Dynamics of nutrition and vulnerability: ethnographic insights from Cusco, Peru

Theoretical thesis.Bibliography: pages 79-86.Introduction -- Theoretical approach -- Methodology -- Chapter 1. La vida es mejor ahora : Transformations and ongoing challenges -- Chapter 2. Tengo prisa. No puedo comer ahora : Modernisation and lifestyle -- Chapter 3. Yo sólo confío en mis propios productos : Natural food and the fear of disease -- Chapter 4. Carne es malo para su cuerpo : Nutritional messages and ethnomedical understandings -- Conclusion.Over the past two decades Peru has undergone rapid economic and social transformations producing significant declines in rates of chronic malnutrition. Although malnutrition continues to persist in some Andean regions, communities have nonetheless experienced a decline in overall hunger and are consuming a wider variety of foodstuffs. Despite this, anthropological attention to nutritional issues has lessened since the mid-1990s. Based on ethnographic research conducted in the Andean Department of Cusco, this thesis demonstrates that peasant communities and their diet are in a state of transition. Local perceptions indicate that the increased access to and consumption of a wider variety of foods is a result of the growing modernisation of communities. However, this transition is incomplete. Communities remain situated between the demands of a peasant lifestyle and the encroaching changes associated with modernisation. Peasants describe how these demands place different pressures on food selection and indicate how food allocation and consumption practices stand at the forefront of this disjuncture between the past and the present. This thesis offers a holistic understanding of the Andean diet and, in particular, the forces shaping malnutrition in school aged children. From an applied perspective, research findings will assist in developing culturally congruent and locally specific nutritional interventions for families in the region.Mode of access: World wide web1 online resource (89 pages) black & white illustration

Media Discourse Regarding COVID-19 Vaccinations for Children Aged 5 to 11 Years in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States: Comparative Analysis Using the Narrative Policy Framework

BackgroundMedia narratives can shape public opinion and actions, influencing the uptake of pediatric COVID-19 vaccines. The COVID-19 pandemic has occurred at a time where infodemics, misinformation, and disinformation are present, impacting the COVID-19 response. ObjectiveThis study aims to investigate how narratives about pediatric COVID-19 vaccines in the media of 4 English-speaking countries: the United States, Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom. MethodsThe Narrative Policy Framework was used to guide the comparative analyses of the major print and web-based news agencies’ media regarding COVID-19 vaccines for children aged 5 to 11 years. Data were sought using systematic searching on Factiva (Dow Jones) of 4 key phases of pediatric vaccine approval and rollout. ResultsA total of 400 articles (n=287, 71.8% in the United States, n=40, 10% in Australia, n=60, 15% in Canada, and n=13, 3% in the United Kingdom) met the search criteria and were included. Using the Narrative Policy Framework, the following were identified in each article: hero, villain, survivor, and plot. The United States was the earliest country to vaccinate children, and other countries’ media often lauded the United States for this. Australian and Canadian media narratives about vaccines for children aged 5 to 11 years were commonly about protecting susceptible people in society, whereas the US and the UK narratives focused more on the vaccine helping children return to school. All 4 countries focused on the vaccines for children aged 5 to 11 years as being key to “ending” the pandemic. Australian and Canadian narratives frequently compared vaccine rollouts across states or provinces and bemoaned local progress in vaccine delivery compared with other countries globally. Canadian and US narratives highlighted the “infodemic” about the COVID-19 pandemic and disinformation regarding child vaccines as impeding uptake. All 4 countries—the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada—used war imagery in reporting about COVID-19 vaccines for children. The advent of the Omicron variant demonstrated that populations were fatigued by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the media reporting increasingly blamed the unvaccinated. The UK media narrative was unique in describing vaccinating children as a distraction from adult COVID-19 vaccination efforts. The United States and Canada had narratives expressing anger about potential vaccine passports for children. In Australia, general practitioners were labelled as heroes. Finally, the Canadian narrative suggested altruistic forgoing of COVID-19 vaccine “boosters” as well as pediatric COVID-19 vaccines to benefit those in poorer nations. ConclusionsPublic health emergencies require clear; compelling and accurate communication. The stories told during this pandemic are compelling because they contain the classic elements of a narrative; however, they can be reductive and inaccurate

