Dataset Information

Mapping the sociodemographic distribution and self-reported justifications for non-compliance with COVID-19 guidelines in the United Kingdom.

ABSTRACT: Which population factors have predisposed people to disregard government safety guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic and what justifications do they give for this non-compliance? To address these questions, we analyse fixed-choice and free-text responses to survey questions about compliance and government handling of the pandemic, collected from tens of thousands of members of the UK public at three 6-monthly timepoints. We report that sceptical opinions about the government and mainstream-media narrative, especially as pertaining to justification for guidelines, significantly predict non-compliance. However, free text topic modelling shows that such opinions are diverse, spanning from scepticism about government competence and self-interest to full-blown conspiracy theories, and covary in prevalence with sociodemographic variables. These results indicate that attempts to counter non-compliance through argument should account for this diversity in peoples' underlying opinions, and inform conversations aimed at bridging the gap between the general public and bodies of authority accordingly.

SUBMITTER: Balaet M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10395087 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mapping the sociodemographic distribution and self-reported justifications for non-compliance with COVID-19 guidelines in the United Kingdom.

Bălăeț Maria M Kurtin Danielle L DL Gruia Dragos C DC Lerede Annalaura A Custovic Darije D Trender William W Jolly Amy E AE Hellyer Peter J PJ Hampshire Adam A

Frontiers in psychology 20230719

Which population factors have predisposed people to disregard government safety guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic and what justifications do they give for this non-compliance? To address these questions, we analyse fixed-choice and free-text responses to survey questions about compliance and government handling of the pandemic, collected from tens of thousands of members of the UK public at three 6-monthly timepoints. We report that sceptical opinions about the government and mainstream-me ...[more]

PMID: 37539003

Similar Datasets

Project description:This is the official guideline endorsed by the specialty associations involved in the care of head and neck cancer patients in the UK. Significantly new data have been published on laryngeal cancer management since the last edition of the guidelines. This paper discusses the evidence base pertaining to the management of laryngeal cancer and provides updated recommendations on management for this group of patients receiving cancer care. Recommendations • Radiotherapy (RT) and transoral laser microsurgery (TLM) are accepted treatment options for T1a-T2a glottic carcinoma. (R) • Open partial surgery may have a role in the management of selected tumours. (R) • Radiotherapy, TLM and transoral robotic surgery are reasonable treatment options for T1-T2 supraglottic carcinoma. (R) • Supraglottic laryngectomy may have a role in the management of selected tumours. (R) • Most patients with T2b-T3 glottic cancers are suitable for non-surgical larynx preservation therapies. (R) • Concurrent chemoradiotherapy should be regarded as the standard of care for non-surgical management. (R) • Subject to the availability of appropriate surgical expertise and multi-disciplinary rehabilitation services, TLM or open partial surgical procedures ± post-operative RT, may be also be appropriate in selected cases. (R) • In the absence of clinical or radiological evidence of nodal disease, elective treatment (RT or surgery ± post-operative RT) is recommended to at least lymph node levels II, III and IV bilaterally. In node positive disease, it is recommended that lymph node levels II-V should be treated on the involved side. If level II nodes are involved, then elective irradiation of ipsilateral level Ib nodes may be considered. (R) • Most patients with T3 supraglottic cancers are suitable for non-surgical larynx preservation therapies. (R) • Concurrent chemoradiotherapy should be regarded as the standard of care for non-surgical management. (R) • Subject to the availability of appropriate surgical expertise and multi-disciplinary rehabilitation services, TLM or open partial surgical procedures ± post-operative RT, may also be appropriate in selected cases. (R) • In the absence of clinical or radiological evidence of nodal disease, elective treatment (RT or surgery ± post-operative RT) is recommended to at least lymph node levels II, III and IV bilaterally. In node positive disease, lymph node levels II-V should be treated on the involved side. (R) • As per the PET-Neck clinical trial, patients with N2 or N3 neck disease who undergo treatment with chemoradiotherapy to their laryngeal primary and experience a complete response with a subsequent negative post-treatment positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography (PET-CT) scan do not require an elective neck dissection. In contrast, patients who have a partial response to treatment or have increased uptake on a post-treatment PET-CT scan should have a neck dissection. (R) • Larynx preservation with concurrent chemoradiotherapy should be considered for T4 tumours, unless there is tumour invasion through cartilage into the soft tissues of the neck, in which case total laryngectomy yields better outcomes. (R) • In the absence of clinical or radiological evidence of nodal disease, elective treatment (RT or surgery ± post-operative RT) is recommended to bilateral lymph node levels II, III, IV, V and VI. (R).

