Longitudinal changes in COVID-19 vaccination intent among South African adults: evidence from the NIDS-CRAM panel survey, February to May 2021

Background COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has threatened the ability of many countries worldwide to contain the pandemic. Given the severe impact of the pandemic in South Africa and disruptions to the roll-out of the vaccine in early 2021, slower-than-expected uptake is a pressing public health challenge in the country. We examined longitudinal changes in COVID-19 vaccination intent among South African adults, as well as determinants of intent to receive a vaccine. Methods We used longitudinal data from Wave 4 (February/March 2021) and Wave 5 (April/May 2021) of the National Income Dynamics Study: Coronavirus Rapid Mobile Survey (NIDS-CRAM), a national and broadly representative panel survey of adults in South Africa. We conducted cross-sectional analyses on aggregate and between-group variation in vaccination intent, examined individual-level changes between waves, and modeled demographic predictors of intent. Results We analysed data for 5629 (Wave 4; 48% male, mean age 41.5 years) and 5862 (Wave 5; 48% male, mean age 41.6 years) respondents. Willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine significantly increased from 70.8% (95% CI: 68.5–73.1) in Wave 4 to 76.1% (95% CI: 74.2–77.8) in Wave 5. Individual-level analyses indicated that only 6.6% of respondents remained strongly hesitant between survey waves. Although respondents aged 18–24 years were 8.5 percentage points more likely to report hesitancy, hesitant respondents in this group were 5.6 percentage points more likely to change their minds by Wave 5. Concerns about rushed testing and safety of the vaccines were frequent and strongly-held reasons for hesitancy. Conclusions Willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine has increased among adults in South Africa, and those who were entrenched in their reluctance make up a small proportion of the country’s population. Younger adults, those in formal housing, and those who trusted COVID-19 information on social media were more likely to be hesitant. Given that stated vaccination intent may not translate into behaviour, our finding that three-quarters of the population were willing to accept the vaccine may reflect an upper bound. Vaccination promotion campaigns should continue to frame vaccine acceptance as the norm and tailor strategies to different demographic groups

What were the information voids? A qualitative analysis of questions asked by Dear Pandemic readers between august 2020-august 2021

In the current infodemic, how individuals receive information (channel), who it is coming from (source), and how it is framed can have an important effect on COVID-19 related mitigation behaviors. In light of these challenges presented by the infodemic, Dear Pandemic (DP) was created to directly address persistent questions related to COVID-19 and other health topics in the online environment. This is a qualitative analysis of 3806 questions that were submitted by DP readers to a question box on the Dear Pandemic website between August 30, 2020 and August 29, 2021. Analyses resulted in four themes: the need for clarification of other sources; lack of trust in information; recognition of possible misinformation; and questions on personal decision-making. Each theme reflects an unmet informational need of Dear Pandemic readers, which may be reflective of the broader informational gaps in our science communication efforts.This study highlights the role of an ad hoc risk communication platform in the current environment and uses questions submitted to the Dear Pandemic question box to identify informational needs of DP readers over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings may help clarify how organizations addressing health misinformation in the digital space can contribute to timely, responsive science communication and improve future communication efforts

Is Participation Contagious? Evidence From a Household Vector Control Campaign in Urban Peru

Objective: High rates of household participation are critical to the success of door-to-door vector control campaigns. We used the Health Belief Model to assess determinants of participation, including neighbour participation as a cue to action, in a Chagas disease vector control campaign in Peru. Methods: We evaluated clustering of participation among neighbours; estimated participation as a function of household infestation status, neighbourhood type and number of participating neighbours; and described the reported reasons for refusal to participate in a district of 2911 households. Results: We observed significant clustering of participation along city blocks (p\u3c0.0001). Participation was significantly higher for households in new versus established neighbourhoods, for infested households, and for households with more participating neighbours. The effect of neighbour participation was greater in new neighbourhoods. Conclusions: Results support a ‘contagion’ model of participation, highlighting the possibility that one or two participating households can tip a block towards full participation. Future campaigns can leverage these findings by making participation more visible, by addressing stigma associated with spraying, and by employing group incentives to spray

What Were the Information Voids? A Qualitative Analysis of Questions Asked by Dear Pandemic Readers between August 2020-August 2021

