Understanding the associations between information sources, sociodemographics, and views on public health measures: evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic in Austria.

BACKGROUND: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, it was a key priority for governments globally to ensure agreement with, and subsequently adherence to, imposed public health measures, specifically non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). Prior research in this regard highlighted the role of COVID-19 information sources as well as sociodemographic and other personal characteristics, however, there is only limited evidence including both. To bridge this gap, this study investigated the associations of COVID-19 information sources such as social media and participant characteristics with agreement with and adherence to NPIs during the first lockdown in Austria. METHODS: An online survey was conducted in May 2020 among adult Austrian residents asking about their experiences during the first lockdown. Collected data included sociodemographic characteristics, main COVID-19-related information sources, agreement with/adherence to three NPIs (no physical contact to family members not living in the same household, leisurely walks restricted to members of the same household, mandatory face masks) and information about perceived social support using the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS), anxiety/depression levels using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), whether participants felt well advised by the government, and whether participants perceived the pandemic to threaten their income. Ordered and multinomial logistic regression models were employed to achieve the research aims. RESULTS: The cross-sectional sample consisted of 559 Austrian residents. Using social media as main COVID-19 information source was consistently associated with lower agreement with NPIs. A positive association with agreement with measures was found for higher educational backgrounds and higher anxiety levels. By contrast, higher levels of depression, not feeling well advised by the government, and perceiving the pandemic as an economic threat were negatively associated with agreement with measures. Moreover, the use of social media as main COVID-19 information source and not feeling well advised by the government were associated with lower adherence to NPIs. By contrast, higher levels of education were associated with higher adherence. CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive analysis emphasizes the associations of COVID-19 information sources as well as sociodemographic and other participant characteristics with agreement with and adherence to NPIs, bearing important implications for future public health crisis communication strategies.

Postdigital health practices: new directions in medical humanities.

Digitalisation has changed the way we understand and practice health. The recent pandemic has accelerated some of the developments in digital health and brought about modifications in public access to information. Taking this into consideration, this programmatic paper sets the stage for and conceptualises postdigital health practices as a possible field of inquiry within medical humanities. While delineating some central aspects of said practices, I draw attention to their significance in contemporary strategies of knowledge production. Spotlighting online environments as the point of ingress for the analysis of these practices, I propose three possible foci of critical and methodological engagement. By spotlighting the serialisation, multimodality, and transmediality of such environments, I argue, we have a chance to both augment and go beyond the field's long-standing preoccupation with narrative, attend to various strategies of communicating illness experience, and re-frame them within larger questions of systemic inequalities. On this basis, and taking as examples COVID-19 and Long COVID, I sketch some of the directions that future strands of medical humanities may take and some of the questions we still have to ask for the field to overcome its own biases and blind spots.

COVID-19 survivors: Multi-disciplinary efforts in psychiatry and medical humanities for long-term realignment.

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic represents an enduring transformation in health care and education with the advancement of smart universities, telehealth, adaptive research protocols, personalized medicine, and self-controlled or artificial intelligence-controlled learning. These changes, of course, also cover mental health and long-term realignment of coronavirus disease 2019 survivors. Fatigue or anxiety, as the most prominent psychiatric "long coronavirus disease 2019" symptoms, need a theory-based and empirically-sound procedure that would help us grasp the complexity of the condition in research and treatment. Considering the systemic character of the condition, such strategies have to take the whole individual and their sociocultural context into consideration. Still, at the moment, attempts to build an integrative framework for providing meaning and understanding for the patients of how to cope with anxiety when they are confronted with empirically reduced parameters (e.g., severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2) or biomarkers (e.g., the FK506 binding protein 5) are rare. In this context, multidisciplinary efforts are necessary. We therefore join in a plea for an establishment of 'translational medical humanities' that would allow a more straightforward intervention of humanities (e.g., the importance of the therapist variable, continuity, the social environment, etc) into the disciplinary, medial, political, and popular cultural debates around health, health-care provision, research (e.g., computer scientists for simulation studies), and wellbeing.

Disease, communication, and the ethics of (in) visibility.

As the recent Ebola outbreak demonstrates, visibility is central to the shaping of political, medical, and socioeconomic decisions. The symposium in this issue of the Journal of Bioethical Inquiry explores the uneasy relationship between the necessity of making diseases visible, the mechanisms of legal and visual censorship, and the overall ethics of viewing and spectatorship, including the effects of media visibility on the perception of particular "marked" bodies. Scholarship across the disciplines of communication, anthropology, gender studies, and visual studies, as well as a photographer's visual essay and memorial reflection, throw light on various strategies of visualization and (de)legitimation and link these to broader socioeconomic concerns. Questions of the ethics of spectatorship, such as how to evoke empathy in the representation of individuals' suffering without perpetuating social and economic inequalities, are explored in individual, (trans-)national, and global contexts, demonstrating how disease (in)visibility intersects with a complex nexus of health, sexuality, and global/national politics. A sensible management of visibility--an "ecology of the visible"--can be productive of more viable ways of individual and collective engagement with those who suffer.