Intent to Be Vaccinated against COVID-19 in Victoria, Australia

Background: High vaccine uptake requires strong public support, acceptance, and willingness. Methods: A longitudinal cohort study gathered survey data every four weeks between 1 October 2020 and 9 November 2021 in Victoria, Australia. Data were analysed for 686 participants aged 18 years and older. Results: Vaccine intention in our cohort increased from 60% in October 2020 to 99% in November 2021. Vaccine intention increased in all demographics, but longitudinal trends in vaccine intention differed by age, employment as a healthcare worker, presence of children in the household, and highest qualification attained. Acceptance of vaccine mandates increased from 50% in October 2020 to 71% in November 2021. Acceptance of vaccine mandates increased in all age groups except 18–25 years; acceptance also varied by gender and highest qualification attained. The main reasons for not intending to be vaccinated included safety concerns, including blood clots, and vaccine efficacy. Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccination campaigns should be informed by understanding of the sociodemographic drivers of vaccine acceptance to enable socially and culturally relevant guidance and ensure equitable vaccine coverage. Vaccination policies should be applied judiciously to avoid polarisation

Priority populations' experiences of isolation, quarantine and distancing for COVID-19 : protocol for a longitudinal cohort study (Optimise Study)

Introduction: Longitudinal studies can provide timely and accurate information to evaluate and inform COVID-19 control and mitigation strategies and future pandemic preparedness. The Optimise Study is a multidisciplinary research platform established in the Australian state of Victoria in September 2020 to collect epidemiological, social, psychological and behavioural data from priority populations. It aims to understand changing public attitudes, behaviours and experiences of COVID-19 and inform epidemic modelling and support responsive government policy. Methods and analysis: This protocol paper describes the data collection procedures for the Optimise Study, an ongoing longitudinal cohort of ~1000 Victorian adults and their social networks. Participants are recruited using snowball sampling with a set of seeds and two waves of snowball recruitment. Seeds are purposively selected from priority groups, including recent COVID-19 cases and close contacts and people at heightened risk of infection and/or adverse outcomes of COVID-19 infection and/or public health measures. Participants complete a schedule of monthly quantitative surveys and daily diaries for up to 24 months, plus additional surveys annually for up to 48 months. Cohort participants are recruited for qualitative interviews at key time points to enable in-depth exploration of people's lived experiences. Separately, community representatives are invited to participate in community engagement groups, which review and interpret research findings to inform policy and practice recommendations. Ethics and dissemination: The Optimise longitudinal cohort and qualitative interviews are approved by the Alfred Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (# 333/20). The Optimise Study CEG is approved by the La Trobe University Human Ethics Committee (# HEC20532). All participants provide informed verbal consent to enter the cohort, with additional consent provided prior to any of the sub studies. Study findings will be disseminated through public website (https://optimisecovid.com.au/study-findings/) and through peer-reviewed publications.Trial registration number NCT05323799

Communication to promote and support physical distancing for COVID-19 prevention and control

