Blaming the unvaccinated during the COVID-19 pandemic: the roles of political ideology and risk perceptions in the USA.

Individuals unvaccinated against COVID-19 (C19) experienced prejudice and blame for the pandemic. Because people vastly overestimate C19 risks, we examined whether these negative judgements could be partially understood as a form of scapegoating (ie, blaming a group unfairly for an undesirable outcome) and whether political ideology (previously shown to shape risk perceptions in the USA) moderates scapegoating of the unvaccinated. We grounded our analyses in scapegoating literature and risk perception during C19. We obtained support for our speculations through two vignette-based studies conducted in the USA in early 2022. We varied the risk profiles (age, prior infection, comorbidities) and vaccination statuses of vignette characters (eg, vaccinated, vaccinated without recent boosters, unvaccinated, unvaccinated-recovered), while keeping all other information constant. We observed that people hold the unvaccinated (vs vaccinated) more responsible for negative pandemic outcomes and that political ideology moderated these effects: liberals (vs conservatives) were more likely to scapegoat the unvaccinated (vs vaccinated), even when presented with information challenging the culpability of the unvaccinated known at the time of data collection (eg, natural immunity, availability of vaccines, time since last vaccination). These findings support a scapegoating explanation for a specific group-based prejudice that emerged during the C19 pandemic. We encourage medical ethicists to examine the negative consequences of significant C19 risk overestimation among the public. The public needs accurate information about health issues. That may involve combating misinformation that overestimates and underestimates disease risk with similar vigilance to error.

Evaluating a community engagement model for malaria elimination in Haiti: lessons from the community health council project (2019-2021).

BACKGROUND: Community engagement (CE) plays a critical role in malaria control and elimination. CE approaches vary substantially, with more participatory programmes requiring higher levels of adaptive management. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a volunteer-based CE programme developed in Haiti in 2018. The approach was based on local leaders organizing and implementing monthly anti-malaria activities in their communities, and was implemented as part of Malaria Zero Consortium activities. METHODS: This programme evaluation draws on quantitative and qualitative data collected from 23 Community Health Councils (CHCs) over a two-year period (2019-2021) in Grand'Anse department, a malaria hotspot region in Haiti. RESULTS: Monthly monitoring data showed that 100% of the 23 CHCs remained functional over the two-year period, with an average of 0.90 monthly meetings held with an 85% attendance rate. A high degree of transparency and diversity in membership helped create strong planning and involvement from members. CHCs conducted an average of 1.6 community-based activities per month, directly engaging an average of 123 people per month. High levels of fluctuation in monthly activities were indicative of local ownership and self-organization. This included school and church sensitization, environmental sanitation campaigns, mass education, support for case referrals and community mobilization during mass drug administration (MDA) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) campaigns. Members drew on the tradition of konbit (mutual self-help), local histories of health and development campaigns and a lexicon of "solidarity" in difficult times as they negotiated their agency as community volunteers. Small incentives played both symbolic and supportive roles. Some level of politicization was viewed as inevitable, even beneficial. Rumours about financial and political profiteering of CHC volunteers took time to dispel while the tendency towards vertical planning in malaria control created conditions that excluded CHCs from some activities. This generated resentment from members who felt sidelined by the government malaria programme. CONCLUSION: The CHC model was effective in promoting group solidarity and community-based anti-malaria activities over a two-year period in Haiti. With the end of the Malaria Zero Consortium in early 2021, there is now an opportunity to better integrate this programme into the primary healthcare system, evaluate the impact of the CHCs on malaria epidemiology, and promote the greater integration of CHCs with active surveillance and response activities.

An ethics of anthropology-informed community engagement with COVID-19 clinical trials in Africa.

The COVID-19 pandemic has reinforced the critical role of ethics and community engagement in designing and conducting clinical research during infectious disease outbreaks where no vaccine or treatment already exists. In reviewing current practices across Africa, we distinguish between three distinct roles for community engagement in clinical research that are often conflated: 1) the importance of community engagement for identifying and honouring cultural sensitivities; 2) the importance of recognising the socio-political context in which the research is proposed; and 3) the importance of understanding what is in the interest of communities recruited to research according to their own views and values. By making these distinctions, we show that current practice of clinical research could draw on anthropology in ways which are sometimes unnecessary to solicit local cultural values, overlook the importance of socio-political contexts and wider societal structures within which it works, potentially serving to reinforce unjust political or social regimes, and threaten to cast doubt on the trustworthiness of the research. We argue that more discerning anthropological engagement as well as wider collaboration with other social scientists and those working in the humanities is urgently needed to improve the ethics of current biomedical and pharmaceutical research practice in Africa.

