skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Compounding hazards and intersecting vulnerabilities: experiences and responses to extreme heat during COVID-19
Abstract Extreme heat is a major threat to human health worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic, with its complexity and global reach, created unprecedented challenges for public health and highlighted societal vulnerability to hazardous hot weather. In this study, we used data from a three-wave nationally representative survey of 3036 American adults to examine how the COVID-19 pandemic affected extreme heat vulnerability during the summer of 2020. We used mixed effects models to examine the roles of socio-demographic characteristics and pandemic-related factors in the distribution of negative heat effects and experiences across the United States. The survey findings show that over a quarter of the US population experienced heat-related symptoms during the summer of 2020. Mixed effects models demonstrate that among all socio-economic groups, those who were most vulnerable were women, those in low-income households, unemployed or on furlough, and people who identify as Hispanic or Latino or as other non-white census categories (including Asian, American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and multi-racial US residents). The study findings indicate that millions of people in the US had difficulty coping with or responding to extreme heat because of the direct and indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Limited access to cooling as well as COVID-19 related social isolation played a major role in adverse heat health effects. Geographically, the South and the West of the US stood out in terms of self-reported negative heat effects. Overall, the study suggests that the intersection of two health hazards—extreme heat and coronavirus SARS-CoV2—amplified existing systemic vulnerabilities and expanded the demographic range of people vulnerable to heat stress.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2031217
PAR ID:
10323224
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Environmental Research Letters
Volume:
16
Issue:
8
ISSN:
1748-9326
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al (, PLOS ONE)
    Lin, Chung-Ying (Ed.)
    Background University students are increasingly recognized as a vulnerable population, suffering from higher levels of anxiety, depression, substance abuse, and disordered eating compared to the general population. Therefore, when the nature of their educational experience radically changes—such as sheltering in place during the COVID-19 pandemic—the burden on the mental health of this vulnerable population is amplified. The objectives of this study are to 1) identify the array of psychological impacts COVID-19 has on students, 2) develop profiles to characterize students' anticipated levels of psychological impact during the pandemic, and 3) evaluate potential sociodemographic, lifestyle-related, and awareness of people infected with COVID-19 risk factors that could make students more likely to experience these impacts. Methods Cross-sectional data were collected through web-based questionnaires from seven U.S. universities. Representative and convenience sampling was used to invite students to complete the questionnaires in mid-March to early-May 2020, when most coronavirus-related sheltering in place orders were in effect. We received 2,534 completed responses, of which 61% were from women, 79% from non-Hispanic Whites, and 20% from graduate students. Results Exploratory factor analysis on close-ended responses resulted in two latent constructs, which we used to identify profiles of students with latent profile analysis, including high (45% of sample), moderate (40%), and low (14%) levels of psychological impact. Bivariate associations showed students who were women, were non-Hispanic Asian, in fair/poor health, of below-average relative family income, or who knew someone infected with COVID-19 experienced higher levels of psychological impact. Students who were non-Hispanic White, above-average social class, spent at least two hours outside, or less than eight hours on electronic screens were likely to experience lower levels of psychological impact. Multivariate modeling (mixed-effects logistic regression) showed that being a woman, having fair/poor general health status, being 18 to 24 years old, spending 8 or more hours on screens daily, and knowing someone infected predicted higher levels of psychological impact when risk factors were considered simultaneously. Conclusion Inadequate efforts to recognize and address college students’ mental health challenges, especially during a pandemic, could have long-term consequences on their health and education. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Frontiers in Communication)
    null (Ed.)
