Intersecting Inequities in COVID-19 Vaccination: A Discourse Analysis of Information Use and Decision-Making Among Ethnically Diverse Parents in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how intersecting social privilege and disadvantage contribute to inequities in COVID-19 information use and vaccine access. This study explored how social inequities intersect to shape access to and use of COVID-19 information and vaccines among parents in Canada. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews on COVID-19 vaccination information use with ethnically diverse parents of children ages 11 to 18 years from April to August 2022. We purposefully invited parents from respondents to a national online survey to ensure representation across diverse intersecting social identities. Five researchers coded transcripts in NVivo using a discourse analysis approach informed by intersectionality. Our analysis focused on use of vaccine information and intersecting privileges and oppressions, including identifying with equity-denied group(s). RESULTS: Interview participants (N = 48) identified as ethnically diverse non-Indigenous (n = 40) and Indigenous (n = 8) Peoples from seven Canadian provinces. Racialized minority or Indigenous participants reflected on historical and contemporary events of racism from government and medical institutions as barriers to trust and access to COVID-19 information, vaccines, and the Canadian healthcare system. Participants with privileged social locations showed greater comfort in resisting public health measures. Despite the urgency to receive COVID-19 vaccines, information gaps and transportation barriers delayed vaccination among some participants living with chronic medical conditions. CONCLUSION: Historicization of colonialism and ongoing events of racism are a major barrier to trusting public health information. Fostering partnerships with trusted leaders and/or healthcare workers from racialized communities may help rebuild trust. Healthcare systems need to continuously implement strategies to restore trust with Indigenous and racialized populations.

Racial disparities in COVID-19 vaccination in Canada: results from the cross-sectional Canadian Community Health Survey.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 vaccination coverage have been observed in Canada and in other countries. We aimed to compare vaccination coverage for at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine between First Nations people living off reserve and Métis, Black, Arab, Chinese, South Asian and White people. METHODS: We used data collected between June 2021 and June 2022 by Statistics Canada's Canadian Community Health Survey, a large, nationally representative cross-sectional study. The analysis included 64 722 participants aged 18 years or older from the 10 provinces. We used a multiple logistic regression model to determine associations between vaccination status and race, controlling for collection period, region of residence, age, gender and education. RESULTS: Nonvaccination against COVID-19 was more frequent in off-reserve First Nations people (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-2.7) and Black people (adjusted OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.6), and less frequent among South Asian people (adjusted OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.7) compared to White people. INTERPRETATION: This analysis showed significant inequalities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake between racial/ethnic populations in Canada. Further research is needed to understand the sociocultural, structural and systemic facilitators of and barriers to vaccination across racial groups, and to identify strategies that may improve vaccination uptake among First Nations and Black people.

Risk communication and perceptions about lead ammunition and Inuit health in Nunavik, Canada.

Lead ammunition is commonly used to hunt waterfowl and other wildlife in the Arctic. Hunting with lead is problematic because the toxicant can be transferred to the consumer. Therefore, it is critical to evaluate perceptions and awareness of the risks associated with using lead ammunition among Arctic populations. Results of the Nunavik Child Development Study (a longitudinal health study gathering information on health and well-being among Inuit in Nunavik, Canada) included advice to eliminate the use of lead ammunition in hunting practices. We surveyed 112 Nunavik residents (93 women; 18 men) about their awareness of lead related messages, use of lead ammunition and risk perceptions about contaminants. Sixty-seven participants (59.8%) reported there was an active hunter in their household. We found that only 27% of participants had heard or seen the messages about reducing lead ammunition. After participants viewed the Nunavik Child Development Study messages about lead, 44% stated they would stop using lead ammunition. However, 28% indicated that they would continue using lead ammunition. We conclude that, while messages had an overall positive effect, further study is required to understand why people continue to use lead ammunition.

"None of it was especially easy": improving COVID-19 vaccine equity for people with disabilities.

OBJECTIVES: Our study aimed to (1) identify barriers to equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines for Canadians with disabilities and (2) present recommendations made by study participants to improve immunization programs in terms of inclusivity and equitable access. METHODS: We invited Manitobans living with disabilities to participate in online focus groups. Focus groups were conducted across multiple disability experiences, although one focus group was advertised explicitly as offering simultaneous American Sign Language interpretation to encourage people who are d/Deaf or hard of hearing to participate. Participants were asked about their perspectives on the management of COVID-19 public health measures and vaccination program rollout. Participants were also asked about barriers and facilitators of their vaccination experiences and if they had recommendations for improvement. RESULTS: The participants identified three areas where they encountered routine barriers in accessing the COVID-19 vaccines: (1) vaccine information and appointment booking, (2) physical access to vaccination clinics, and (3) vaccination experience. While participants identified specific recommendations to improve vaccine accessibility for people with disabilities, the single most crucial advice consistently identified was to involve people with disabilities in developing accessible immunization programs. CONCLUSION: Meaningful engagement with people living with disabilities in immunization program planning would help ensure that people with disabilities, who already face significant challenges due to COVID-19, are offered the same protections as the rest of the population. These recommendations could be easily transferred to the administration of other large-scale immunization campaigns (e.g., influenza vaccines).

