examines the causal impact of these stressors on mental distress. MethodsWe combined evidence of objective pandemic-related stressors collected at the county level (e.g., lack of social contact, infection rates, and unemployment rates) with self-reported survey data from over 11.5 million adult respondents in the United States collected daily for eight months. We used mediation analysis to examine the extent to which the objective stressors influenced mental health by influencing individual respondents’ behavior and fears. ResultsCounty-level, day-to-day social distancing predicted significantly greater mental distress, both directly and indirectly through its effects on individual social contacts, worries about getting ill, and concerns about finances. Economic hardships were indirectly linked to increased mental distress by elevating people’s concerns about their household’s finances. Disease threats were both directly linked to mental distress and indirectly through its effects on individual worries about getting ill. Although one might expect that social distancing from people outside the home would have a greater influence on people who live alone, sub-analyses based on household composition do not support this expectation. ConclusionThis research provides evidence consistent with the thesis that the COVID-19 pandemic harmed the mental well-being of adults in the United States and identifies specific stressors associated with the pandemic that are responsible for increasing mental distress.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Abstract The objective of this study is to examine the transmission risk of COVID-19 based on cross-county population co-location data from Facebook. The rapid spread of COVID-19 in the United States has imposed a major threat to public health, the real economy, and human well-being. With the absence of effective vaccines, the preventive actions of social distancing, travel reduction and stay-at-home orders are recognized as essential non-pharmacologic approaches to control the infection and spatial spread of COVID-19. Prior studies demonstrated that human movement and mobility drove the spatiotemporal distribution of COVID-19 in China. Little is known, however, about the patterns and effects of co-location reduction on cross-county transmission risk of COVID-19. This study utilizes Facebook co-location data for all counties in the United States from March to early May 2020 for conducting spatial network analysis where nodes represent counties and edge weights are associated with the co-location probability of populations of the counties. The analysis examines the synchronicity and time lag between travel reduction and pandemic growth trajectory to evaluate the efficacy of social distancing in ceasing the population co-location probabilities, and subsequently the growth in weekly new cases across counties. The results show that the mitigation effects of co-location reduction appear in the growth of weekly new confirmed cases with one week of delay. The analysis categorizes counties based on the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases and examines co-location patterns within and across groups. Significant segregation is found among different county groups. The results suggest that within-group co-location probabilities (e.g., co-location probabilities among counties with high numbers of cases) remain stable, and social distancing policies primarily resulted in reduced cross-group co-location probabilities (due to travel reduction from counties with large number of cases to counties with low numbers of cases). These findings could have important practical implications for local governments to inform their intervention measures for monitoring and reducing the spread of COVID-19, as well as for adoption in future pandemics. Public policy, economic forecasting, and epidemic modeling need to account for population co-location patterns in evaluating transmission risk of COVID-19 across counties.more » « less
-
During the COVID - 19 pandemic, the United States (US) operated a patchwork response of varying closures and restrictions that depended on individual states. At the federal level, efforts to address COVID - 19 risk focused primarily on elderly populations and largely ignored the disproportionately high risk of COVID - 19 exposure among Black , Latin x, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and otherwise queer - identifying (LGBTQ+) populations . These groups have elevated risk of COVID - 1 9 exposure due to social, political, and economic vulnerabilities that structure poor health. In this paper, I describe how a grassroots racial, sexual, and gender justice organization responded to state failings in meeting the needs of LGBTQ+ Black and Latinx populations during the COVID - 19 pandemic. Drawing from ongoing ethnographic fieldwork in Orlando, Florida, that began in 2016 following the Pulse shooting, I describe how a social justice organization advanced a notion of intersectional belonging in response to the absence of health and social services during the COVID - 19 pandemic. Specifically, I show how one organization, the Contigo Fund, created an LGBTQ+ COVID - 19 relief effort that provided financial assistance to Black and Latinx LGBTQ+ populations when the state of Florida failed to marshal resources for its most marginalized communities . The state’s failure is just one of many ways the state has historically refused to meet the needs of populations with intersecting queer and racial minority identities , reproducing longstanding health and social inequities. Overall, I argue that the Contigo Fund’s response demonstrates how grassroots mobilization can challenge the necropolitcs of state - sponsored neglect and advance health equitymore » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1177/0748233720970439