Background This review is an update of a rapid review undertaken in 2020 to identify relevant, feasible and effective communication approaches to promote acceptance, uptake and adherence to physical distancing measures for COVID‐19 prevention and control. The rapid review was published when little was known about transmission, treatment or future vaccination, and when physical distancing measures (isolation, quarantine, contact tracing, crowd avoidance, work and school measures) were the cornerstone of public health responses globally. This updated review includes more recent evidence to extend what we know about effective pandemic public health communication. This includes considerations of changes needed over time to maintain responsiveness to pandemic transmission waves, the (in)equities and variable needs of groups within communities due to the pandemic, and highlights again the critical role of effective communication as integral to the public health response. Objectives To update the evidence on the question 'What are relevant, feasible and effective communication approaches to promote acceptance, uptake and adherence to physical distancing measures for COVID‐19 prevention and control?', our primary focus was communication approaches to promote and support acceptance, uptake and adherence to physical distancing. Secondary objective: to explore and identify key elements of effective communication for physical distancing measures for different (diverse) populations and groups. Search methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases from inception, with searches for this update including the period 1 January 2020 to 18 August 2021. Systematic review and study repositories and grey literature sources were searched in August 2021 and guidelines identified for the eCOVID19 Recommendations Map were screened (November 2021). Selection criteria Guidelines or reviews focusing on communication (information, education, reminders, facilitating decision‐making, skills acquisition, supporting behaviour change, support, involvement in decision‐making) related to physical distancing measures for prevention and/or control of COVID‐19 or selected other diseases (sudden acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), influenza, Ebola virus disease (EVD) or tuberculosis (TB)) were included. New evidence was added to guidelines, reviews and primary studies included in the 2020 review. Data collection and analysis Methods were based on the original rapid review, using methods developed by McMaster University and informed by Cochrane rapid review guidance. Screening, data extraction, quality assessment and synthesis were conducted by one author and checked by a second author. Synthesis of results was conducted using modified framework analysis, with themes from the original review used as an initial framework. Main results This review update includes 68 studies, with 17 guidelines and 20 reviews added to the original 31 studies. Synthesis identified six major themes, which can be used to inform policy and decision‐making related to planning and implementing communication about a public health emergency and measures to protect the community. Theme 1: Strengthening public trust and countering misinformation: essential foundations for effective public health communication Recognising the key role of public trust is essential. Working to build and maintain trust over time underpins the success of public health communications and, therefore, the effectiveness of public health prevention measures. Theme 2: Two‐way communication: involving communities to improve the dissemination, accessibility and acceptability of information Two‐way communication (engagement) with the public is needed over the course of a public health emergency: at first, recognition of a health threat (despite uncertainties), and regularly as public health measures are introduced or adjusted. Engagement needs to be embedded at all stages of the response and inform tailoring of communications and implementation of public health measures over time. Theme 3: Development of and preparation for public communication: target audience, equity and tailoring Communication and information must be tailored to reach all groups within populations, and explicitly consider existing inequities and the needs of disadvantaged groups, including those who are underserved, vulnerable, from diverse cultural or language groups, or who have lower educational attainment. Awareness that implementing public health measures may magnify existing or emerging inequities is also needed in response planning, enactment and adjustment over time. Theme 4: Public communication features: content, timing and duration, delivery Public communication needs to be based on clear, consistent, actionable and timely (up‐to‐date) information about preventive measures, including the benefits (whether for individual, social groupings or wider society), harms (likewise) and rationale for use, and include information about supports available to help follow recommended measures. Communication needs to occur through multiple channels and/or formats to build public trust and reach more of the community. Theme 5: Supporting behaviour change at individual and population levels Supporting implementation of public health measures with practical supports and services (e.g. essential supplies, financial support) is critical. Information about available supports must be widely disseminated and well understood. Supports and communication related to them require flexibility and tailoring to explicitly consider community needs, including those of vulnerable groups. Proactively monitoring and countering stigma related to preventive measures (e.g. quarantine) is also necessary to support adherence. Theme 6: Fostering and sustaining receptiveness and responsiveness to public health communication Efforts to foster and sustain public receptiveness and responsiveness to public health communication are needed throughout a public health emergency. Trust, acceptance and behaviours change over time, and communication needs to be adaptive and responsive to these changing needs. Ongoing community engagement efforts should inform communication and public health response measures. Authors' conclusions Implications for practice Evidence highlights the critical role of communication throughout a public health emergency. Like any intervention, communication can be done well or poorly, but the consequences of poor communication during a pandemic may mean the difference between life and death. The approaches to effective communication identified in this review can be used by policymakers and decision‐makers, working closely with communication teams, to plan, implement and adjust public communications over the course of a public health emergency like the COVID‐19 pandemic. Implications for research Despite massive growth in research during the COVID‐19 period, gaps in the evidence persist and require high‐quality, meaningful research. This includes investigating the experiences of people at heightened COVID‐19 risk, and identifying barriers to implementing public communication and protective health measures particular to lower‐ and middle‐income countries, and how to overcome these

Priority populations’ experiences of isolation, quarantine and distancing for COVID-19: protocol for a longitudinal cohort study (Optimise Study)

Introduction Longitudinal studies can provide timely and accurate information to evaluate and inform COVID-19 control and mitigation strategies and future pandemic preparedness. The Optimise Study is a multidisciplinary research platform established in the Australian state of Victoria in September 2020 to collect epidemiological, social, psychological and behavioural data from priority populations. It aims to understand changing public attitudes, behaviours and experiences of COVID-19 and inform epidemic modelling and support responsive government policy.Methods and analysis This protocol paper describes the data collection procedures for the Optimise Study, an ongoing longitudinal cohort of ~1000 Victorian adults and their social networks. Participants are recruited using snowball sampling with a set of seeds and two waves of snowball recruitment. Seeds are purposively selected from priority groups, including recent COVID-19 cases and close contacts and people at heightened risk of infection and/or adverse outcomes of COVID-19 infection and/or public health measures. Participants complete a schedule of monthly quantitative surveys and daily diaries for up to 24 months, plus additional surveys annually for up to 48 months. Cohort participants are recruited for qualitative interviews at key time points to enable in-depth exploration of people’s lived experiences. Separately, community representatives are invited to participate in community engagement groups, which review and interpret research findings to inform policy and practice recommendations.Ethics and dissemination The Optimise longitudinal cohort and qualitative interviews are approved by the Alfred Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (# 333/20). The Optimise Study CEG is approved by the La Trobe University Human Ethics Committee (# HEC20532). All participants provide informed verbal consent to enter the cohort, with additional consent provided prior to any of the sub studies. Study findings will be disseminated through public website (https://optimisecovid.com.au/study-findings/) and through peer-reviewed publications.Trial registration number NCT05323799