COVID-19 vaccine boosters for young adults: a risk benefit assessment and ethical analysis of mandate policies at universities.

In 2022, students at North American universities with third-dose COVID-19 vaccine mandates risk disenrolment if unvaccinated. To assess the appropriateness of booster mandates in this age group, we combine empirical risk-benefit assessment and ethical analysis. To prevent one COVID-19 hospitalisation over a 6-month period, we estimate that 31 207-42 836 young adults aged 18-29 years must receive a third mRNA vaccine. Booster mandates in young adults are expected to cause a net harm: per COVID-19 hospitalisation prevented, we anticipate at least 18.5 serious adverse events from mRNA vaccines, including 1.5-4.6 booster-associated myopericarditis cases in males (typically requiring hospitalisation). We also anticipate 1430-4626 cases of grade ≥3 reactogenicity interfering with daily activities (although typically not requiring hospitalisation). University booster mandates are unethical because they: (1) are not based on an updated (Omicron era) stratified risk-benefit assessment for this age group; (2) may result in a net harm to healthy young adults; (3) are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission; (4) violate the reciprocity principle because serious vaccine-related harms are not reliably compensated due to gaps in vaccine injury schemes; and (5) may result in wider social harms. We consider counterarguments including efforts to increase safety on campus but find these are fraught with limitations and little scientific support. Finally, we discuss the policy relevance of our analysis for primary series COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

Rapid ethnographic assessment for potential anti-malarial mass drug administration in an outbreak area of Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.

BACKGROUND: In the Dominican Republic, a recent outbreak of malaria in the capital, Santo Domingo, threatens efforts to eliminate the disease. Mass drug administration (MDA) has been proposed as one strategy to reduce transmission. The success of MDA is contingent upon high levels of acceptance among the target population. To inform the design of future MDA campaigns, this rapid ethnographic assessment examined malaria-related knowledge and attitudes toward malaria MDA among residents of a transmission focus in Santo Domingo. METHODS: In October 2019, a rapid ethnographic assessment was conducted in the Los Tres Brazos transmission focus, which had not previously received MDA. National malaria programme staff conducted 61 structured interviews with key informants, recorded observations, and held 72 informal conversations. Using a grounded theory approach, data were analysed during three workshop sessions with research team members. RESULTS: Among those who had heard of malaria in the structured interviews (n = 39/61; 64%), understanding of the disease was largely based on personal experience from past outbreaks or through word-of-mouth. Community health workers (promotores) were trusted for health information and malaria diagnosis more so than professional clinicians. No participant (0%) was familiar with malaria MDA. After learning about MDA, almost all study participants (92%) said that they would participate, seeing it as a way to care for their community. Reasons for not participating in future MDA included not trusting drug administrators, feeling reluctant to take unprescribed medicine, and fear of missing work. Additional identified challenges to MDA included reaching specific demographic groups, disseminating effective MDA campaign messages, and managing misinformation and political influence. CONCLUSION: Residents appear accepting of MDA despite a lack of prior familiarity. Successful MDA will depend on several factors: fostering relationships among community-based health workers, clinicians, community leaders, and others; developing clear health messages that use local terms and spreading them through a variety of media and social networks; and contextualizing MDA as part of a broader effort to promote community health.

Are malaria transmission-blocking vaccines acceptable to high burden communities? Results from a mixed methods study in Bo, Sierra Leone.