In the current infodemic, how individuals receive information (channel), who it is coming from (source), and how it is framed can have an important effect on COVID-19 related mitigation behaviors. In light of these challenges presented by the infodemic, Dear Pandemic (DP) was created to directly address persistent questions related to COVID-19 and other health topics in the online environment. This is a qualitative analysis of 3806 questions that were submitted by DP readers to a question box on the Dear Pandemic website between August 30, 2020 and August 29, 2021. Analyses resulted in four themes: the need for clarification of other sources; lack of trust in information; recognition of possible misinformation; and questions on personal decision-making. Each theme reflects an unmet informational need of Dear Pandemic readers, which may be reflective of the broader informational gaps in our science communication efforts. This study highlights the role of an ad hoc risk communication platform in the current environment and uses questions submitted to the Dear Pandemic question box to identify informational needs of DP readers over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings may help clarify how organizations addressing health misinformation in the digital space can contribute to timely, responsive science communication and improve future communication efforts

Study protocol for a type III hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial of strategies to implement firearm safety promotion as a universal suicide prevention strategy in pediatric primary care

BACKGROUND: Insights from behavioral economics, or how individuals\u27 decisions and behaviors are shaped by finite cognitive resources (e.g., time, attention) and mental heuristics, have been underutilized in efforts to increase the use of evidence-based practices in implementation science. Using the example of firearm safety promotion in pediatric primary care, which addresses an evidence-to-practice gap in universal suicide prevention, we aim to determine: is a less costly and more scalable behavioral economic-informed implementation strategy (i.e., Nudge ) powerful enough to change clinician behavior or is a more intensive and expensive facilitation strategy needed to overcome implementation barriers? METHODS: The Adolescent and child Suicide Prevention in Routine clinical Encounters (ASPIRE) hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation trial uses a longitudinal cluster randomized design. We will test the comparative effectiveness of two implementation strategies to support clinicians\u27 use of an evidence-based firearm safety practice, S.A.F.E. Firearm, in 32 pediatric practices across two health systems. All pediatric practices in the two health systems will receive S.A.F.E. Firearm materials, including training and cable locks. Half of the practices (k = 16) will be randomized to receive Nudge; the other half (k = 16) will be randomized to receive Nudge plus 1 year of facilitation to target additional practice and clinician implementation barriers (Nudge+). The primary implementation outcome is parent-reported clinician fidelity to the S.A.F.E Firearm program. Secondary implementation outcomes include reach and cost. To understand how the implementation strategies work, the primary mechanism to be tested is practice adaptive reserve, a self-report practice-level measure that includes relationship infrastructure, facilitative leadership, sense-making, teamwork, work environment, and culture of learning. DISCUSSION: The ASPIRE trial will integrate implementation science and behavioral economic approaches to advance our understanding of methods for implementing evidence-based firearm safety promotion practices in pediatric primary care. The study answers a question at the heart of many practice change efforts: which strategies are sufficient to support change, and why? Results of the trial will offer valuable insights into how best to implement evidence-based practices that address sensitive health matters in pediatric primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04844021 . Registered 14 April 2021

Implementing nudges for suicide prevention in real-world environments: project INSPIRE study protocol

Background: Suicide is a global health issue. There are a number of evidence-based practices for suicide screening, assessment, and intervention that are not routinely deployed in usual care settings. The goal of this study is to develop and test implementation strategies to facilitate evidence-based suicide screening, assessment, and intervention in two settings where individuals at risk for suicide are especially likely to present: primary care and specialty mental health care. We will leverage methods from behavioral economics, which involves understanding the many factors that influence human decision making, to inform strategy development. Methods: We will identify key mechanisms that limit implementation of evidence-based suicide screening, assessment, and intervention practices in primary care and specialty mental health through contextual inquiry involving behavioral health and primary care clinicians. Second, we will use contextual inquiry results to systematically design a menu of behavioral economics-informed implementation strategies that cut across settings, in collaboration with an advisory board composed of key stakeholders (i.e., behavioral economists, clinicians, implementation scientists, and suicide prevention experts). Finally, we will conduct rapid-cycle trials to test and refine the menu of implementation strategies. Primary outcomes include clinician-reported feasibility and acceptability of the implementation strategies. Discussion: Findings will elucidate ways to address common and unique barriers to evidence-based suicide screening, assessment, and intervention practices in primary care and specialty mental health care. Results will yield refined, pragmatically tested strategies that can inform larger confirmatory trials to combat the growing public health crisis of suicide

Behavioral economic implementation strategies to improve serious illness communication between clinicians and high-risk patients with cancer: protocol for a cluster randomized pragmatic trial