Project description:BackgroundThis research investigates the distribution of optometrists in Canada relative to population health needs and self-reported use of vision services.MethodsOptometrist locations were gathered from provincial regulatory bodies. Optometrist-to-population ratios (i.e. the number of providers per 10,000 people at the health region level) were then calculated. Utilization of vision care services was extracted from the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) 2013-2014 question regarding self-reported contacts with optometrists or ophthalmologists. Data from the 2016 Statistics Canada census were used to create three population 'need' subgroups (65 years and over; low-income; and people aged 15 and over with less than a high school diploma). Cross-classification mapping compared optometrist distribution to self-reported use of vision care services in relation to need. Each variable was converted into three classes (i.e., low, moderate, and high) using a standard deviation (SD) classification scheme where ±0.5SD from the mean was considered as a cut-off. Three classes: low (< - 0.5SD), moderate (- 0.5 to 0.5SD), and high (> 0.5SD) were used for demonstrating distribution of each variable across health regions.ResultsA total of 5959 optometrists across ten Canadian provinces were included in this analysis. The nationwide distribution of optometrists is variable across Canada; they are predominantly concentrated in urban areas. The national mean ratio of optometrists was 1.70 optometrists per 10,000 people (range = 0.13 to 2.92). Out of 109 health regions (HRs), 26 were classified as low ratios, 51 HRs were classified as moderate ratios, and 32 HRs were high ratios. Thirty-five HRs were classified as low utilization, 39 HRs were classified as moderate, and 32 HRs as high utilization. HRs with a low optometrist ratio relative to eye care utilization and a high proportion of key sociodemographic characteristics (e.g. older age, low income) are located throughout Canada and identified with maps indicating areas of likely greater need for optometry services.ConclusionThis research provides a nationwide overview of vision care provided by optometrists identifying gaps in geographic availability relative to "supply" and "need" factors. This examination of variation in accessibility to optometric services will be useful to inform workforce planning and policies.

Project description:Introduction The objective of this study was to assess whether small animal veterinarians across Western Europe are compliant with the 2012 cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) guidelines by the Reassessment Campaign on Veterinary Resuscitation (RECOVER). Methods A previously published online questionnaire from Switzerland was adapted and translated into 7 languages, corresponding to national languages in Austria, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom. The survey was distributed via respective national veterinary organizations and social media outlets. A subset of questions was analyzed to evaluate respondent demographics, RECOVER guideline awareness, and to allocate composite compliance scores for CPR preparedness, basic life support (BLS) and advanced life support (ALS). Percentages of group total (95% confidence interval) were calculated. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the effects of region of practice, gender, age, specialty training, and guideline awareness on compliance. Odds ratios (95% confidence interval) were generated and significance set at P < 0.05. Results Nine-hundred and thirty respondents were included in analysis. Awareness of and compliance with RECOVER guidelines varied widely across regions. Compliance with all assessed RECOVER guideline recommendations was highest in Germany/Austria [14% (7- 27%)] and lowest in France and Portugal [0% (0–3%)]. CPR preparedness compliance was higher in participants aware of RECOVER guidelines [OR 10.1 (5.2-19.5)], those practicing in Germany/Austria [OR 4.1 (1.9–8.8)] or UK/Ireland [OR 2.2 (1.3–3.7)], and lower in those practicing in Portugal [OR 0.2 (0.1–0.9)]. Specialty training [OR 1.8 (1.1–2.9)], guideline awareness [OR 5.2 (3.2–8.6)], and practice in Germany/Austria [OR 3.1 (1.5–6.5)], UK/Ireland [OR 2.6 (1.7–4.1)], or the Netherlands [OR 5.3 (2.0–14.2)] were associated with increased BLS compliance. ALS compliance was higher in participants with guideline awareness [OR 7.0 (2.9–17.0)], specialty training [OR 6.8 (3.8–12.1)], those practicing in Germany/Austria [OR 3.5 (1.3–9.6)], UK/Ireland [OR 4.0 (1.9–8.3)], or Spain [OR 3.2 (1.2–8.3)] and in younger survey participants [OR 0.9 (0.9–1.0)]. Conclusions Awareness and compliance with RECOVER guidelines varied widely among countries surveyed, however overall compliance scores in all countries were considered low. Further research may highlight factors surrounding poor guideline awareness and compliance so targeted efforts can be made to improve veterinary CPR in Europe.

Dataset Information

Mapping the sociodemographic distribution and self-reported justifications for non-compliance with COVID-19 guidelines in the United Kingdom.

Publications

Mapping the sociodemographic distribution and self-reported justifications for non-compliance with COVID-19 guidelines in the United Kingdom.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets