Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 10 de 10
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37987198

RESUMO

CONTEXT: To address the considerable burden of mental health need in the United States, Congress passed the National Suicide Hotline Designation Act in 2020. The Act rebranded the national suicide prevention lifeline as 988 - a 3-digit number akin to 911 for individuals to call in the case of a mental health emergency. Surprisingly little is known about American attitudes towards this new lifeline. METHODS: We rely on a demographically representative sample of 5,482 US adults conducted from June 24-28, 2022. We examine the influence of mental health status, partisan identification, and demographic characteristics on public awareness, public support, and intended use of the new 988 lifeline. FINDINGS: We find that while only a quarter of Americans are aware of the lifeline, support for the 988 lifeline is widespread, with over 75% of Americans indicating they would be likely to use the new number if needed. We identify key disparities in awareness, support, and intended use, with Republicans, individuals with low socio-economic status, and Blacks less supportive and in some cases less likely to use the 988 lifeline. CONCLUSIONS: Our results point to the need for additional interventions that increase public awareness of 988 and reduce disparities in program knowledge, support, and intended use.

2.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(9): e2334945, 2023 Sep 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37755830

RESUMO

Importance: Marked elevation in levels of depressive symptoms compared with historical norms have been described during the COVID-19 pandemic, and understanding the extent to which these are associated with diminished in-person social interaction could inform public health planning for future pandemics or other disasters. Objective: To describe the association between living in a US county with diminished mobility during the COVID-19 pandemic and self-reported depressive symptoms, while accounting for potential local and state-level confounding factors. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used 18 waves of a nonprobability internet survey conducted in the United States between May 2020 and April 2022. Participants included respondents who were 18 years and older and lived in 1 of the 50 US states or Washington DC. Main Outcome and Measure: Depressive symptoms measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9); county-level community mobility estimates from mobile apps; COVID-19 policies at the US state level from the Oxford stringency index. Results: The 192 271 survey respondents had a mean (SD) of age 43.1 (16.5) years, and 768 (0.4%) were American Indian or Alaska Native individuals, 11 448 (6.0%) were Asian individuals, 20 277 (10.5%) were Black individuals, 15 036 (7.8%) were Hispanic individuals, 1975 (1.0%) were Pacific Islander individuals, 138 702 (72.1%) were White individuals, and 4065 (2.1%) were individuals of another race. Additionally, 126 381 respondents (65.7%) identified as female and 65 890 (34.3%) as male. Mean (SD) depression severity by PHQ-9 was 7.2 (6.8). In a mixed-effects linear regression model, the mean county-level proportion of individuals not leaving home was associated with a greater level of depression symptoms (ß, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.57-3.58) after adjustment for individual sociodemographic features. Results were similar after the inclusion in regression models of local COVID-19 activity, weather, and county-level economic features, and persisted after widespread availability of COVID-19 vaccination. They were attenuated by the inclusion of state-level pandemic restrictions. Two restrictions, mandatory mask-wearing in public (ß, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.15-0.30) and policies cancelling public events (ß, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.22-0.51), demonstrated modest independent associations with depressive symptom severity. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, depressive symptoms were greater in locales and times with diminished community mobility. Strategies to understand the potential public health consequences of pandemic responses are needed.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Masculino , Humanos , Feminino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Depressão/epidemiologia , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacinas contra COVID-19
3.
JAMA Health Forum ; 4(9): e233257, 2023 09 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37773507

RESUMO

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has been notable for the widespread dissemination of misinformation regarding the virus and appropriate treatment. Objective: To quantify the prevalence of non-evidence-based treatment for COVID-19 in the US and the association between such treatment and endorsement of misinformation as well as lack of trust in physicians and scientists. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-wave, population-based, nonprobability internet survey study was conducted between December 22, 2022, and January 16, 2023, in US residents 18 years or older who reported prior COVID-19 infection. Main Outcome and Measure: Self-reported use of ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine, endorsing false statements related to COVID-19 vaccination, self-reported trust in various institutions, conspiratorial thinking measured by the American Conspiracy Thinking Scale, and news sources. Results: A total of 13 438 individuals (mean [SD] age, 42.7 [16.1] years; 9150 [68.1%] female and 4288 [31.9%] male) who reported prior COVID-19 infection were included in this study. In this cohort, 799 (5.9%) reported prior use of hydroxychloroquine (527 [3.9%]) or ivermectin (440 [3.3%]). In regression models including sociodemographic features as well as political affiliation, those who endorsed at least 1 item of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation were more likely to receive non-evidence-based medication (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.86; 95% CI, 2.28-3.58). Those reporting trust in physicians and hospitals (adjusted OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56-0.98) and in scientists (adjusted OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.51-0.79) were less likely to receive non-evidence-based medication. Respondents reporting trust in social media (adjusted OR, 2.39; 95% CI, 2.00-2.87) and in Donald Trump (adjusted OR, 2.97; 95% CI, 2.34-3.78) were more likely to have taken non-evidence-based medication. Individuals with greater scores on the American Conspiracy Thinking Scale were more likely to have received non-evidence-based medications (unadjusted OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06-1.11; adjusted OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.07-1.13). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of US adults, endorsement of misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic, lack of trust in physicians or scientists, conspiracy-mindedness, and the nature of news sources were associated with receiving non-evidence-based treatment for COVID-19. These results suggest that the potential harms of misinformation may extend to the use of ineffective and potentially toxic treatments in addition to avoidance of health-promoting behaviors.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Ivermectina/uso terapêutico , Hidroxicloroquina/uso terapêutico , Confiança , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Comunicação
4.
J Health Polit Policy Law ; 48(6): 829-857, 2023 Dec 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37497881

RESUMO

CONTEXT: The CDC's ability to respond to communicable disease threats has recently met significant political and legal opposition. The authors unpack the influence of political ideology on support for CDC authority, and they experimentally assess whether highlighting ideology's role in responding to health threats might bolster CDC support. METHODS: The authors fielded a demographically representative online survey experiment to 5,483 US adults. They assessed the sociopolitical correlates of CDC attitudes via multivariate regression analyses limited to a study-wide treatment group. Additionally, they tested the effectiveness of their experimental treatments via multivariate models that interact indicators of stimulus exposure with political ideology. FINDINGS: Although most Americans support the CDC's role in responding to health crises, self-identified conservatives are significantly less likely to do so. This effect holds when accounting for respondents' limited government and anti-expert attitudes, which the authors replicated in nationally representative data. Encouragingly, though, emphasizing the CDC's role in combating the spread of COVID-19 is associated with significantly stronger levels of support on the ideological right. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to communicate the CDC's importance in responding to health threats can help bridge existing ideological divides and might create an incentive for policy makers to codify the agency's regulatory powers.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Inquéritos e Questionários
5.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(2): e2256152, 2023 02 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36790806

RESUMO

Importance: Little is known about the functional correlates of post-COVID-19 condition (PCC), also known as long COVID, particularly the relevance of neurocognitive symptoms. Objective: To characterize prevalence of unemployment among individuals who did, or did not, develop PCC after acute infection. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used data from 8 waves of a 50-state US nonprobability internet population-based survey of respondents aged 18 to 69 years conducted between February 2021 and July 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were self-reported current employment status and the presence of PCC, defined as report of continued symptoms at least 2 months beyond initial month of symptoms confirmed by a positive COVID-19 test. Results: The cohort included 15 308 survey respondents with test-confirmed COVID-19 at least 2 months prior, of whom 2236 (14.6%) reported PCC symptoms, including 1027 of 2236 (45.9%) reporting either brain fog or impaired memory. The mean (SD) age was 38.8 (13.5) years; 9679 respondents (63.2%) identified as women and 10 720 (70.0%) were White. Overall, 1418 of 15 308 respondents (9.3%) reported being unemployed, including 276 of 2236 (12.3%) of those with PCC and 1142 of 13 071 (8.7%) of those without PCC; 8229 respondents (53.8%) worked full-time, including 1017 (45.5%) of those with PCC and 7212 (55.2%) without PCC. In survey-weighted regression models excluding retired respondents, the presence of PCC was associated with a lower likelihood of working full-time (odds ratio [OR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.63-0.80]; adjusted OR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.74-0.96]) and with a higher likelihood of being unemployed (OR, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.22-1.73]; adjusted OR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.02-1.48]). The presence of any cognitive symptom was associated with lower likelihood of working full time (OR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.56-0.88]; adjusted OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.59-0.84]). Conclusions and Relevance: PCC was associated with a greater likelihood of unemployment and lesser likelihood of working full time in adjusted models. The presence of cognitive symptoms was associated with diminished likelihood of working full time. These results underscore the importance of developing strategies to treat and manage PCC symptoms.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , Feminino , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Síndrome de COVID-19 Pós-Aguda , Emprego , Inquéritos e Questionários , Desemprego
6.
Vaccine ; 41(12): 2093-2099, 2023 03 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36822967

