Dataset Information

Public Preferences for Social Distancing Policy Measures to Mitigate the Spread of COVID-19 in Missouri.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Policies to promote social distancing can minimize COVID-19 transmission but come with substantial social and economic costs. Quantifying relative preferences among the public for such practices can inform locally relevant policy prioritization and optimize uptake.

Objective

To evaluate relative utilities (ie, preferences) for COVID-19 pandemic social distancing strategies against the hypothetical risk of acquiring COVID-19 and anticipated income loss.

Design, setting, and participants

This survey study recruited individuals living in the Missouri area from May to June 2020 via randomly distributed unincentivized social media advertisements and local recruitment platforms for members of minority racial and ethnic groups. Participants answered 6 questions that asked them to choose between 2 hypothetical counties where business closures, social distancing policy duration, COVID-19 infection risk, and income loss varied.

Main outcomes and measures

Reweighted population-level relative preferences (utilities) for social distancing policies, subgroups, and latent classes.

Results

The survey had a 3% response rate (3045 of 90 320). Of the 2428 respondents who completed the survey, 1669 (75%) were 35 years and older, 1536 (69%) were women, and 1973 (89%) were White. After reweighting to match Missouri population demographic characteristics, the strongest preference was for the prohibition of large gatherings (mean preference, -1.43; 95% CI, -1.67 to -1.18), with relative indifference to the closure of social and lifestyle venues (mean preference, 0.05; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.17). There were weak preferences to keep outdoor venues (mean preference, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.61) and schools (mean preference, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.30) open. Latent class analysis revealed 4 distinct preference phenotypes in the population: risk averse (48.9%), conflicted (22.5%), prosocial (14.9%), and back to normal (13.7%), with men twice as likely as women to belong to the back to normal group than the risk averse group (relative risk ratio, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.54 to 3.12).

Conclusions and relevance

In this survey study using a discrete choice experiment, public health policies that prohibited large gatherings, as well as those that closed social and lifestyle venues, appeared to be acceptable to the public. During policy implementation, these activities should be prioritized for first-phase closures. These findings suggest that policy messages that address preference heterogeneity (eg, focusing on specific preference subgroups or targeting men) could improve adherence to social distancing measures for COVID-19 and future pandemics.

SUBMITTER: Eshun-Wilson I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8267603 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInformation on the public's preferences for current public health and social measures (PHSMs) and people's mental health under PHSMs is insufficient.ObjectiveThis study aimed to quantify the public's preferences for varied PHSMs and measure the level of pandemic fatigue in the COVID-19 normalization stage in China.MethodsA nationwide cross-sectional study with a discrete choice experiment and psychometric scales was conducted to assess public preferences for and attitudes toward PHSMs, using the quota sampling method. The COVID-19 Pandemic Fatigue Scale (CPFS) was used to screen fatigue levels among respondents. The multinomial logit model, latent class model, and Mann-Whitney test were used for statistical analysis. We also conducted subgroup analysis based on sex, age, monthly income, mental health status, and pandemic fatigue status.ResultsA total of 689 respondents across China completed the survey. The discrete choice experiment revealed that respondents attached the greatest importance to the risk of COVID-19 infection within 3 months (45.53%), followed by loss of income within 3 months (30.69%). Vulnerable populations (low-income populations and elderly people) were more sensitive to the risk of infection, while younger respondents were more sensitive to income loss and preferred nonsuspension of social places and transportation. Migrants and those with pandemic fatigue had less acceptance of the mandatory booster vaccination and suspension of transportation. Additionally, a higher pandemic fatigue level was observed in female respondents, younger respondents, migrants, and relatively lower-income respondents (CPFS correlation with age: r=-0.274, P<.001; correlation with monthly income: r=-0.25, P<.001). Mandatory booster COVID-19 vaccination was also not preferred by respondents with a higher level of pandemic fatigue, while universal COVID-19 booster vaccination was preferred by respondents with a lower level of pandemic fatigue.ConclusionsPandemic fatigue is widely prevalent in respondents across China, and respondents desired the resumption of normal social life while being confronted with the fear of COVID-19 infection in the normalization stage of COVID-19 in China. During future pandemics, the mental burden and adherence of residents should be considered for the proper implementation of PHSMs.