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Notre étude visait à (1) identifier les obstacles à un accès équitable aux vaccins contre la COVID-19 pour les Canadiens vivant avec un handicap; et (2) présenter les recommandations faites par les participants à l'étude pour améliorer les programmes de vaccination en termes d'inclusivité et d'accès équitable. MéTHODES: Nous avons invité les Manitobains vivant avec un handicap à participer à des groupes de discussion en ligne. Les groupes de discussion ont été organisés pour divers types de handicap, bien qu'un groupe de discussion ait été explicitement annoncé comme offrant une interprétation simultanée en langue des signes américaine pour encourager les personnes sourdes ou malentendantes à participer. Les participants ont été interrogés sur leurs points de vue sur la gestion des mesures de santé publique contre la COVID-19 et le déploiement du programme d'immunisation. Les participants ont également été interrogés sur les obstacles et les facilitateurs de leurs expériences de vaccination et s'ils avaient des recommandations d'amélioration. RéSULTATS: Les participants ont identifié trois domaines dans lesquels ils ont rencontré des obstacles récurrents pour accéder aux vaccins contre la COVID-19 : 1) l'information sur les vaccins et la prise de rendez-vous, 2) l'accès physique aux cliniques de vaccination, et 3) l'expérience de la vaccination. Bien que les participants aient formulé des recommandations spécifiques pour améliorer l'accessibilité des vaccins pour les personnes handicapées, le conseil le plus crucial systématiquement identifié a été d'impliquer les personnes vivant avec un handicap dans l'élaboration de programmes d'immunisation accessibles. CONCLUSION: Un engagement significatif envers les personnes handicapées dans la planification du programme d'immunisation aiderait à garantir que les personnes vivant avec un handicap, qui sont déjà confrontées à des défis importants en raison de la COVID-19, bénéficient des mêmes protections que le reste de la population. Ces recommandations pourraient être facilement transférées à l'administration d'autres campagnes de vaccination à grande échelle (par exemple, le vaccin contre la grippe).

Culturally Responsive Supports for Metis Elders and Metis Family Caregivers.

Malgré une attention académique considérable au rôle de la famille des soignants avec la population générale, peu de recherches ont été menées avec les familles autochtones. Cette étude qualitative vise à combler cette lacune en se concentrant sur l'expérience des soignants Metis, fournir des soins aux adultes Metis plus âges. Des groupes de discussions et des entrevues ont été menés avec des aidants familiaux Metis (n - 79), aînés Metis (n - 11), et soignants officiels (n - 8). Bien qu'il existe de parallèles considérables dans les expériences des soins identifiés dans cette étude sur les Metis avec celles déjà documentées dans la littérature, il existe néanmoins des différences importantes pour la prestation des soins culturellement adaptés aux aînés Metis.Despite considerable academic attention to the role of family caregivers within the general population, little research has been conducted with Indigenous families. This qualitative study aims to fill that gap by focusing on the experiences of Metis caregivers providing care for older Metis adults. Focus groups and interviews were conducted with Metis family caregivers (n = 79), Metis Elders (n = 11) and formal caregivers (n = 8). Although there are considerable parallels in the caregiving experiences identified in this Metis study with those already documented in the literature, there are nonetheless important differences for providing culturally responsive care to Metis seniors.

"There is always a better way": Managing uncertainty in decision making about new cancer drugs in Canada.

Policy decisions about the approval and funding of new cancer drugs must often be made in an environment of complex uncertainty about clinical and cost-effectiveness data. The focus of this article is on the results from qualitative interviews with senior officials (n = 16) who make decisions about or influence cancer drug policy in various organizations in the Canadian cancer control system. Most participants identified the use of a limited number of informal approaches to address uncertainty, such as grounding decisions in evidence and advice from expert groups. People tended to focus on evidence informed decisions including price negotiations, the ability to implement policy changes, and stakeholder values. Lessons from the Canadian context related to continuing efforts to build a public culture of understanding into how policy decisions like cancer drug funding are made may result in greater acceptance and increased confidence in health policy decision-making processes across multiple sectors internationally.

Dengue Disease Risk Mental Models in the City of Dhaka, Bangladesh: Juxtapositions and Gaps Between the Public and Experts.