BACKGROUND: Malaria transmission-blocking vaccines (TBVs) could help break the cycle of malaria transmission by conferring community rather than individual protection. When introducing new intervention strategies, uptake is dependent on acceptability, not just efficacy. In this exploratory study on acceptability of TBVs in Sierra Leone, it was hypothesized that TBVs would be largely acceptable to adults and health workers in areas with relatively few ongoing malaria interventions, and that (i) knowledge of malaria and vaccines, (ii) health behaviours associated with malaria and vaccines, and (iii) attitudes towards different vaccines types could lead to greater TBV acceptability. METHODS: This study used a mixed methods approach in Bo, Sierra Leone, to understand community knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to malaria and vaccination in general. This included: (i) a population-based cross-sectional survey (n=615 adults), (ii) 6 focus group discussions with parents, and (iii) 20 key informant interviews. The concept of a TBV was explained to participants before they were asked about their willingness to accept this vaccine modality as part of an integrated malaria elimination programme. RESULTS: This study found that most adults would be willing to receive a TBV vaccine. Respondents noted mostly positive past experiences with adult and childhood vaccinations for other infectious diseases and high levels of engagement in other malaria prevention behaviors such as bed nets. Perceived barriers to TBV acceptance were largely focused on general community-level distribution of a vaccine, including personal fears of vaccination and possible costs. After an explanation of the TBV mechanism, nearly all focus group and interview participants believed that community members would accept the vaccine as part of an integrated malaria control approach. Both parents and health workers offered insight on how to successfully roll-out a future TBV vaccination programme. CONCLUSIONS: The willingness of community members in Bo, Sierra Leone to accept a TBV as part of an integrated anti-malarial strategy suggests that the atypical mechanism of TBV action might not be an obstacle to future clinical trials. This study's findings suggests that perceived general barriers to vaccination implementation, such as perceived personal fears and vaccine cost, must be addressed in future clinical and implementation research studies.

Comparing COVID-19 physical distancing policies: results from a physical distancing intensity coding framework for Botswana, India, Jamaica, Mozambique, Namibia, Ukraine, and the United States.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the differences in timing and composition of physical distancing policies is important to evaluate the early global response to COVID-19. A physical distancing intensity monitoring framework comprising 16 domains was recently published to compare physical distancing approaches across 12 U.S. States. We applied this framework to a diverse set of low and middle-income countries (LMICs) (Botswana, India, Jamaica, Mozambique, Namibia, and Ukraine) to test the appropriateness of this framework in the global context and to compare the policy responses in these LMICs with a sample of U.S. States during the first 100-days of the pandemic. RESULTS: The LMICs in our sample adopted wide ranging physical distancing policies. The highest peak daily physical distancing intensity during this period was: Botswana (4.60); India (4.40); Ukraine (4.40); Namibia (4.20); Mozambique (3.87), and Jamaica (3.80). The number of days each country stayed at peak policy intensity ranged from 12-days (Jamaica) to more than 67-days (Mozambique). We found some key similarities and differences, including substantial differences in whether and how countries expressly required certain groups to stay at home. Despite the much higher number of cases in the US, the physical distancing responses in our LMIC sample were generally more intense than in the U.S. States, but results vary depending on the U.S. State. The peak policy intensity for the U.S. 12-state average was 3.84, which would place it lower than every LMIC in this sample except Jamaica. The LMIC sample countries also reached peak physical distancing intensity earlier in outbreak progression compared to the U.S. states sample. The easing of physical distancing policies in the LMIC sample did not discernably correlate with change in COVID-19 incidence. CONCLUSIONS: This physical distancing intensity framework was appropriate for the LMIC context with only minor adaptations. This framework may be useful for ongoing monitoring of physical distancing policy approaches and for use in effectiveness analyses. This analysis helps to highlight the differing paths taken by the countries in this sample and may provide lessons to other countries regarding options for structuring physical distancing policies in response to COVID-19 and future outbreaks.

Evaluation of the implementation process of the mobile health platform 'WelTel' in six sites in East Africa and Canada using the modified consolidated framework for implementation research (mCFIR).