Project description:ImportanceIn the absence of a national strategy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many public health decisions fell to local elected officials and agencies. Outcomes of such policies depend on a complex combination of local epidemic conditions and demographic features as well as the intensity and timing of such policies and are therefore unclear.ObjectiveTo use a decision analytical model of the COVID-19 epidemic to investigate potential outcomes if actual policies enacted in March 2020 (during the first wave of the epidemic) in the St Louis region of Missouri had been delayed.Design, setting, and participantsA previously developed, publicly available, open-source modeling platform (Local Epidemic Modeling for Management & Action, version 2.1) designed to enable localized COVID-19 epidemic projections was used. The compartmental epidemic model is programmed in R and Stan, uses bayesian inference, and accepts user-supplied demographic, epidemiologic, and policy inputs. Hospital census data for 1.3 million people from St Louis City and County from March 14, 2020, through July 15, 2020, were used to calibrate the model.ExposuresHypothetical delays in actual social distancing policies (which began on March 13, 2020) by 1, 2, or 4 weeks. Sensitivity analyses were conducted that explored plausible spontaneous behavior change in the absence of social distancing policies.Main outcomes and measuresHospitalizations and deaths.ResultsA model of 1.3 million residents of the greater St Louis, Missouri, area found an initial reproductive number (indicating transmissibility of an infectious agent) of 3.9 (95% credible interval [CrI], 3.1-4.5) in the St Louis region before March 15, 2020, which fell to 0.93 (95% CrI, 0.88-0.98) after social distancing policies were implemented between March 15 and March 21, 2020. By June 15, a 1-week delay in policies would have increased cumulative hospitalizations from an observed actual number of 2246 hospitalizations to 8005 hospitalizations (75% CrI: 3973-15 236 hospitalizations) and increased deaths from an observed actual number of 482 deaths to a projected 1304 deaths (75% CrI, 656-2428 deaths). By June 15, a 2-week delay would have yielded 3292 deaths (75% CrI, 2104-4905 deaths)-an additional 2810 deaths or a 583% increase beyond what was actually observed. Sensitivity analyses incorporating a range of spontaneous behavior changes did not avert severe epidemic projections.Conclusions and relevanceThe results of this decision analytical model study suggest that, in the St Louis region, timely social distancing policies were associated with improved population health outcomes, and small delays may likely have led to a COVID-19 epidemic similar to the most heavily affected areas in the US. These findings indicate that an open-source modeling platform designed to accept user-supplied local and regional data may provide projections tailored to, and more relevant for, local settings.

Project description:BackgroundSince March 2020, when coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic, many countries have applied unprecedented restrictive measures to contain the spread of the virus. This study aimed to explore the optimal social distancing policy for COVID-19 control in South Korea to safely reopen the society.MethodsWe developed an age-specific, deterministic compartment epidemic model to examine the COVID-19 control decision-making process, including the epidemiology of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between 1 July 2021 and 30 December 2022. The model consists of the natural history of COVID-19, testing performance, vaccinations, and social distancing enforcement measures to detect and control SARS-CoV-2. We modelled potential intervention scenarios with three distinct components: 1) social distancing duration and level; 2) testing intensity; and 3) vaccination uptake rate. The primary and secondary outcomes were COVID-19 incidence and prevalence of severe patients requiring intensive care unit (ICU) care.ResultsFour (or more) months of social distancing (that can reduce 40-60% transmission) may mitigate epidemic resurgence and ICU demand in the future and keep the cases below the capacity limit if the testing intensity and vaccination rate remain constant or increase by 20% (with respect to the current level). In contrast, two months of strict social distancing enforcement may also successfully mitigate future epidemic surge and ICU demand as long as testing intensity and vaccination rates are increased by 20%.ConclusionIn South Korea, given the relatively high vaccination coverage and low incidence, four or more months of social distancing enforcement can effectively mitigate epidemic resurgence after lifting the social distancing measures. In addition, increasing the testing intensity and vaccination rate may help reduce necessary social distancing levels and duration to prevent a future epidemic resurgence and mitigate social and economic damage.