    In times of uncertainty, people often seek out information to help alleviate fear, possibly leaving them vulnerable to false information. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we attended to a viral spread of incorrect and misleading information that compromised collective actions and public health measures to contain the spread of the disease. We investigated the influence of fear of COVID-19 on social and cognitive factors including believing in fake news, bullshit receptivity, overclaiming, and problem-solving—within two of the populations that have been severely hit by COVID-19: Italy and the United States of America. To gain a better understanding of the role of misinformation during the early height of the COVID-19 pandemic, we also investigated whether problem-solving ability and socio-cognitive polarization were associated with believing in fake news. Results showed that fear of COVID-19 is related to seeking out information about the virus and avoiding infection in the Italian and American samples, as well as a willingness to share real news (COVID and non-COVID-related) headlines in the American sample. However, fear positively correlated with bullshit receptivity, suggesting that the pandemic might have contributed to creating a situation where people were pushed toward pseudo-profound existential beliefs. Furthermore, problem-solving ability was associated with correctly discerning real or fake news, whereas socio-cognitive polarization was the strongest predictor of believing in fake news in both samples. From these results, we concluded that a construct reflecting cognitive rigidity, neglecting alternative information, and black-and-white thinking negatively predicts the ability to discern fake from real news. Such a construct extends also to reasoning processes based on thinking outside the box and considering alternative information such as problem-solving. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; (, JAMIA Open)
    Abstract ObjectiveOnline patient portals become important during disruptions to in-person health care, like when cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and other respiratory viruses rise, yet underlying structural inequalities associated with race, socio-economic status, and other socio-demographic characteristics may affect their use. We analyzed a population-based survey to identify disparities within the United States in access to online portals during the early period of COVID-19 in 2020. Materials and MethodsThe National Cancer Institute fielded the 2020 Health and Information National Trends Survey from February to June 2020. We conducted multivariable analysis to identify socio-demographic characteristics of US patients who were offered and accessed online portals, and reasons for nonuse. ResultsLess than half of insured adult patients reported accessing an online portal in the prior 12 months, and this was less common among patients who are male, are Hispanic, have less than a college degree, have Medicaid insurance, have no regular provider, or have no internet. Reasons for nonuse include: wanting to speak directly to a provider, not having an online record, concerns about privacy, and discomfort with technology. DiscussionDespite the rapid expansion of digital health technologies due to COVID-19, we found persistent socio-demographic disparities in access to patient portals. Ensuring that digital health tools are secure, private, and trustworthy would address some patient concerns that are barriers to portal access. ConclusionExpanding the use of online portals requires explicitly addressing fundamental inequities to prevent exacerbating existing disparities, particularly during surges in cases of COVID-19 and other respiratory viruses that tax health care resources. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, BMJ Global Health)
    The discourse on vulnerability to COVID-19 or any other pandemic is about the susceptibility to the effects of disease outbreaks. Over time, vulnerability has been assessed through various indices calculated using a confluence of societal factors. However, categorising Arctic communities, without considering their socioeconomic, cultural and demographic uniqueness, into the high and low continuum of vulnerability using universal indicators will undoubtedly result in the underestimation of the communities’ capacity to withstand and recover from pandemic exposure. By recognising vulnerability and resilience as two separate but interrelated dimensions, this study reviews the Arctic communities’ ability to cope with pandemic risks. In particular, we have developed a pandemic vulnerability–resilience framework for Alaska to examine the potential community-level risks of COVID-19 or future pandemics. Based on the combined assessment of the vulnerability and resilience indices, we found that not all highly vulnerable census areas and boroughs had experienced COVID-19 epidemiological outcomes with similar severity. The more resilient a census area or borough is, the lower the cumulative death per 100 000 and case fatality ratio in that area. The insight that pandemic risks are the result of the interaction between vulnerability and resilience could help public officials and concerned parties to accurately identify the populations and communities at most risk or with the greatest need, which, in turn, helps in the efficient allocation of resources and services before, during and after a pandemic. A resilience–vulnerability-focused approach described in this paper can be applied to assess the potential effect of COVID-19 and similar future health crises in remote regions or regions with large Indigenous populations in other parts of the world. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, PLOS ONE)
    Grundy, Quinn (Ed.)
    Early research on the impact of COVID-19 on academic scientists suggests that disruptions to research, teaching, and daily work life are not experienced equally. However, this work has overwhelmingly focused on experiences of women and parents, with limited attention to the disproportionate impact on academic work by race, disability status, sexual identity, first-generation status, and academic career stage. Using a stratified random survey sample of early-career academics in four science disciplines ( N = 3,277), we investigated socio-demographic and career stage differences in the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic along seven work outcomes: changes in four work areas (research progress, workload, concern about career advancement, support from mentors) and work disruptions due to three COVID-19 related life challenges (physical health, mental health, and caretaking). Our analyses examined patterns across career stages as well as separately for doctoral students and for postdocs/assistant professors. Overall, our results indicate that scientists from marginalized (i.e., devalued) and minoritized (i.e., underrepresented) groups across early career stages reported more negative work outcomes as a result of COVID-19. However, there were notable patterns of differences depending on the socio-demographic identities examined. Those with a physical or mental disability were negatively impacted on all seven work outcomes. Women, primary caregivers, underrepresented racial minorities, sexual minorities, and first-generation scholars reported more negative experiences across several outcomes such as increased disruptions due to physical health symptoms and additional caretaking compared to more privileged counterparts. Doctoral students reported more work disruptions from life challenges than other early-career scholars, especially those related to health problems, while assistant professors reported more negative changes in areas such as decreased research progress and increased workload. These findings suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately harmed work outcomes for minoritized and marginalized early-career scholars. Institutional interventions are required to address these inequalities in an effort to retain diverse cohorts in academic science. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email