RESUMO

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers have studied how Americans' attitudes toward health experts influence their health behaviors and policy opinions. Fewer, however, consider the potential gap between individual and expert opinion about COVID-19, and how that might shape health attitudes and behavior. This omission is notable, as discrepancies between individual and expert opinion could help explain why some Americans fail to take action to protect themselves and others from the virus. In novel demographically representative surveys of the US adult population (N = 5,482) and primary care physician subpopulations (PCPs; N = 625), we contrast the relationship between: (1) Americans' and (2) PCPs' preferences regarding who ought to be responsible for taking action to combat the spread of COVID-19, as well as (3) Americans' perceptions of PCP preferences ("PCP meta-opinion"). In the aggregate, we find that Americans are far less likely than PCPs to see a role for both private and state actors in taking action to combat COVID-19. Interestingly, though, this disjuncture is not reflected in individual-level PCP meta-opinion; as most Americans think that PCPs share their views on state and private intervention (τb = 0.44-0.49). However, this consonance is often erroneous, which we show can have problematic health consequences. Multivariate models suggest that Americans who both see little place for individual responsibility in taking action to stop viral spread and who think that PCPs share those views are significantly less likely to vaccinate against COVID-19. We conclude by discussing the public health benefits of efforts to bring public opinion in line with expert opinion.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Médicos , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Atitude Frente a Saúde
7.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(10): e2238804, 2022 10 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36301542

RESUMO

Importance: Persistence of COVID-19 symptoms beyond 2 months, or long COVID, is increasingly recognized as a common sequela of acute infection. Objectives: To estimate the prevalence of and sociodemographic factors associated with long COVID and to identify whether the predominant variant at the time of infection and prior vaccination status are associated with differential risk. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study comprised 8 waves of a nonprobability internet survey conducted between February 5, 2021, and July 6, 2022, among individuals aged 18 years or older, inclusive of all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Main Outcomes and Measures: Long COVID, defined as reporting continued COVID-19 symptoms beyond 2 months after the initial month of symptoms, among individuals with self-reported positive results of a polymerase chain reaction test or antigen test. Results: The 16 091 survey respondents reporting test-confirmed COVID-19 illness at least 2 months prior had a mean age of 40.5 (15.2) years; 10 075 (62.6%) were women, and 6016 (37.4%) were men; 817 (5.1%) were Asian, 1826 (11.3%) were Black, 1546 (9.6%) were Hispanic, and 11 425 (71.0%) were White. From this cohort, 2359 individuals (14.7%) reported continued COVID-19 symptoms more than 2 months after acute illness. Reweighted to reflect national sociodemographic distributions, these individuals represented 13.9% of those who had tested positive for COVID-19, or 1.7% of US adults. In logistic regression models, older age per decade above 40 years (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.15; 95% CI, 1.12-1.19) and female gender (adjusted OR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.73-2.13) were associated with greater risk of persistence of long COVID; individuals with a graduate education vs high school or less (adjusted OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.56-0.79) and urban vs rural residence (adjusted OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.64-0.86) were less likely to report persistence of long COVID. Compared with ancestral COVID-19, infection during periods when the Epsilon variant (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69-0.95) or the Omicron variant (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64-0.92) predominated in the US was associated with diminished likelihood of long COVID. Completion of the primary vaccine series prior to acute illness was associated with diminished risk for long COVID (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.86). Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that long COVID is prevalent and associated with female gender and older age, while risk may be diminished by completion of primary vaccination series prior to infection.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus , Pneumonia Viral , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Doença Aguda , Betacoronavirus , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Estudos Transversais , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Prevalência , SARS-CoV-2 , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Síndrome de COVID-19 Pós-Aguda
8.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(3): e223245, 2022 03 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35311961