BACKGROUND: Health systems globally are investing in integrating secure messaging platforms for virtual care in clinical practice. Implementation science is essential for adoption, scale-up, spread and maintenance of complex evidence-based solutions in clinics with evolving priorities. In response, the mobile Health (mHealth) Research Group modified the existing consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) to evaluate implementation of virtual health tools in clinical settings. WelTel® is an evidence-based digital health platform widely deployed in various geographical and health contexts. The objective is to identify the facilitators and barriers for implementing WelTel and to assess the application of the mCFIR tool in facilitating focus groups in different geographical and health settings. METHODS: Both qualitative and descriptive quantitative approaches were employed. Six mCFIR sessions were held in three countries with 51 key stakeholders. The mCFIR tool consists of 5 Domains and 25 constructs and was distributed through Qualtrics Experience Management (XM). "Performance" and "Importance" scores were valued on a scale of 0 to 10 (Mean ± SD). Descriptive analysis was conducted using R computing software. NVivo 12 Pro software was used to analyze mCFIR responses and to generate themes from the participants' input. RESULTS: We observed a parallel trend in the scores of Importance and Performance. Of the five Domains, Domain 4 (End-user Characteristics) and Domain 3 (Inner Settings) scored highest in Importance (8.9 ± 0.5 and 8.6 ± 0.6, respectively) and Performance (7.6 ± 0.7 and 7.2 ± 1.3, respectively) for all sites. Domain 2 (Outer Setting) scored the lowest in both Importance and Performance for all sites (7.6 ± 0.4 and 5.6 ± 1.8). The thematic analysis produced the following themes: for areas of strengths, the themes brought up were timely diagnosis and response, cost-effectiveness, and user-friendliness. As for areas for improvement, the themes discussed were training, phone accessibility, stakeholder engagement, and literacy. CONCLUSION: The mCFIR tool allowed for a comprehensive understanding of the barriers and facilitators to the implementation, reach, and scale-up of digital health tools. Amongst several important findings, we observed the value of bringing the perspectives of both end users (HCPs and patients) to the table across Domains. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02603536 - November 11, 2015: WelTelOAKTREE: Text Messaging to Support Patients With HIV/AIDS in British Columbia (WelTelOAKTREE). NCT01549457 - March 9, 2012: TB mHealth Study-Use of Cell Phones to Improve Compliance in Patients on LTBI Treatment.

Understanding hard-to-reach communities: local perspectives and experiences of trachoma control among the pastoralist Maasai in northern Tanzania.

As progress to eliminate trachoma is made, addressing hard-to-reach communities becomes of greater significance. Areas in Tanzania, inhabited by the Maasai, remain endemic for trachoma. This study assessed the effectiveness of Mass Drug Administration (MDA) through an ethnographic study of trachoma amongst a Maasai community. The MDA experience in the context of the livelihoods of the Maasai in a changing political economy was explored using participant observation and household interviews. Factors influencing MDA effectiveness within five domains were analysed. 1) Terrain of intervention: Human movement hindered MDA, including seasonal migration, domestic chores, grazing and school. Encounters with wildlife were significant. 2) Socio-cultural factors and community agency: Norms around pregnancy led women to accept the drug but hide refusal to swallow the drug. Timing of Community Drug Distributor (CDD) visits conflicted with livestock grazing. Refusals occurred among the ilmurrani age group and older women. Mistrust significantly hindered uptake of drugs. 3) Strategies and motivation of drug distributors: Maa-speaking CDDs were critical to effective drug delivery. Maasai CDDs, whilst motivated, faced challenges of distances, encounters with wildlife and compensation. 4) Socio-materiality of technology: Decreases in side-effects over years have improved trust in the drug. Restrictions to swallowing drugs and/or water were relevant to post-partum women and the ilmurrani. 5) History and health governance: Whilst perceptions of the programme were positive, communities questioned government priorities for resources for hospitals, medicines, clean water and roads. They complained of a lack of information and involvement of community members in health care services. With elimination in sight, hard-to-reach communities are paramount as these are probably the last foci of infection. Effective delivery of MDA programmes in such communities requires a critical understanding of community experiences and responses that can inform tailored approaches to trachoma control. Application of a critical social science perspective should be embedded in planning and evaluation of all NTD programmes.

Integrating the social sciences in epidemic preparedness and response: A strategic framework to strengthen capacities and improve Global Health security.

