Compliant citizens, defiant rebels or neither? Exploring change and complexity in COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and decisions in Bradford, UK: Findings from a follow-up qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines have been the central pillar of the public health response to the pandemic, intended to enable us to 'live with Covid'. It is important to understand change and complexity of COVID-19 vaccines attitudes and decisions to maximize uptake through an empathetic lens. OBJECTIVE: To explore the factors that influenced people's COVID-19 vaccines decisions and how their complex attitudes towards the vaccines had changed in an eventful year. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: This is a follow-up study that took place in Bradford, UK between October 2021 and January 2022, 1 year after the original study. In-depth phone interviews were conducted with 12 (of the 20 originally interviewed) people from different ethnic groups and areas of Bradford. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Eleven of the 12 participants interviewed had received both doses of the COVID-19 vaccine and most intended to have a booster dose. Participants described a variety of reasons why they had decided to have the vaccines, including the following: feeling at increased risk at work; protecting family and others in their communities; unrestricted travel and being influenced by the vaccine decisions of family, friends and colleagues. All participants discussed ongoing interaction with COVID-19 misinformation and for some, this meant they were uneasy about their decision to have the vaccine. They described feeling overloaded by and disengaged from COVID-19 information, which they often found contradictory and some felt mistrustful of the UK Government's motives and decisions during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of participants had managed to navigate an overwhelming amount of circulating COVID-19 misinformation and chosen to have two or more COVID-19 vaccines, even if they had been previously said they were unsure. However, these decisions were complicated, demonstrating the continuum of vaccine hesitancy and acceptance. This follow-up study underlines that vaccine attitudes are changeable and contextual. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The original study was developed through a rapid community and stakeholder engagement process in 2020. Discussion with the Bradford Council Public Health team and the public through the Bradford COVID-19 Community Insights Group was undertaken in 2021 to identify important priorities for this follow-up study.

Children's behavioural and emotional wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from the Born in Bradford COVID-19 mixed methods longitudinal study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a multitude of immediate social restrictions for many across the world. In the UK, the lives of children and young people were quickly impacted when COVID-19 restrictions led to school closures for most children and restrictions on social interactions. The Born in Bradford COVID-19 longitudinal research study explored the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the lives of children and their families living in Bradford. Methods: Surveys were administered during the first wave of the pandemic (March to June 2020) and compared to findings from before the pandemic. The current study examined the social and emotional wellbeing of children from before to during the pandemic, measured using the parent completed Strengths and Difficulties questionnaire (SDQ). Regression analyses looked at associations between a range of social determinants of health and changes in SDQ scores. Results: The results showed that those children most likely to experience difficulties during the pandemic were boys, younger children, those from White British ethnicity (compared to Pakistani heritage children) and those living in the most deprived areas. There were associations between experiencing difficulties and: food insecurity; financial worry; getting below recommended levels of physical activity; and having less than the recommended amount of sleep. Conclusions: The effect of COVID-19 restrictions are likely to have had negative consequences on children that could, in time, have long-lasting impacts on the health, wellbeing and development of children in the UK.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused immediate and long-lasting social restrictions to be implemented here in the UK and across the world. In the UK, children and young people were quickly affected by these restrictions that led to school closures and other restrictions that prevented these individuals from socialising in person with one another. This study explored the impact that the pandemic had on the wellbeing of children by comparing data from before the pandemic with data collected during the pandemic. The data that has been collected looks at the behavioural strengths and difficulties that children are displaying. Our exploration found that children that were most likely to experience difficulties during the pandemic were boys, younger children, those who were White British and those who lived in the most deprived areas. The effect of the COVID-19 restrictions are likely to have had a negative impact on children and young people which in time may impact the health and development of children living here in the UK.

Growing up during a public health crisis: a qualitative study of Born in Bradford early adolescents during Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Whilst children and young people have not often been at forefront of the immediate Covid-19 pandemic health response there has been concern about the indirect consequences of Covid-19 on children's physical and mental health and what the effect of the pandemic will be throughout their lifetimes. Early adolescence is a time of transition and reorientation. This study considers the impact of the first UK Covid-19 lockdown on early adolescents. METHODS: The study topic was identified through a consultation process which aimed to provide appropriate evidence to local decision makers in Bradford, UK and plan for future interventions. A group of children and their parents from the longitudinal Born in Bradford (BiB) cohort study were randomly selected and then purposively sampled by ethnicity, age, sex and deprivation. The BiB cohort is made up of 13,776 children and their families and were recruited at Bradford Royal Infirmary between 2007 and 2011. 41 interviews (with 20 families: 20 parents and 21 children) were carried out between August and September 2020. Interview data was analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: The transitional age of the children interviewed had an important influence on their experience Covid-19 and the first UK lockdown. Their age combined with lockdown and school closures meant that they missed out on key learning and social opportunities at a crucial time in their lives. Covid-19 and lockdown also disrupted their daily mental wellbeing and led to increased anxiety, lethargy and low moods, during a period of personal change and social transition. CONCLUSION: For children at the start of their adolescence undergoing change and formation, the experiences and feelings Covid-19 has set in motion will likely have an impact on their mental and cognitive functioning as they develop further. It is important to acknowledge these early adolescent experiences and continue to monitor and provide targeted support to this group of young people.

