Dataset Information

A guilt-free strategy increases self-reported non-compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures: Experimental evidence from 12 countries.

ABSTRACT: Studies of citizens' compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures routinely rely on survey data. While such data are essential, public health restrictions provide clear signals of what is socially desirable in this context, creating a potential source of response bias in self-reported measures of compliance. In this research, we examine whether the results of a guilt-free strategy recently proposed to lessen this constraint are generalizable across twelve countries, and whether the treatment effect varies across subgroups. Our findings show that the guilt-free strategy is a useful tool in every country included, increasing respondents' proclivity to report non-compliance by 9 to 16 percentage points. This effect holds for different subgroups based on gender, age and education. We conclude that the inclusion of this strategy should be the new standard for survey research that aims to provide crucial data on the current pandemic.

SUBMITTER: Daoust JF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8059824 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The COVIDiSTRESS global survey collects data on early human responses to the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic from 173 429 respondents in 48 countries. The open science study was co-designed by an international consortium of researchers to investigate how psychological responses differ across countries and cultures, and how this has impacted behaviour, coping and trust in government efforts to slow the spread of the virus. Starting in March 2020, COVIDiSTRESS leveraged the convenience of unpaid online recruitment to generate public data. The objective of the present analysis is to understand relationships between psychological responses in the early months of global coronavirus restrictions and help understand how different government measures succeed or fail in changing public behaviour. There were variations between and within countries. Although Western Europeans registered as more concerned over COVID-19, more stressed, and having slightly more trust in the governments' efforts, there was no clear geographical pattern in compliance with behavioural measures. Detailed plots illustrating between-countries differences are provided. Using both traditional and Bayesian analyses, we found that individuals who worried about getting sick worked harder to protect themselves and others. However, concern about the coronavirus itself did not account for all of the variances in experienced stress during the early months of COVID-19 restrictions. More alarmingly, such stress was associated with less compliance. Further, those most concerned over the coronavirus trusted in government measures primarily where policies were strict. While concern over a disease is a source of mental distress, other factors including strictness of protective measures, social support and personal lockdown conditions must also be taken into consideration to fully appreciate the psychological impact of COVID-19 and to understand why some people fail to follow behavioural guidelines intended to protect themselves and others from infection. The Stage 1 manuscript associated with this submission received in-principle acceptance (IPA) on 18 May 2020. Following IPA, the accepted Stage 1 version of the manuscript was preregistered on the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/g2t3b. This preregistration was performed prior to data analysis.

Project description:BackgroundMaintaining compliance with personal preventive measures is important to achieve a balance of COVID-19 pandemic control and work resumption.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate self-reported compliance with four personal measures to prevent COVID-19 among a sample of factory workers in Shenzhen, China, at the beginning of work resumption in China following the COVID-19 outbreak. These preventive measures included consistent wearing of face masks in public spaces (the workplace and other public settings); sanitizing hands using soap, liquid soap, or alcohol-based hand sanitizer after returning from public spaces or touching public installations and equipment; avoiding social and meal gatherings; and avoiding crowded places.MethodsThe participants were adult factory workers who had resumed work in Shenzhen, China. A stratified two-stage cluster sampling design was used. We randomly selected 14 factories that had resumed work. All full-time employees aged ≥18 years who had resumed work in these factories were invited to complete a web-based survey. Out of 4158 workers who had resumed work in these factories, 3035 (73.0%) completed the web-based survey from March 1 to 14, 2020. Multilevel logistic regression models were fitted.ResultsAmong the 3035 participants, 2938 (96.8%) and 2996 (98.7%) reported always wearing a face mask in the workplace and in other public settings, respectively, in the past month. However, frequencies of self-reported sanitizing hands (2152/3035, 70.9%), avoiding social and meal gatherings (2225/3035, 73.3%), and avoiding crowded places (1997/3035, 65.8%) were relatively low. At the individual level, knowledge about COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratios [AORs] from 1.16, CI 1.10-1.24, to 1.29, CI 1.21-1.37), perceived risk (AORs from 0.58, CI 0.50-0.68, to 0.85, CI 0.72-0.99) and severity (AOR 1.05, CI 1.01-1.09, and AOR 1.07, CI 1.03-1.11) of COVID-19, perceived effectiveness of preventive measures by the individual (AORs from 1.05, CI 1.00-1.10, to 1.09, CI 1.04-1.13), organization (AOR 1.30, CI 1.20-1.41), and government (AORs from 1.14, CI 1.04-1.25, to 1.21, CI 1.02-1.42), perceived preparedness for a potential outbreak after work resumption (AORs from 1.10, CI 1.00-1.21, to 1.50, CI 1.36-1.64), and depressive symptoms (AORs from 0.93, CI 0.91-0.94, to 0.96, CI 0.92-0.99) were associated with self-reported compliance with at least one personal preventive measure. At the interpersonal level, exposure to COVID-19-specific information through official media channels (AOR 1.08, CI 1.04-1.11) and face-to-face communication (AOR 0.90, CI 0.83-0.98) were associated with self-reported sanitizing of hands. The number of preventive measures implemented in the workplace was positively associated with self-reported compliance with all four preventive measures (AORs from 1.30, CI 1.08-1.57, to 1.63, CI 1.45-1.84).ConclusionsMeasures are needed to strengthen hand hygiene and physical distancing among factory workers to reduce transmission following work resumption. Future programs in workplaces should address these factors at multiple levels.