BACKGROUND: The importance of integrating the social sciences in epidemic preparedness and response has become a common feature of infectious disease policy and practice debates. However to date, this integration remains inadequate, fragmented and under-funded, with limited reach and small initial investments. Based on data collected prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, in this paper we analysed the variety of knowledge, infrastructure and funding gaps that hinder the full integration of the social sciences in epidemics and present a strategic framework for addressing them. METHODS: Senior social scientists with expertise in public health emergencies facilitated expert deliberations, and conducted 75 key informant interviews, a consultation with 20 expert social scientists from Africa, Asia and Europe, 2 focus groups and a literature review of 128 identified high-priority peer reviewed articles. We also analysed 56 interviews from the Ebola 100 project, collected just after the West African Ebola epidemic. Analysis was conducted on gaps and recommendations. These were inductively classified according to various themes during two group prioritization exercises. The project was conducted between February and May 2019. Findings from the report were used to inform strategic prioritization of global investments in social science capacities for health emergencies. FINDINGS: Our analysis consolidated 12 knowledge and infrastructure gaps and 38 recommendations from an initial list of 600 gaps and 220 recommendations. In developing our framework, we clustered these into three areas: 1) Recommendations to improve core social science response capacities, including investments in: human resources within response agencies; the creation of social science data analysis capacities at field and global level; mechanisms for operationalizing knowledge; and a set of rapid deployment infrastructures; 2) Recommendations to strengthen applied and basic social sciences, including the need to: better define the social science agenda and core competencies; support innovative interdisciplinary science; make concerted investments in developing field ready tools and building the evidence-base; and develop codes of conduct; and 3) Recommendations for a supportive social science ecosystem, including: the essential foundational investments in institutional development; training and capacity building; awareness-raising activities with allied disciplines; and lastly, support for a community of practice. INTERPRETATION: Comprehensively integrating social science into the epidemic preparedness and response architecture demands multifaceted investments on par with allied disciplines, such as epidemiology and virology. Building core capacities and competencies should occur at multiple levels, grounded in country-led capacity building. Social science should not be a parallel system, nor should it be "siloed" into risk communication and community engagement. Rather, it should be integrated across existing systems and networks, and deploy interdisciplinary knowledge "transversally" across all preparedness and response sectors and pillars. Future work should update this framework to account for the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the institutional landscape.

Operationalizing mHealth to improve patient care: a qualitative implementation science evaluation of the WelTel texting intervention in Canada and Kenya.

BACKGROUND: Mobile health (mHealth) applications have proliferated across the globe with much enthusiasm, although few have reached scale and shown public health impact. In this study, we explored how different contextual factors influenced the implementation, effectiveness and potential for scale-up of WelTel, an easy-to-use and evidence-based mHealth intervention. WelTel uses two-way SMS communication to improve patient adherence to medication and engagement in care, and has been developed and tested in Canada and Kenya. METHODS: We used a comparative qualitative case study design, which drew on 32 key informant interviews, conducted in 2016, with stakeholders involved in six WelTel projects. Our research was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), a meta-theoretical framework, and our analysis relied on a modified approach to grounded theory, which allowed us to compare findings across these projects. RESULTS: We found that WelTel had positive influences on the "culture of care" at local clinics and hospitals in Canada and Kenya, many of which stretched beyond the immediate patient-client relationship to influence wider organizational systems. However, these were mediated by clinician norms and practices, the availability of local champion staff, the receptivity and capacity of local management, and the particular characteristics of the technology platform, including the ability for adaptation and co-design. We also found that scale-up was influenced by different forms of data and evidence, which played important roles in legitimization and partnership building. Even with robust research evidence, scale-up was viewed as a precarious and uncertain process, embedded within the wider politics and financing of Canadian and Kenyan health systems. Challenges included juggling different interests, determining appropriate financing pathways, maintaining network growth, and "packaging" the intervention for impact and relevance. CONCLUSIONS: Our comparative case study, of a unique transnational mobile health research network, revealed that moving from mHealth pilots to scale is a difficult, context-specific process that couples social and technological innovation. Fostering new organizational partnerships and ways of learning are paramount, as mHealth platforms straddle the world of research, industry and public health. Partnerships need to avoid the perils of the technological fix, and engage the structural barriers that mediate people's health and access to services.

ZOONOTIC ENCOUNTERS AT THE SLAUGHTERHOUSE: PATHWAYS AND POSSIBILITIES FOR THE CONTROL OF CYSTIC ECHINOCOCCOSIS IN NORTHERN MOROCCO.

This study traces the biosocial dynamics of Echinococcus granulosus - a zoonotic tapeworm spread between dogs, livestock and people - at slaughterhouses in Morocco. One of the most important parasitic zoonoses worldwide, this neglected cestode is responsible for a debilitating, potentially life-threatening, human disease and significant livestock production losses. Transmission can be interrupted, among other ways, by restricting dogs from eating cyst-infected livestock viscera. Recent epidemiological studies in Sidi Kacem province, northern Morocco, found that government-operated slaughterhouses were 'hotspots' for hydatid cysts in livestock and infection in dogs. An ethnographic approach was used to compliment these studies, exploring 'how' and 'why' cysts were being openly discarded. All seven visited slaughterhouses had low levels of hygiene, oversight and infrastructure. This was described locally as perpetuating a sense of 'chaos' that normalized (un)hygienic practices and justified the ignoring of state rules and regulations. However deference to 'poor' infrastructure, both physically and symbolically, served to under-emphasize local institutional logics, which were mediated by prevailing risk perceptions, economic practices and local socio-political norms. These included inter-departmental government relationships, the motivation of veterinary technicians, the political lobbying of butchers and market-based mitigation strategies. The study shows the importance of understanding E. granulosus from a biosocial perspective, and the need for more long-term, participatory and integrated 'One Health' approaches for neglected zoonotic diseases.