RESUMO

Importance: Both major depression and firearm ownership are associated with an increased risk for death by suicide in the United States, but the extent of overlap among these major risk factors is not well characterized. Objective: To assess the prevalence of current and planned firearm ownership among individuals with depression. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional survey study using data pooled from 2 waves of a 50-state nonprobability internet survey conducted between May and July 7, 2021. Internet survey respondents were 18 years of age or older and were sampled from all 50 US states and the District of Columbia. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported firearm ownership; depressive symptoms as measured by the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire. Results: Of 24 770 survey respondents (64.6% women and 35.4% men; 5.0% Asian, 10.8% Black, 7.5% Hispanic, and 74.0% White; mean [SD] age 45.8 [17.5]), 6929 (28.0%) reported moderate or greater depressive symptoms; this group had mean (SD) age of 38.18 (15.19) years, 4587 were female (66.2%), and 406 were Asian (5.9%), 725 were Black (10.5%), 652 were Hispanic (6.8%), and 4902 were White (70.7%). Of those with depression, 31.3% reported firearm ownership (n = 2167), of whom 35.9% (n = 777) reported purchasing a firearm within the past year. In regression models, the presence of moderate or greater depressive symptoms was not significantly associated with firearm ownership (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.07; 95% CI, 0.98-1.17) but was associated with greater likelihood of a first-time firearm purchase during the COVID-19 pandemic (adjusted OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.56-2.02) and greater likelihood of considering a future firearm purchase (adjusted OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.23-1.90). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, current and planned firearm ownership was common among individuals with major depressive symptoms, suggesting a public health opportunity to address this conjunction of suicide risk factors.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Transtorno Depressivo Maior , Adolescente , Adulto , Estudos Transversais , Depressão/epidemiologia , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Propriedade , Pandemias , Prevalência , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
9.
Polit Behav ; 44(3): 1509-1532, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35125582

RESUMO

Anti-intellectualism-a distrust of intellectuals and experts-has had a significant political presence in the U.S. and globally, especially in recent years. Anti-intellectualism drives support for phenomena such as populism, a rejection of scientific consensus, and health and science misinformation endorsement. Therefore, discovering what drives someone to be more anti-intellectual is highly important in understanding contemporary public opinion and political behavior. Here, I argue that a significant and overlooked factor contributing to anti-intellectualism is rural social identification-a psychological attachment to being from a rural area or small town-because rural identity in particular views experts and intellectuals as an out-group. Using 2019 ANES pilot data (N = 3000), original survey data (N = 811) and a separate original survey experiment, I find that rural social identification significantly predicts greater anti-intellectualism. Conversely, anti-intellectualism is not significantly associated with rural residency alone, as theoretically speaking, simply living in a rural area does not capture the affective dimension of rural psychological attachment. These findings have implications for health and science attitudes, populist support, and other relevant political matters. They also have implications for what it means to hold a rural identity beyond anti-urban sentiment, and for understanding the urban-rural divide. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11109-022-09770-w.

10.
Soc Sci Med ; 238: 112407, 2019 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31366444

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The study of vaccine hesitancy identifies parental decisions to delay childhood vaccinations as an important public health issue, with consequences for immunization rates, the pursuit of nonmedical exemptions in states, and disease outbreaks. While prior work has explored the demographic and social underpinnings of parental decisions to delay childhood vaccinations, little is known about how the psychological dispositions of parents are associated with this choice. We analyze public opinion data to assess the role of psychological factors in reported parental decisions to delay childhood vaccination. RATIONALE: We anticipate that parents with certain psychological characteristics will be more likely to delay childhood vaccination. Specifically, we explore the roles of conspiratorial thinking, dispositions towards needle sensitivity, and moral purity; expecting that parents with high levels of any of these characteristics will be more likely to delay vaccinating their children. METHOD: In an original survey of 4010 American parents weighted to population benchmarks, we asked parents about delay-related vaccination behavior, demographic questions, and several psychological batteries. We then developed a vaccination delay scale and modeled delay as a function of conspiratorial thinking, needle sensitivity, moral purity, and relevant demographic controls. We then re-specified our models to look specifically at the predictors of delaying HPV vaccination, which has a low uptake rate in the United States. RESULTS: Controlling for other common predictors of hesitant behavior, we find that parents with high levels of conspiratorial thinking and needle sensitivity are more likely to report pursuing alternative vaccination schedules. When analyzing the specific decision by parents to delay HPV vaccination, we find that tendencies towards moral purity and, in turn, sexual deviance are also associated with vaccine seeking behavior. CONCLUSION: Parental decisions to delay childhood vaccinations are an important public health concern that are associated with conspiratorial thinking and needle sensitivity.


Assuntos
Tomada de Decisões , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Poder Familiar/psicologia , Vacinação/psicologia , Humanos , Princípios Morais , Vacinas contra Papillomavirus/uso terapêutico , Pais/psicologia , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/psicologia , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Estados Unidos , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...