Background Serious illness conversations (SICs) are an evidence-based approach to eliciting patients’ values, goals, and care preferences that improve patient outcomes. However, most patients with cancer die without a documented SIC. Clinician-directed implementation strategies informed by behavioral economics (“nudges”) that identify high-risk patients have shown promise in increasing SIC documentation among clinicians. It is unknown whether patient-directed nudges that normalize and prime patients towards SIC completion—either alone or in combination with clinician nudges that additionally compare performance relative to peers—may improve on this approach. Our objective is to test the effect of clinician- and patient-directed nudges as implementation strategies for increasing SIC completion among patients with cancer. Methods We will conduct a 2 × 2 factorial, cluster randomized pragmatic trial to test the effect of nudges to clinicians, patients, or both, compared to usual care, on SIC completion. Participants will include 166 medical and gynecologic oncology clinicians practicing at ten sites within a large academic health system and their approximately 5500 patients at high risk of predicted 6-month mortality based on a validated machine-learning prognostic algorithm. Data will be obtained via the electronic medical record, clinician survey, and semi-structured interviews with clinicians and patients. The primary outcome will be time to SIC documentation among high-risk patients. Secondary outcomes will include time to SIC documentation among all patients (assessing spillover effects), palliative care referral among high-risk patients, and aggressive end-of-life care utilization (composite of chemotherapy within 14 days before death, hospitalization within 30 days before death, or admission to hospice within 3 days before death) among high-risk decedents. We will assess moderators of the effect of implementation strategies and conduct semi-structured interviews with a subset of clinicians and patients to assess contextual factors that shape the effectiveness of nudges with an eye towards health equity. Discussion This will be the first pragmatic trial to evaluate clinician- and patient-directed nudges to promote SIC completion for patients with cancer. We expect the study to yield insights into the effectiveness of clinician and patient nudges as implementation strategies to improve SIC rates, and to uncover multilevel contextual factors that drive response to these strategies. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04867850 . Registered on April 30, 2021. Funding National Cancer Institute P50CA24469

Microfinance Programs and Contraceptive Use: Evidence from Indonesia

This study examines the relationship between microfinance programs and contraceptive use with data from the 1997 and 2000 waves of the Indonesia Family Life Survey. Community and individual fixed-effects models are used to control for nonrandom program placement and program participation selection bias. Given wide availability of contraceptive services at low costs in Indonesia, the hypothesized mechanism linking microfinance programs to contraceptive use is the desire to stop childbearing. I conclude that microfinance program availability is associated with increased contraceptive use, with a stronger effect at lower levels of community resources. The effect is also conditioned on desire for no more children. At the individual level, microfinance borrowing is not associated with increased contraceptive use at any level of household resources. Among women who report wanting no more children, microfinance borrowing is associated with lower odds of ever-use of contraception

Flood Exposure and Child Health in Bangladesh

In the summer of 1998, Bangladesh was inundated by significant flooding that covered two-thirds of the country and affected more than 30 million people. Although annual flooding is normal and expected in Bangladesh, the 1998 floods caused extraordinary devastation and were considered a “century” flood. Homestead flooding, crop loss, and infrastructure damage compromised household food security and increased disease prevalence in a population with already high rates of poverty and malnutrition.Unfortunately, this type of scenario has become increasingly common around the world: a significant crisis—whether environmental, economic, or political—devastates a large population of densely-settled households who are already trapped in chronic poverty. How do households anticipate and respond to such crises in the context of ongoing livelihood struggles? Do shocks affect investments in human capital? More specifically, what happens to children in the wake of such shocks? In this paper I use longitudinal data from the post-flood period in rural Bangladesh to examine how children’s human capital, as measured by nutritional status, responds to severe flooding and its aftermath. I emphasize the importance of analyzing these responses in a dynamic context, linking exposure to shocks and nutritional outcomes to longer-term measures of household vulnerability and resilience.I pose two related research questions. First, did flood exposure in 1998 cause marginal growth faltering in children? To isolate the effects of the flood and address the endogeneity of flood exposure, I use a difference-in-difference estimator and village fixed effects. I also exploit the fact that younger children are more vulnerable than older children to nutrition shocks. I next ask whether the effects of flooding on child growth faltering were mediated by household resources, hypothesizing that households with lower levels of pre-flood resources are less able to protect children from nutrition shocks.These analysis help to answer several important policy questions related to crisis and recovery in vulnerable populations. The results reveal the extent to which children were nutritionally compromised by the flood, and which children fared worst. The analyses also contribute specifically to the design and implementation of livelihood interventions, and relief and recovery efforts. Can households use physical, financial and human capital to protect children’s nutritional status from significant shocks to income and food security? If so, is it more effective to focus on long-term asset-building strategies in vulnerable populations, or to facilitate asset recovery post-shock through access to credit and other forms of relief? Given the increasing exposure to shocks and the quantity of resources allocated post-disaster to relief and recovery, these questions are not trivial