Zero-covid advocacy during the COVID-19 pandemic: a case study of views on Twitter/X.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many advocacy groups and individuals criticized governments on social media for doing either too much or too little to mitigate the pandemic. In this article, we review advocacy for COVID-19 elimination or "zero-covid" on the social media platform X (Twitter). We present a thematic analysis of tweets by 20 influential co-signatories of the World Health Network letter on ten themes, covering six topics of science and mitigation (zero-covid, epidemiological data on variants, long-term post-acute sequelae (Long COVID), vaccines, schools and children, views on monkeypox/Mpox) and four advocacy methods (personal advice and promoting remedies, use of anecdotes, criticism of other scientists, and of authorities). The advocacy, although timely and informative, often appealed to emotions and values using anecdotes and strong criticism of authorities and other scientists. Many tweets received hundreds or thousands of likes. Risks were emphasized about children's vulnerability, Long COVID, variant severity, and Mpox, and via comparisons with human immunodeficiency viruses (HIV). Far-reaching policies and promotion of remedies were advocated without systematic evidence review, or sometimes, core field expertise. We identified potential conflicts of interest connected to private companies. Our study documents a need for public health debates to be less polarizing and judgmental, and more factual. In order to protect public trust in science during a crisis, we suggest the development of mechanisms to ensure ethical guidelines for engagement in "science-based" advocacy, and consideration of cost-benefit analysis of recommendations for public health decision-making.

Correction: Wet market biosecurity reform: Three social narratives influence stakeholder responses in Vietnam, Kenya, and the Philippines.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001704.].

Panel stacking is a threat to consensus statement validity.

Consensus statements can be very influential in medicine and public health. Some of these statements use systematic evidence synthesis but others fail on this front. Many consensus statements use panels of experts to deduce perceived consensus through Delphi processes. We argue that stacking of panel members toward one particular position or narrative is a major threat, especially in absence of systematic evidence review. Stacking may involve financial conflicts of interest, but nonfinancial conflicts of strong advocacy can also cause major bias. Given their emerging importance, we describe here how such consensus statements may be misleading, by analyzing in depth a recent high-impact Delphi consensus statement on COVID-19 recommendations as a case example. We demonstrate that many of the selected panel members and at least 35% of the core panel members had advocated toward COVID-19 elimination (Zero-COVID) during the pandemic and were leading members of aggressive advocacy groups. These advocacy conflicts were not declared in the Delphi consensus publication, with rare exceptions. Therefore, we propose that consensus statements should always require rigorous evidence synthesis and maximal transparency on potential biases toward advocacy or lobbyist groups to be valid. While advocacy can have many important functions, its biased impact on consensus panels should be carefully avoided.

Results from a Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Survey in Two Malaria Transmission Foci of Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.

Metropolitan Santo Domingo has accounted for a majority of reported malaria cases in the Dominican Republic in recent years. To inform malaria control and elimination efforts, a cross-sectional survey of malaria knowledge, attitudes, and practices collected 489 adult household-level questionnaires across 20 neighborhoods in the city's two main transmission foci, Los Tres Brazos (n = 286) and La Ciénaga (n = 203), in December 2020. Overall, most residents (69%) were aware of the problem of malaria in Santo Domingo, but less than half knew that mosquitos transmit the disease (46%) or took any correct preventative measure (45%). More residents of Los Tres Brazos, where malaria incidence is higher than in La Ciénaga, said that they had never been visited by active surveillance teams (80% versus 66%, respectively; P = 0.001), did not link mosquitos with malaria transmission (59% versus 48%, P = 0.013), and did not know medication can cure malaria (42% versus 27%, P = 0.005). Fewer residents of Los Tres Brazos said that malaria was a problem in their neighborhoods (43% versus 49%, P = 0.021) and fewer had mosquito bed nets in their homes (42% versus 60%, P < 0.001). The majority (75%) of questionnaire respondents in both foci did not have enough mosquito nets for all household residents. These findings demonstrate gaps in malaria knowledge and community-based interventions and highlight the need to improve community engagement for malaria elimination in affected areas of Santo Domingo.