The Measurement Properties and Acceptability of a New Parent-Infant Bonding Tool ('Me and My Baby') for Use in United Kingdom Universal Healthcare Settings: A Psychometric, Cross-Sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines acknowledge the importance of the parent-infant relationship for child development but highlight the need for further research to establish reliable tools for assessment, particularly for parents of children under 1 year. This study explores the acceptability and psychometric properties of a co-developed tool, 'Me and My Baby' (MaMB). STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional design was applied. The MaMB was administered universally (in two sites) with mothers during routine 6-8-week Health Visitor contacts. The sample comprised 467 mothers (434 MaMB completers and 33 'non-completers'). Dimensionality of instrument responses were evaluated via exploratory and confirmatory ordinal factor analyses. Item response modeling was conducted via a Rasch calibration to evaluate how the tool conformed to principles of 'fundamental measurement'. Tool acceptability was evaluated via completion rates and comparing 'completers' and 'non-completers' demographic differences on age, parity, ethnicity, and English as an additional language. Free-text comments were summarized. Data sharing agreements and data management were compliant with the General Data Protection Regulation, and University of York data management policies. RESULTS: High completion rates suggested the MaMB was acceptable. Psychometric analyses showed the response data to be an excellent fit to a unidimensional confirmatory factor analytic model. All items loaded statistically significantly and substantially (>0.4) on a single underlying factor (latent variable). The item response modeling showed that most MaMB items fitted the Rasch model. (Rasch) item reliability was high (0.94) yet the test yielded little information on each respondent, as highlighted by the relatively low 'person separation index' of 0.1. CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS: MaMB reliably measures a single construct, likely to be infant bonding. However, further validation work is needed, preferably with 'enriched population samples' to include higher-need/risk families. The MaMB tool may benefit from reduced response categories (from four to three) and some modest item wording amendments. Following further validation and reliability appraisal the MaMB may ultimately be used with fathers/other primary caregivers and be potentially useful in research, universal health settings as part of a referral pathway, and clinical practice, to identify dyads in need of additional support/interventions.

The feasibility of an objective measure of the parent-child relationship in health visiting practice: assessment of the Maternal Postnatal Attachment Scale.

Background: Positive parent infant relationships are key to achieving long term child outcomes. Identifying parents who may need support is difficult because of a lack of robust assessment tools. Working in partnership with health services we piloted the Maternal Postnatal Attachment Scale (MPAS) in a deprived, multi-ethnic urban community in Bradford, UK. The pilot aimed to assess the clinical utility of MPAS to identify need for support: Was it administered to a representative group of women? Is MPAS valid for this population? Methods: Data were linked to a cohort study in the pilot area (Born in Bradford's Better Start - BiBBS). Chi Square tests assessed sample representativeness (age, ethnicity, parity, English language, education, deprivation). Exploratory factor analysis explored MPAS' validity. Results: 563 women in BiBBS were eligible, 210 (37%) completed MPAS.  No differences were found between completers and non-completers, suggestive of a representative sample. In total, 336 women completed MPAS in the pilot.  MPAS had ceiling effects and a satisfactory factor structure could not be identified, indicating poor psychometric properties Conclusions: Health visitors were successful in administering MPAS to a representative sample, but poor psychometric robustness indicates that MPAS is unsuitable for routine use in this setting. A gap for such a measure remains.

Addressing inequalities in the identification and management of perinatal mental health difficulties: The perspectives of minoritised women, healthcare practitioners and the voluntary sector.

Background: Perinatal mental health (PMH) difficulties affect approximately one in five birthing women. If not identified and managed appropriately, these PMH difficulties can carry impacts across generations, affecting mental health and relationship outcomes. There are known inequalities in identification and management across the healthcare pathway. Whilst barriers and facilitators have been identified there is a lack of clarity about how these relate to the avoidable and unfair inequalities experienced by various groups of women. Further research is required to understand how to address inequalities in PMH. Aim: To understand the key factors that enable and hinder access to PMH care for women from minoritised groups across the PMH care pathway, and how these have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A sequential mixed-methods approach gathered views and experiences from stakeholders in one region in northern England. This included an online survey with 145 NHS healthcare practitioners and semi-structured interviews with 19 women from ethnic minority and/or socio-economically deprived backgrounds who had experienced PMH difficulties, and 12 key informants from the voluntary and community sector workforce. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and framework analysis was applied to qualitative data. Findings: Barriers and facilitators were mapped using a socio-technical framework to understand the role of (i) processes, (ii) people (organised as women, practitioners and others), (iii) technology, and (iv) the system as a whole in deepening or alleviating inequalities. Influences that were identified as pertinent to inequalities in identification and management included provision of interpreters, digital exclusion, stigma, disempowerment, distrust of services, practitioner attitudes, data capture, representation in the workforce, narrow rules of engagement and partnership working. Stakeholder groups expressed that several barriers were further compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic. Discussion: The findings highlight the need for change at the system level to tackle inequalities across the PMH care pathway. Four inter-connected recommendations were developed to enable this systems change: building emotional safety between professionals and women; making PMH a part of core healthcare business; increasing cultural competency specific to PMH; and enhanced partnership working.

