Engagement in rapid public health research among young people from underserved communities: maximising opportunities and overcoming barriers.

BACKGROUND: Inclusion in public health research of young people from low-income households and those from minority ethnic groups remains low. It is recognised that there is a need to change the way in which research is conducted so that it becomes more inclusive. The aim of this work was to identify novel and innovative ways to maximise recruitment and inclusion of diverse participants when doing co-production within very short time frames for emergency responses. METHOD: We conducted interviews with young people from low-income and minority ethnic backgrounds, and members or leaders of groups or organisations supporting or representing young people from underserved communities. RESULTS: A total of 42 participants took part in an interview. This included 30 young people from low income or minority ethnic backgrounds and 12 community leaders/service providers. Of the 30 young people, 26 participants identified as female and 12 participants identified as being from a minority ethnic background. Participants discussed a number of interrelated barriers to research involvement and identified ways in which barriers may be reduced. Prejudice and discrimination experienced by young people from underserved communities has led to substantial mistrust of educational and governmental establishments. Rigid and unfamiliar research practices further limit the involvement of young people. Four themes were identified as ways of supporting involvement, including: making opportunities available for young people, adaptations to research governance, understanding and acknowledging challenges faced by young people, and ensuring reciprocal benefits. CONCLUSION: This research explored barriers to engagement in rapid public health co-production. Working with communities to co-produce rapid recruitment and research procedures to suit the needs and the context in which young people live is necessary.

Rates of, and factors associated with, common mental disorders in homeworking UK Government response employees' during COVID-19: a cross-sectional survey and secondary data analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Working on the frontline during the COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with increased risk to mental health and wellbeing in multiple occupations and contexts. The current study aimed to provide an insight into the rate of probable mental health problems amongst United Kingdom (UK) Government employees who contributed to the COVID-19 response whilst working from home, and to ascertain what factors and constructs, if any, influence mental health and wellbeing in the sample population. METHOD: This paper reports on the findings from two studies completed by UK Government employees. Study 1: A cross-sectional online survey, containing standardised and validated measures of common mental health disorders of staff who actively contributed to the COVID-19 response from their own homes. Binary logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with mental health outcomes. Study 2: A secondary data analysis of cross-sectional survey data collected across three timepoints (May, June, and August) in 2020 focusing on the wellbeing of employees who worked from home during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Study 1: 17.9% of participants met the threshold criteria for a probable moderate anxiety disorder, moderate depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder. Younger, less resilient, less productive individuals, with lower personal wellbeing and less enjoyment of working from home, were more likely to present with poorer mental health. Study 2: Found lower wellbeing was consistently associated with having less opportunities to look after one's physical and mental health, and having unsupportive line managers and colleagues. CONCLUSION: It is important to ensure UK Government employees' psychological needs are met whilst working from home and responding to enhanced incidents. It is recommended that workplaces should be seeking to continually build and improve employee resilience (e.g., through opportunities to increase social ties and support networks), essentially ensuring employees have necessary resources and skills to support themselves and others.

Use of UK faith Centre as a COVID-19 community vaccination clinic: exploring a potential model for community-based health care delivery.

INTRODUCTION: Effective and safe vaccines against COVID-19 are essential to achieve global control of the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Using faith centres may offer a promising route for promoting higher vaccine uptake from certain minority ethnic groups known to be more likely to be vaccine hesitant. METHODS: This cross-sectional study explored attendees' perceptions, experiences of being offered, and receiving COVID-19 vaccination in a local mosque in Woking, Surrey, UK. About 199 attendees completed a brief questionnaire on experiences, views, motivations about attending the mosque and vaccination on site. RESULTS: The most common ethnic groups reported were White British (39.2%) and Pakistani (22.6%); 36.2% identified as Christian, 23.6% as Muslim, 5.5% as Hindu, and 17.1% had no religion. Genders was relatively equal with 90 men (45.2%) and 98 women (49.2%), and 35-44-year-olds represented the most common age group (28.1%). Views and experiences around receiving vaccinations at the mosque were predominantly positive. Primary reasons for getting vaccinated at the mosque included convenience, accessibility, positive aspects of the venue's intercultural relations, and intentions to protect oneself against COVID-19, regardless of venue type. Negative views and experiences in regards to receiving the vaccination at the mosque were less common (7% expressed no intention of recommending the centre to others), and disliked aspects mostly referred to the travel distance and long waiting times. CONCLUSIONS: Offering COVID-19 vaccination in faith centres appears acceptable for different faith groups, ensuring convenient access for communities from all religions and ethnic backgrounds.

Improving modelling for epidemic responses: reflections from members of the UK infectious disease modelling community on their experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic both relied and placed significant burdens on the experts involved from research and public health sectors. The sustained high pressure of a pandemic on responders, such as healthcare workers, can lead to lasting psychological impacts including acute stress disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, burnout, and moral injury, which can impact individual wellbeing and productivity. Methods: As members of the infectious disease modelling community, we convened a reflective workshop to understand the professional and personal impacts of response work on our community and to propose recommendations for future epidemic responses. The attendees represented a range of career stages, institutions, and disciplines. This piece was collectively produced by those present at the session based on our collective experiences. Results: Key issues we identified at the workshop were lack of institutional support, insecure contracts, unequal credit and recognition, and mental health impacts. Our recommendations include rewarding impactful work, fostering academia-public health collaboration, decreasing dependence on key individuals by developing teams, increasing transparency in decision-making, and implementing sustainable work practices. Conclusions: Despite limitations in representation, this workshop provided valuable insights into the UK COVID-19 modelling experience and guidance for future public health crises. Recognising and addressing the issues highlighted is crucial, in our view, for ensuring the effectiveness of epidemic response work in the future.

Experiences of working from home: umbrella review.

INTRODUCTION: The concept of "working from home" is extremely topical following the COVID-19 pandemic; therefore, it is unsurprising that there has been an increased interest in collating research related to homeworking. This has been carried out by multiple reviews, all with slightly different research aims and methodologies. Collating the findings from the available reviews is therefore highly beneficial to establish the experience of homeworking to create recommendations for the future of home-based work. METHODS: An umbrella review was carried out. In June 2022, literature searches were conducted across 4 electronic databases. Published reviews of literature that used a systematic process, were focused on working from home populations, and detailed factors that could be related to the personal experience of homeworking (eg, barriers, facilitators, advantages, disadvantages) were included. RESULTS: A total of 1930 records were screened and 6 review articles were included. Results report on the following sections: working environment (eg, workplace design, space conditions), personal impact (eg, satisfaction, career impact), and health (eg, physical health, well-being) including a total of 19 themes. Mixed findings were apparent for nearly all included themes, highlighting the need to consider individual and contextual circumstances when researching working from home. CONCLUSIONS: This review establishes the importance of retaining flexibility while homeworking for employees, managers, and organizations. Essentially, a one-size-fits-all approach to working from home is impractical as individual circumstances limit application. Eight recommendations for the future of working from home are suggested.