Rapid ethnography and participatory techniques increase onchocerciasis mass drug administration treatment coverage in Benin: a difference-in-differences analysis.

BACKGROUND: Onchocerciasis, a neglected tropical disease (NTD) that causes blindness, is controlled via mass drug administration (MDA) where entire endemic communities are targeted with preventative chemotherapeutic treatment. However, in many settings, MDA coverage remains low. The purpose of this project was to determine if engaging communities in the development of implementation strategies improves MDA coverage. METHODS: This study took place in an intervention and a control commune in Benin, West Africa. We conducted rapid ethnography in each commune to learn about community member perceptions of onchocerciasis, MDA, and opportunities to increase MDA coverage. Findings were shared with key stakeholders and a structured nominal group technique was used to derive implementation strategies most likely to increase treatment coverage. The implementation strategies were delivered prior to and during onchocerciasis MDA. We conducted a coverage survey within 2 weeks of MDA to determine treatment coverage in each commune. A difference-in-differences design was used to determine if the implementation package effectively increased coverage. A dissemination meeting was held with the NTD program and partners to share findings and determine the perceived acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of implementing rapid ethnography as part of routine program improvement. RESULTS: During rapid ethnography, key barriers to MDA participation included trust in community drug distributors, poor penetration of MDA programs in rural or geographically isolated areas, and low demand for MDA among specific sub-populations driven by religious or socio-cultural beliefs. Stakeholders developed a five-component implementation strategy package, including making drug distributor trainings dynamic, redesigning distributor job aids, tailoring community sensitization messages, formalizing supervision, and preparing local champions. After implementing the strategy package, MDA coverage increased by 13% (95% CI: 11.0-15.9%) in the intervention commune relative to the control commune. Ministry of Health and implementing partners found the approach to be largely acceptable and appropriate; however, there was mixed feedback regarding the feasibility of future implementation of rapid ethnography. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation research conducted in Benin, and indeed throughout sub-Saharan Africa, is often implemented in a top-down manner, with both implementation determinants and strategies derived in the global North. This project demonstrates the importance of participatory action research involving community members and implementers to optimize program delivery.

Was lockdown worth it? community perspectives and experiences of the Covid-19 pandemic in remote southwestern Haiti.

Public experiences of COVID-19 pandemic lockdown differed dramatically between countries and socio-economic groups. Low-income countries raise unique empirical and ethical concerns about (1) the balance between benefits and social harms and (2) how explanatory disease models and everyday life realities influenced the experience and interpretation of lockdown itself. In this paper, we present qualitative data on community perceptions and experiences of the pandemic from a remote area of Haiti, with a focus on the 2020 lockdown. We conducted in-depth interviews with 30 community leaders in Grand'Anse Department, southwest Haiti, at two time periods: May 2020 and October-December 2021. We divide our results into five sections. First, our analysis showed that lockdown was widely considered ineffective at controlling COVID-19. Despite the lack of testing, community leaders believed most of the local population had caught COVID-19 in the first half of 2020, with limited reported mortality. Public concern about the pandemic largely ended at this time, overtaken by other socio-economic and political crises. Second, we found that popular explanations for the low fatality rate were related to various coping strategies: the strength of people's immune systems, use of natural prophylactic folk teas, beliefs about the virus, spiritual protections and the tropical weather. Third, we found that lockdown was widely seen to have not been appropriate for the Haitian context due to various challenges with compliance in the face of socio-economic vulnerability. Fourth, we found strong negative feelings about the social consequences of lockdown measures, which lasted from March-August 2020, including adverse effects on: food security, household income, education, health, and psychosocial well-being. Finally, these perceptions and experiences reinforced popular ideas that lockdown had been imposed by elites for financial and/or political gain, something that was also reflected in the discourse about the low vaccine acceptance rate. Our study showed that pandemic respiratory virus response in Haiti should better balance restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) with existing socio-economic vulnerability. Local socio-behavioral dynamics and risk perceptions decrease the overall effectiveness of NPIs in fragile states and alternatives to lockdown, such as shielding the most vulnerable, are likely to be a more appropriate strategy.