Inequalities in the identification and management of common mental disorders in the perinatal period: An equity focused re-analysis of a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Maternal mental health problems in the perinatal period can cause significant distress and loss of functioning, and can have lasting impact on children. People living in disadvantage are at risk of health inequalities, including for perinatal mental health. A review of current guidance found that overall implementation of the UK detection and management strategy was satisfactory, but equity was not considered in the review. Greater understanding of implementation equity is needed. We aimed to reanalyse an existing systematic review on the implementation of current guidance for the identification and management of perinatal mental health problems for equity. METHODS: Studies reporting the presence or absence of variation by a social, economic or demographic group were quality appraised and the presence and direction of disparity tabled. We calculated standardised absolute prevalence estimates for overall detection and management, and absolute and relative estimates by determinants grouping. A thematic analysis of the studies that examined potential reasons for disparity was undertaken. RESULTS: Six studies, with no major quality concerns, provided consistent evidence of reduced identification and management for ethnic minority women, both those who do, and do not, speak English. There was less consistent evidence of inequality for other axes of social disparity and for characteristics such as age, parity and partnership status. Explanations centred on difficulties that translation and interpretation added to communication, and hesitancy related to uncertainty from healthcare providers over cultural understanding of mental health problems. CONCLUSION: The identification and management of perinatal mental health problems is likely to be inequitable for ethnic minority women. Further systems-based research should focus on clarifying whether other groups of women are at risk for inequalities, understand how mismatches in perception are generated, and design effective strategies for remediation. Inequalities should be considered when reviewing evidence that underpins service planning and policy decision-making.

Comparison of Experiences in Two Birth Cohorts Comprising Young Families with Children under Four Years during the Initial COVID-19 Lockdown in Australia and the UK: A Qualitative Study.

This study aims to understand the experience and impact of the initial COVID-19 lockdown in young families with children aged below 4 years. Free text questions were administered to participants in the ORIGINS (Australia) and Born in Bradford (UK) cohort studies to collect qualitative information on worries, concerns and enjoyable experiences during the pandemic. A total of 903 (400 for ORIGINS and 503 for BiB) participants completed the two surveys during April 2020. Despite varying in geography, levels of socio-economic disadvantage and their situational context during the pandemic, respondents from both cohorts reported similar worries and challenges during the lockdown period, including: employment/finances, health anxiety, mental health and social isolation, caring for children and child development. Families across the globe experienced both positive and negative immediate impacts of COVID-19. Population-based data can be used to inform the development of support services, public health campaigns and universal interventions to assist families in future health crises.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in an ethnically diverse community: descriptive findings from the Born in Bradford study.

Background: The roll out of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are underway in the UK, and ensuring good uptake in vulnerable communities will be critical to reducing hospital admissions and deaths. There is emerging evidence that vaccine hesitancy is higher in ethnic minorities and deprived areas, and that this may be caused by distrust and misinformation in the community. This study aims to understand COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in an ethnically diverse and deprived population of Bradford through the Born in Bradford (BiB) research programme. Methods: Surveys were sent to parents in BiB who had taken part in a previous Covid-19 survey (n=1727). Cross tabulations explored variation by ethnicity and deprivation. Answers to a question asking the main reason for hesitancy was analysed using thematic analysis. Results: 535 (31%) of those invited between 29 th October-9 th December 2020 participated. 48% were White British, 37% Pakistani heritage and 15% from other ethnicities; 46% were from the most deprived quintile of the Index of Multiple Deprivation. 29% of respondents do want a vaccine, 10% do not. The majority had not thought about it (29%) or were unsure (30%). Vaccine hesitancy differed by ethnicity and deprivation: 43% (95% CIs: 37-54%) of White British and 60% (35-81%) in the least deprived areas do want a vaccine, compared to 13% (9-19%) of Pakistani heritage and 20% (15-26%) in the most deprived areas. Reasons for not wanting a vaccine were commonly explained by confusion and distrust which was linked to exposure to misinformation. Conclusions: There is a risk of unequitable roll out of the vaccination programme in the UK with higher vaccine hesitancy in ethnic minorities and those living in deprived areas. There is an urgent need to tackle misinformation that is leading to uncertainty and confusion about the vaccines.