Project description:BackgroundWhile household contact investigation is widely recommended as a means to reduce the burden of tuberculosis (TB) among children, only 27% of eligible pediatric household contacts globally received preventive treatment in 2018. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of household contact investigation for TB treatment and short-course preventive therapy provision for children under 15 years old across 12 high TB burden countries.MethodsWe used decision analysis to compare the costs and estimated effectiveness of three intervention scenarios: (a) status quo (existing levels of coverage with isoniazid preventive therapy), (b) contact investigation with treatment of active TB but no additional preventive therapy, and (c) contact investigation with TB treatment and provision of short-course preventive therapy. Using country-specific demographic, epidemiological and cost data from the literature, we estimated annual costs (in 2018 USD) and the number of TB cases and deaths averted across 12 countries. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios were assessed as cost per death and per disability-adjusted life year [DALY] averted.FindingsOur model estimates that contact investigation with treatment of active TB and provision of preventive therapy could be highly cost-effective compared to the status quo (ranging from $100 per DALY averted in Malawi to $1,600 in Brazil; weighted average $383 per DALY averted [uncertainty range: $248 - $1,130]) and preferred to contact investigation without preventive therapy (weighted average $751 per DALY averted [uncertainty range: $250 - $1,306]). Key drivers of cost-effectiveness were TB prevalence, sensitivity of TB diagnosis, case fatality for untreated TB, and cost of household screening.InterpretationBased on this modeling analysis of available published data, household contact investigation with provision of short-course preventive therapy for TB has a value-for-money profile that compares favorably with other interventions.FundingUnitaid (2017-20-IMPAACT4TB).

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine if increases in hospital discharge prices are associated with improvements in clinical quality or patient experience.Data sourcesThis study used Medicare cost report data and publicly available Medicare.gov Care Compare quality measures for approximately 3000 short-term care general hospitals between 2011 and 2018.Study designWe separately regressed quality measure scores on a lag of case mix adjusted discharge price, hospital fixed effects, and year indicators. Clinical quality measures included 30-day readmission rates for acute myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, hip and knee replacement, and pneumonia; risk-adjusted 30-day mortality rates for acute myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, and stroke; and 90-day complication rate for hip and knee replacement. Patient experience measures included the summary star rating and 10 domain measures reported through the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey. We tested for heterogeneous effects by hospital ownership, number of beds, the commercial share of overall discharges, and market concentration.Data collection/extraction methodsWe linked hospitals identified in Medicare cost reports to Medicare.gov Care Compare quality measures. We excluded hospitals for which we could not identify a discharge price or that had an unrealistic price.Principal findingsThere was no positive association between lagged discharge price and any clinical quality measure. For patient experience measures, a 2% increase in discharge price was not associated with overall patient satisfaction but was associated with small, statistically significant increases ranging from 0.01% to 0.02% (relative to mean scores) for seven of ten domain measures. There was a positive association for five of ten patient experience measures in competitive markets and one measure in both moderately concentrated and heavily concentrated markets.ConclusionsWe found no evidence that hospitals use higher prices to make investments in clinical quality; patient experience improved, but only negligibly.

Project description:IntroductionSo far, shreds of evidence have shown that COVID-19 related hospitalization, serious outcomes, and mortality were high among individuals with chronic medical conditions. However, strict compliance with basic public health measures such as hand washing with soap, social distancing, and wearing masks has been recommended and proven effective in preventing transmission of the infection. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the level of compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures and identify its predictors among patients with common chronic diseases in public hospitals of Southern Ethiopia by applying the proportional odds model.MethodsA facility-based cross-sectional study was employed in public hospitals of Southern Ethiopia between February and March 2021. Using a systematic random sampling technique, 419 patients with common chronic diseases were recruited. Data were collected using an Open Data Kit and then submitted to the online server. The proportional odds model was employed, and the level of significance was declared at a p-value of less than 0.05.ResultsThis study revealed that 55.2% (95%CI: 50.4%-59.9%) of the study participants had low compliance levels with COVID-19 preventive measures. The final proportional odds model identified that perceived susceptibility (AOR: 0.91, 95%CI: 0.84, 0.97), cues to action (AOR: 0.89, 95%CI: 0.85, 0.94), having access to drinking water piped into the dwelling (AOR: 0.52, 95%CI: 0.32, 0.84), having no access to any internet (AOR: 0.62, 95%CI: 0.42, 0.92), having no functional refrigerator (AOR: 2.17, 95%CI: 1.26, 3.74), and having poor knowledge (AOR: 1.42, 95%CI: 1.02, 1.98) were the independent predictors of low compliance level with COVID-19 preventive measures.ConclusionIn the study area, more than half of the participants had low compliance levels with COVID-19 preventive measures. Thus, the identified factors should be considered when designing, planning, and implementing new interventional strategies, so as to improve the participants' compliance level.

Dataset Information

A guilt-free strategy increases self-reported non-compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures: Experimental evidence from 12 countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets