Title: Contested Care: COVID-19 Surveillance and Health Data in the Workplace
Within the ongoing disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic, technologically mediated health surveillance programs have vastly intensified and expanded to new spaces. Popular understandings of medical and health data protections came into question as a variety of institutions introduced new tools for symptom tracking, contact tracing, and the management of related data. These systems have raised complex questions about who should have access to health information, under what circumstances, and how people and institutions negotiate relationships between privacy, public safety, and care during times of crisis. In this paper, we take up the case of a large public university working to keep campus productive during COVID-19 through practices of placemaking, symptom screeners, and vaccine mandate compliance databases. Drawing on a multi-methods study including thirty-eight interviews, organizational documents, and discursive analysis, we show where and for whom administrative care infrastructures either misrecognized or torqued (Bowker and Star 1999) the care relationships that made life possible for people in the university community. We argue that an analysis of care—including the social relations that enable it and those that attempt to hegemonically define it—opens important questions for how people relate to data they produce about their bodies as well as to the institutions that manage them. Furthermore, we argue that privacy frameworks that rely on individual rights, essential categories of “sensitive information,” or the normative legitimacy of institutional practices are not equipped to reveal how people negotiate privacy and care in times of crisis. more »« less
Park, Jinkyung; Ahmed, Eiman; Asif, Hafiz; Vaidya, Jaideep; Singh Vivek
(, Lecture notes in computer science)
Multiple symptom tracking applications (apps) were created during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. While they provided crowdsourced information about the state of the pandemic in a scalable manner, they also posed significant privacy risks for individuals. The present study investigates the interplay between individual privacy attitudes and the adoption of symptom tracking apps. Using the communication privacy theory as a framework, it studies how users’ privacy attitudes changed during the public health emergency compared to the pre-COVID times. Based on focus-group interviews (N = 21), this paper reports significant changes in users’ privacy attitudes toward such apps. Research participants shared various reasons for both increased acceptability (e.g., disease uncertainty, public good) and decreased acceptability (e.g., reduced utility due to changed lifestyle) during COVID. The results of this study can assist health informatics researchers and policy designers in creating more socially acceptable health apps in the future.
Saha, Koustuv; Torous, John; Caine, Eric D; De Choudhury, Munmun
(, Journal of Medical Internet Research)
null
(Ed.)
Background The COVID-19 pandemic has caused several disruptions in personal and collective lives worldwide. The uncertainties surrounding the pandemic have also led to multifaceted mental health concerns, which can be exacerbated with precautionary measures such as social distancing and self-quarantining, as well as societal impacts such as economic downturn and job loss. Despite noting this as a “mental health tsunami”, the psychological effects of the COVID-19 crisis remain unexplored at scale. Consequently, public health stakeholders are currently limited in identifying ways to provide timely and tailored support during these circumstances. Objective Our study aims to provide insights regarding people’s psychosocial concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic by leveraging social media data. We aim to study the temporal and linguistic changes in symptomatic mental health and support expressions in the pandemic context. Methods We obtained about 60 million Twitter streaming posts originating from the United States from March 24 to May 24, 2020, and compared these with about 40 million posts from a comparable period in 2019 to attribute the effect of COVID-19 on people’s social media self-disclosure. Using these data sets, we studied people’s self-disclosure on social media in terms of symptomatic mental health concerns and expressions of support. We employed transfer learning classifiers that identified the social media language indicative of mental health outcomes (anxiety, depression, stress, and suicidal ideation) and support (emotional and informational support). We then examined the changes in psychosocial expressions over time and language, comparing the 2020 and 2019 data sets. Results We found that all of the examined psychosocial expressions have significantly increased during the COVID-19 crisis—mental health symptomatic expressions have increased by about 14%, and support expressions have increased by about 5%, both thematically related to COVID-19. We also observed a steady decline and eventual plateauing in these expressions during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have been due to habituation or due to supportive policy measures enacted during this period. Our language analyses highlighted that people express concerns that are specific to and contextually related to the COVID-19 crisis. Conclusions We studied the psychosocial effects of the COVID-19 crisis by using social media data from 2020, finding that people’s mental health symptomatic and support expressions significantly increased during the COVID-19 period as compared to similar data from 2019. However, this effect gradually lessened over time, suggesting that people adapted to the circumstances and their “new normal.” Our linguistic analyses revealed that people expressed mental health concerns regarding personal and professional challenges, health care and precautionary measures, and pandemic-related awareness. This study shows the potential to provide insights to mental health care and stakeholders and policy makers in planning and implementing measures to mitigate mental health risks amid the health crisis.
The 2020 global pandemic caused by COVID-19 forced higher education institutions to immediately stop face-to-face teaching and transition to virtual instruction. This transition has been difficult for engineering education, which has strong hardware, software, and practical/laboratory components, and has further exacerbated the personal and professional experiences of minoritized students in engineering. This study sought to answer the following overarching research question: How has the abrupt transition to online instruction due to COVID-19 affected students traditionally underrepresented in engineering? The abrupt transition for minoritized students and their decision to prioritize their mental health was further explored to answer the following: (1) How many minoritized students chose to prioritize their mental health? (2) How do minoritized students describe their experiences and choices to prioritize (or not) their mental health? Using SenseMaker, participants shared stories using the following prompt: Imagine you are chatting with a friend or family member about the evolving COVID-19 crisis. Tell them about something you have experienced recently as an engineering student. After completing their narrative, a series of triadic, dyadic, and sentiment-based multiple-choice questions were presented. Student responses varied, including positive experiences, which resulted in a strong prioritization, while others had negative experiences resulting in varied prioritizations. Some students chose to prioritize their mental health to remain mentally and emotionally healthy; some with negative experiences abandoned self-care strategies in order to tend to the needs of academics and family. Participants’ decisions to prioritize their mental health were not monolithic.
Maurer, Megan; Cook, Elizabeth M.; Yoon, Liv; Visnic, Olivia; Orlove, Ben; Culligan, Patricia J.; Mailloux, Brian J.
(, Frontiers in Sustainable Cities)
The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated how the accessibility of greenspace can shift in response to social-ecological disturbance, and generated questions as to how changing dimensions of accessibility affect the ecosystem services of greenspace, such as improved subjective well-being. Amidst the growing consensus of the important role of greenspace in improving and maintaining well-being through times of duress, we examine how access to greenspace is affecting subjective well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Both the relationship of greenspace to subjective well-being and the barriers to greenspace access are well-established for normal conditions. Much remains to be known, however, about how barriers to access and the effect of greenspace on subjective well-being shift in response to periods of social duress, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. Using data from surveys and interviews conducted with 1,200 university students in the United States during the spring of 2020, we assess the effect of going outdoors on subjective well-being, commonly experienced barriers to going outside, and how these barriers in turn affected subjective well-being. We find that time spent outside, particularly in greenspace, correlates with higher levels of subjective well-being, and that concern over COVID-19 risk and transmission negatively affects this relationship both in reducing time spent outdoors and the subjective well-being benefits. We also find that type of greenspace (public vs. private) does not have a significant effect on subjective well-being, that while those in areas with lower population density have significantly higher subjective well-being when outdoors, all participants experience a statistically equal benefit to subjective well-being by going outside. Our findings suggest how understanding the ways dimensions of accessibility shift in response to times of social duress can aid public health messaging, the design and management of greenspace, and environmental justice efforts to support the use of greenspace in improving and maintaining subjective well-being during future crisis events.
Kim, Hyung Nam; Sutharson, Sam Jotham
(, British Journal of Visual Impairment)
null
(Ed.)
In response to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, public health interventions such as social distancing and stay-at-home orders have widely been implemented, which is anticipated to contribute to reducing the spread of COVID-19. On the contrary, there is a concern that the public health interventions may increase the level of loneliness. Loneliness and social isolation are public health risks, closely associated with serious medical conditions. As COVID-19 is new to us today, little is known about emotional well-being among people with visual impairment during the COVID-19 pandemic. To address the knowledge gap, this study conducted phone interviews with a convenience sample of 31 people with visual impairment. The interview incorporated the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Loneliness Scale (version 3) and the trait meta-mood scale (TMMS) to measure loneliness and emotional intelligence skills, respectively. This study found that people with visual impairment were vulnerable to the feeling of loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic and showed individual differences in emotional intelligence skills by different degrees of loneliness. Researchers and health professionals should consider offering adequate coping strategies to those with visual impairment amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Metcalf, Kathryne, Irani, Lilly, and Uribe del Águila, Verónica. Contested Care: COVID-19 Surveillance and Health Data in the Workplace. Retrieved from https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10466384. Surveillance & Society 21.2 Web. doi:10.24908/ss.v21i2.15819.
Metcalf, Kathryne, Irani, Lilly, & Uribe del Águila, Verónica. Contested Care: COVID-19 Surveillance and Health Data in the Workplace. Surveillance & Society, 21 (2). Retrieved from https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10466384. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v21i2.15819
@article{osti_10466384,
place = {Country unknown/Code not available},
title = {Contested Care: COVID-19 Surveillance and Health Data in the Workplace},
url = {https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10466384},
DOI = {10.24908/ss.v21i2.15819},
abstractNote = {Within the ongoing disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic, technologically mediated health surveillance programs have vastly intensified and expanded to new spaces. Popular understandings of medical and health data protections came into question as a variety of institutions introduced new tools for symptom tracking, contact tracing, and the management of related data. These systems have raised complex questions about who should have access to health information, under what circumstances, and how people and institutions negotiate relationships between privacy, public safety, and care during times of crisis. In this paper, we take up the case of a large public university working to keep campus productive during COVID-19 through practices of placemaking, symptom screeners, and vaccine mandate compliance databases. Drawing on a multi-methods study including thirty-eight interviews, organizational documents, and discursive analysis, we show where and for whom administrative care infrastructures either misrecognized or torqued (Bowker and Star 1999) the care relationships that made life possible for people in the university community. We argue that an analysis of care—including the social relations that enable it and those that attempt to hegemonically define it—opens important questions for how people relate to data they produce about their bodies as well as to the institutions that manage them. Furthermore, we argue that privacy frameworks that rely on individual rights, essential categories of “sensitive information,” or the normative legitimacy of institutional practices are not equipped to reveal how people negotiate privacy and care in times of crisis.},
journal = {Surveillance & Society},
volume = {21},
number = {2},
author = {Metcalf, Kathryne and Irani, Lilly and Uribe del Águila, Verónica},
}
Warning: Leaving National Science Foundation Website
You are now leaving the National Science Foundation website to go to a non-government website.
Website:
NSF takes no responsibility for and exercises no control over the views expressed or the accuracy of
the information contained on this site. Also be aware that NSF's privacy policy does not apply to this site.
An official website of the United States government