Worldwide, more than 50 million cases of dengue fever are reported every year in at least 124 countries, and it is estimated that approximately 2.5 billion people are at risk for dengue infection. In Bangladesh, the recurrence of dengue has become a growing public health threat. Notably, knowledge and perceptions of dengue disease risk, particularly among the public, are not well understood. Recognizing the importance of assessing risk perception, we adopted a comparative approach to examine a generic methodology to assess diverse sets of beliefs related to dengue disease risk. Our study mapped existing knowledge structures regarding the risk associated with dengue virus, its vector (Aedes mosquitoes), water container use, and human activities in the city of Dhaka, Bangladesh. "Public mental models" were developed from interviews and focus group discussions with diverse community groups; "expert mental models" were formulated based on open-ended discussions with experts in the pertinent fields. A comparative assessment of the public's and experts' knowledge and perception of dengue disease risk has revealed significant gaps in the perception of: (a) disease risk indicators and measurements; (b) disease severity; (c) control of disease spread; and (d) the institutions responsible for intervention. This assessment further identifies misconceptions in public perception regarding: (a) causes of dengue disease; (b) dengue disease symptoms; (c) dengue disease severity; (d) dengue vector ecology; and (e) dengue disease transmission. Based on these results, recommendations are put forward for improving communication of dengue risk and practicing local community engagement and knowledge enhancement in Bangladesh.

Risk communication and trust in decision-maker action: a case study of the Giant Mine Remediation Plan.

BACKGROUND: The development and implementation of a remediation plan for the residual arsenic trioxide stored at the former Giant Mine site in the Canadian Northwest Territories has raised important issues related to trust. Social and individual trust of those responsible for making decisions on risks is critically important in community judgements on risk and the acceptability of risk management decisions. Trust is known to be affected by value similarity and confidence in past performance, which serve as interacting sources of cooperation in acting toward a common goal. OBJECTIVE: To explore the elements of trust associated with the development and implementation of the Giant Mine Remediation Plan. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight purposively selected key informants representing both various interested and affected parties and the two government proponents. RESULTS: Five primary issues related to trust were identified by the participants: (1) a historical legacy of mistrust between the community (particularly Aboriginal peoples) and government; (2) barriers to building trust with the federal government; (3) limited community input and control over the decision-making process; (4) the conflicted and confounded role of the government agencies being both proponent and regulator, and the resulting need for independent oversight; and (5) distrust of the government to commit to the perpetual care required for the remediation option selected. CONCLUSIONS: The dual-mode model of trust and confidence was shown to be a useful framework for understanding the pivotal role of trust in the development of the Giant Mine Remediation Plan. Failure to recognize issues of trust based on value dissimilarity and lack of confidence based on past performance have resulted in a lack of cooperation characterized by delayed remediation and a prolonged and expensive consultation process. Government recognition of the importance of trust to these issues will hopefully improve future communication and public engagement endeavours.

Canadian media representations of mad cow disease.

A Canadian case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or "mad cow disease" was confirmed in May, 2003. An in-depth content analysis of newspaper articles was conducted to understand the portrayal of BSE and variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) in the Canadian media. Articles in the "first 10 days" following the initial discovery of a cow with BSE in Canada on May 20, 2003, were examined based on the premise that these initial stories provide the major frames that dominate news media reporting of the same issue over time and multiple occurrences. Subsequent confirmed Canadian cases were similarly analyzed to determine if coverage changed in these later media articles. The results include a prominence of economic articles, de-emphasis of health aspects, and anchoring the Canadian outbreak to that of Britain's crisis. The variation in media representations between those in Canada and those documented in Britain are explored in this study.

Constructing scientific authorities: issue framing of chlorinated disinfection byproducts in public health.

The practice of chlorine disinfection of drinking water to reduce microbial risks provides substantial benefits to public health. However, increasing concern around potential risks of cancer associated with exposure to chlorinated disinfection byproducts confuses this issue. This article examines the science agenda regarding chlorinated disinfection byproducts (CDBP) and cancer in Canada and the United States, focusing on the social construction of scientific knowledge claims and evidence. Data for this analysis were obtained from published documents as well as from in-depth interviews with epidemiologists and toxicologists centrally involved with the issue in both countries. Results of the analysis suggest that toxicological scientists want to close the door on the "chloroform issue" due to increasing evidence that chloroform is safe at low doses, because epidemiological scientists can no longer move forward the cancer science until significant improvements can be made in assessing human exposures, and because the scientific foci of research on DBP have shifted accordingly. Further, a distinction emerges in terms of how scientific uncertainties are interpreted when they cross-cut disciplines in the context of human health risk assessment. We suggest this tension reflects a balance of how uncertainty and authorities are managed in a mandated science-policy domain. Sufficient evidence was provided to keep the DBP issue on the regulatory agenda and to generate additional research, yet authorities and concomitant interpretations of uncertainty were contested. Such science generation and contestation inevitably influences complex risk assessment processes with respect to what water-related health risks are addressed and how.