Conducting Social Science Research During Epidemics and Pandemics: Lessons Learnt.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on how field-based research is being conducted globally. Given the challenges of undertaking fieldwork during epidemics and the need for mixed methods research to address the social, political, and economic issues related to epidemics, there is a small but growing body of evidence in this area. To contribute to the logistical and ethical considerations for conducting research during a pandemic, we draw on the challenges and lessons learnt from adapting methods for two research studies conducted in 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings: (1) in-person research in Uganda and (2) combined remote and in-person research in South and Southeast Asia. Our case studies focus on data collection and demonstrate the feasibility of conducting mixed methods research, even with many logistical and operational constraints. Social science research is often used to identify the context of specific issues, to provide a needs assessment, or inform longer-term planning; however, these case studies have shown the need to integrate social science research from the start of a health emergency and in a systematic way. Social science research during future health emergencies can also inform public health responses during the emergency. It is also crucial to collect social science data after health emergencies to inform future pandemic preparedness. Finally, researchers need to continue research on other public health issues that are ongoing even during a public health emergency.

Risk perception of Ebola virus disease and COVID-19 among transport drivers living in Ugandan border districts.

Background: Cross-border movements between districts bordering Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) are common due to the interdependence between populations on either side, though this increases the risk of the international spread of infectious diseases. Due to the nature of their work, boda boda drivers (motorcycle taxis), taxis and truck drivers continue to cross the border during epidemics. However, perceived risk of contracting and spreading communicable diseases may be influenced by several factors such as the level of education, packaging and perception of health care messages, limited interaction with local socio-cultural dynamics or personal experiences. This study aims to explore differences in movement patterns and risk perceptions as factors for transmission among transport drivers in Ugandan border districts during the 2018-2020 Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) epidemic and the current COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Between May and June 2021, in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with transport drivers in three Ugandan districts bordering DRC (Kasese, Kisoro and Hoima). Participants were asked about their knowledge and beliefs about EVD and COVID-19, perceived risk during epidemics, reasons for, and travel patterns during the EVD epidemic and COVID- 19 pandemic. A thematic content analysis was applied. Results: Participants' awareness of EVD was higher than that of COVID-19 however, the risk of transmission of Ebola virus was perceived as a remote threat. Measures restricting mobility during the COVID-19 pandemic had a greater impact on transport drivers compared to those implemented during the EVD epidemic, and were perceived as prohibitive rather than protective, largely due to fear of reprisals by security officers. Despite this, drivers were unlikely to be able to comply with the restrictions as they relied on their work as a source of income. Conclusion: The vulnerabilities of transport drivers should be considered in the context of epidemics such EVD and COVID-19 in Uganda. Policy makers should address these particularities and assess the impact of public health measures on transport drivers' mobility and involve them in designing of mobility-relatedpolicies.

Attributing public ignorance in vaccination narratives.

The notion of an 'ignorant public' is attributed in outbreak scenarios through vaccination narratives that are institutionally reinforced by governments and the media across different contexts. The ignorant public narrative is a discursive shift that reduces public concerns about vaccines to a lack of knowledge, obscuring how these concerns are indicative of mistrust and anxiety or efforts to counter the dominance of acceptable and legitimate knowledge. This narrative risks a deflection of challenges in the structural determinants of vaccine uptake and depoliticise rumours and mistrust that arise during vaccination campaigns. Examples from Sierra Leone, Uganda, and India show how 'ignorant public' framings are used as explanation for vaccine hesitancy through assigned roles for institutions and publics, and the consequences this narrative has for vaccination encounters. These examples are based on ethnographic fieldwork and media analysis carried out before, during, and after outbreaks, of newly introduced vaccines for both human and animal health. Drawing on science communication and development studies, we show how this narrative then positions governmental concern about vaccine hesitancy as being a (largely) imagined issue of public ignorance. We argue that when institutions tasked with strengthening vaccine uptake see public ignorance as the key problem, this can obscure other problems, such as competing interests and experiences, and also minority group treatment. As a result, public governance is rationalised by assigning the ignorance label to certain public groups that stand in contrast to scientific and government expertise, and so accountability for low vaccine uptake is transferred onto the public.