Social, ethical and behavioural aspects of COVID-19.

Introduction: Vaccines and drugs for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 require robust evidence generated from clinical trials before they can be used. Decisions on how to apply non-pharmaceutical interventions such as quarantine, self-isolation, social distancing and travel restrictions should also be based on evidence. There are some experiential and mathematical modelling data for these interventions, but there is a lack of data on the social, ethical and behavioural aspects of these interventions in the literature. Therefore, our study aims to produce evidence to inform (non-pharmaceutical) interventions such as communications, quarantine, self-isolation, social distancing, travel restrictions and other public health measures for the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The study will be conducted in the United Kingdom, Italy, Malaysia, Slovenia and Thailand. We propose to conduct 600-1000 quantitative surveys and 25-35 qualitative interviews per country. Data collection will follow the following four themes: (1) Quarantine and self-isolation (2) social distancing and travel restrictions (3) wellbeing and mental health (4) information, misinformation and rumours. In light of limitations of travel and holding in-person meetings, we will primarily use online/remote methods for collecting data. Study participants will be adults who have provided informed consent from different demographic, socio-economic and risk groups. Discussion: At the time of the inception of the study, United Kingdom, Italy, Malaysia, Slovenia and Thailand have initiated strict public health measures and varying degrees of "lockdowns" to curb the pandemic. These public health measures will change in the coming weeks and months depending on the number of cases of COVID-19 in the respective countries. The data generated from our study could inform these strategies in real time

Economic and social impacts of COVID-19 and public health measures: results from an anonymous online survey in Thailand, Malaysia, the UK, Italy and Slovenia.

OBJECTIVES: To understand the impact of COVID-19 and public health measures on different social groups, we conducted a mixed-methods study in five countries ('SEBCOV-social, ethical and behavioural aspects of COVID-19'). Here, we report the results of the online survey. STUDY DESIGN AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall, 5058 respondents from Thailand, Malaysia, the UK, Italy and Slovenia completed the self-administered survey between May and June 2020. Poststratification weighting was applied, and associations between categorical variables assessed. Frequency counts and percentages were used to summarise categorical data. Associations between categorical variables were assessed using Pearson's χ2 test. Data were analysed in Stata 15.0 RESULTS: Among the five countries, Thai respondents reported having been most, and Slovenian respondents least, affected economically. The following factors were associated with greater negative economic impacts: being 18-24 years or 65 years or older; lower education levels; larger households; having children under 18 in the household and and having flexible/no income. Regarding social impact, respondents expressed most concern about their social life, physical health, mental health and well-being.There were large differences between countries in terms of voluntary behavioural change, and in compliance and agreement with COVID-19 restrictions. Overall, self-reported compliance was higher among respondents who self-reported a high understanding of COVID-19. UK respondents felt able to cope the longest and Thai respondents the shortest with only going out for essential needs or work. Many respondents reported seeing news perceived to be fake, the proportion varying between countries, with education level and self-reported levels of understanding of COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed that COVID-19 and public health measures have uneven economic and social impacts on people from different countries and social groups. Understanding the factors associated with these impacts can help to inform future public health interventions and mitigate their negative consequences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: TCTR20200401002

Melioidosis Vaccines (MeVa): Attitudes to vaccines, melioidosis and clinical trials in key stakeholders in Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]

Background: Melioidosis is a bacterial infection which kills an estimated 89,000 people per year in tropical and sub-tropical regions, chiefly affecting the poorest. Diabetes is the primary risk factor, conferring a 12-fold increase in risk. Despite limited funding compared to other neglected tropical diseases, melioidosis vaccine development has generated several candidates for clinical development. The most promising is CPS-CRM197/Hcp1, which will be the first to enter a phase I clinical trial, taking place in Oxford in 2023/24. As we move closer to the possibility of an effective melioidosis vaccine, it is critical to work in parallel to understand perceptions toward a vaccine among those living where melioidosis rates are high. Reasons for vaccine acceptance versus hesitancy are complex, and include perceived risk of the target disease, concern about side effects, and above all trust in government, scientists, the pharmaceutical industry and other authorities. Methods: We will carry out a qualitative study in Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand, an endemic region for melioidosis, as groundwork for a potential future melioidosis vaccine efficacy study, and in the longer-term vaccine introduction. This study seeks to explore knowledge and attitudes in three main areas; 1) melioidosis disease, 2) vaccines, and 3) participation in clinical vaccine trials. In-depth interviews and focus group discussions will take place in five participant groups of different risks and exposure to melioidosis. Purposive, convenience sampling will be used, also snowball sampling to reach some participant groups. Sample size will be based on participant’s experience, to inform the line of enquiries of study, or until data saturation, expecting 66–90 participants across all groups. Discussion: The findings of this study will be written up and published in an open access journal, and will be valuable to inform future design of clinical trials as well as engagement and communications associated with future vaccine rollout

Fever and health-seeking behaviour among migrants living along the Thai-Myanmar border: a mixed-methods study

Abstract Background Fever is a common reason to seek healthcare in Southeast Asia, and the decline of malaria has complexified how is perceived, and what actions are taken towards it. We investigated the concept of fever and the determinants influencing health-seeking behaviours among migrants on the Thai-Myanmar border, where rapid economic development collides with precarious political and socio-economic conditions. Methods We implemented a mixed-methods study between August to December 2019. Phase I used a qualitative approach, with in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. Phase II used a quantitative approach with a close-ended questionnaire based on Phase I findings. A conditional inference tree (CIT) model first identified geographic and socio-demographic determinants, which were then tested using a logistic regression model. Results Fever corresponded to a high diversity of conceptions, symptoms and believed causes. Self-medication was the commonest behaviour at fever onset. If fever persisted, migrants primarily sought care in humanitarian cost-free clinics (45.5%, 92/202), followed by private clinics (43.1%, 87/202), health posts (36.1%, 73/202), public hospitals (33.7%, 68/202) and primary care units (30, 14.9%). The qualitative analysis identified distance and legal status as key barriers for accessing health care. The quantitative analysis further investigated determinants influencing health-seeking behaviour: living near a town where a cost-free clinic operated was inversely associated with seeking care at health posts (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.40, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] [0.19–0.86]), and public hospital attendance (aOR 0.31, 95% CI [0.14–0.67]). Living further away from the nearest town was associated with health posts attendance (aOR 1.05, 95% CI [1.00–1.10] per 1 km). Having legal status was inversely associated with cost-free clinics attendance (aOR 0.27, 95% CI [0.10–0.71]), and positively associated with private clinic and public hospital attendance (aOR 2.56, 95% CI [1.00–6.54] and 5.15, 95% CI [1.80–14.71], respectively). Conclusions Fever conception and believed causes are context-specific and should be investigated prior to any intervention. Distance to care and legal status were key determinants influencing health-seeking behaviour. Current economic upheavals are accelerating the unregulated flow of undocumented migrants from Myanmar to Thailand, warranting further inclusiveness and investments in the public health system

Topic guide for qualitative study: Social, ethical and behavioural aspects of COVID-19

This is the topic guide for the protocol entitled "Social, ethical and behavioural aspects of COVID-19 (SEBCOV)" which will be conducted in the UK, Italy, Malaysia and Thailand

Online survey questions: Social, ethical and behavioural aspects of COVID-19

These are the online surveys for the protocol entitled: Social, ethical and behavioural aspects of COVID-19 (SEBCOV