Subjective Well-Being by Partnership Status and Its Dependence on the Normative Climate

This study first examines the relationship between partnership status and subjective well-being in 45 European countries by analyzing the European Values Study 2008. It was expected and empirically confirmed that married individuals have the highest level of well-being, followed by (in order) cohabiting, dating, single, and finally widowed and divorced individuals. In addition, this study examines to what extent the well-being gaps depend on the normative climate in which an individual lives. It is hypothesized that: (a) being in a non-married relationship (especially cohabitation and divorce) lowers well-being compared to being married in societies that reject non-traditional partnership statuses; and (b) not having a partner is especially detrimental for well-being levels in familialistic societies, which emphasize the importance of a strong, close-knit family. The normative climate appears to hardly affect well-being gaps between partnership statuses. Only the gap between divorced and married women is significantly wider in familialistic societies. It is concluded that the weak dependence of well-being on the normative climate may point at high autonomy in private, relationship-related decisions

The value of non-working time incorporated in quality of life comparisons: The case of the US vs. the Netherlands

Comparisons of well-being across societies depend both on the amount of inequality at the national level and also on the national average level of well-being. Comparisons between the U.S. and western Europe show that inequality is greater in the U.S. but that average GDP per capita is also greater in the U.S., and most Americans have higher standards of living than do western Europeans at comparable locations in their national income distributions. What is less wellknown is that (depending on the country) much or all of this gap arises from differences in the level of working hours in the U.S. and in western Europe. Cross-national comparisons of wellbeing have typically relied on the methodology of generalized Lorenz curves (GLC), but this approach privileges disposable income and cash transfers while ignoring other aspects of welfare state and labor market structure that potentially affect the distribution of well-being in a society. We take an alternative approach that focuses on the value of time use and the different distributions of work and family time that are generated by each country's labor market and social welfare institutions. In this empirical exercise involving the U.S. and the Netherlands, we show that reasonable estimates of the contribution to well-being from non-market activities such as the raising of children or longer vacations can overturn claims in the literature that the U.S. offers greater well-being to more of its citizens than do western European countries

Socioeconomic differences in informal caregiving in Europe

Disclosing socioeconomic differences in informal care provision is increasingly important in aging societies as it helps to identify the segments of the population that may need targeted support and the types of national investments to support family caregivers. This study examines the association between individual-level socioeconomic status and informal care provision within the household. We also examine the role of contextual factors, income inequality, and the generosity of social spending, to identify how macro-level socioeconomic resource structures shape individuals’ provision of care to household members. We use pooled data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE, waves 1, 2, 4, 5, 6) and the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA, waves 2, 3, 4, 6, 7). Poisson regression multilevel models estimate the associations between household socioeconomic status (education, income, and wealth), and country socioeconomic resources (income inequality and social spending as a percentage of GDP), and the likelihood of older adults’ informal care provision within the household. Results indicate that lower individual socioeconomic resources—education, income, and wealth—were associated with a higher incidence of older adults’ informal care provision within the household. At the macro-level, income inequality was positively associated while social spending was negatively associated with older adults’ care provision within the household. Our findings suggest that socioeconomically disadvantaged groups are more likely to provide informal care, which may reinforce socioeconomic inequalities. At the national level, more equitable resource distribution and social spending may reduce intensive family caregiving

Data Stewardship Addressing Disciplinary Data Management Needs

One of the biggest challenges for multidisciplinary research institutions which provide data management support to researchers is addressing disciplinary differences (Akers and Doty,2013). Centralised services need to be general enough to cater for all the different flavours of research conducted in an institution. At the same time, focusing on the common denominator means that subject-specific differences and needs may not be effectively addressed. In 2017, Delft University of Technology (TU Delft) embarked on an ambitious Data Stewardship project, aiming to comprehensively address data management needs across a multi-disciplinary campus. In this article we describe the principles behind the Data Stewardship project at TU Delft, the progress so far, identify the key challenges and explain our plans for the future

Positive and negative outcomes of informal caregiving at home and in institutionalised long-term care: A cross-sectional study

Background: Our ageing society is putting tremendous strain on public health and welfare programs to meet the needs of ageing individuals. Promoting informal caregiving is one way for policymakers to reduce this burden. However, caregiving may be experienced as stressful and is associated with adverse health consequences. While quite a lot of research focuses on caregiving for community-dwelling older adults, little is known about informal care in institutionalised long-term care (ILTC). Therefore, the objectives of this study were: 1) to compare characteristics of informal caregivers and care receivers and caregiver outcomes - at home and in ILTC; 2) to study the association between these characteristics and positive and negative caregiver outcomes; 3) to investigate the moderating effect of the setting (at home vs. ILTC) on these associations. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using the TOPICS-MDS DataSet. A total of 5197 Dutch dyads were included. The average age of the care receivers and caregivers was respectively 80.7 years and 63.2 years. Several sociodemographic, health-related and caregiving-related characteristics of care receiver and caregiver and two caregiver outcomes (i.e., subjective burden and care-related quality of life) were included in the analyses. Results: Caregivers in both settings experienced comparable levels of subjective burden. Caregivers at home had slightly lower care-related quality of life than caregivers in ILTC. Several care receiver characteristics (i.e., male sex, married/cohabiting, more morbidities/disability, and less self-perceived health/psychological wellbeing) and several caregiver characteristics (i.e., female sex, being younger, living together with the care receiver, more objective burden, less self-perceived health, and more support) were associated with an increase in burden and/or a decrease in care-related quality of life. Some of these associations were stronger for dyads at home compared to dyads in ILTC. Conclusions: Informal caregiving does not stop with admission to an ILTC facility. Both settings need an informal caregiving policy, which is (1) tailored to the individual characteristics of care receivers and caregivers; (2) pays attention to the identified risk groups; and (3) reduces the negative caregiver outcomes and emphasizes the positive outcomes at the same time

GDPR in research - what does it mean for research institutions?

Collection of materials from the event "GDPR in research - what does it mean for research institutions?" which was hosted by TU Delft Library on 30 August 2018. The collection includes the following materials: The programme of the event The welcome slide All presentations from the event All authors and event organisers are listed in alphabetical order. Any questions about these materials should be addressed to [email protected]

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among vaccinated nursing home residents and staff in Belgium in August 2021

The SCOPE study assesses the prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among a representative sample of residents and staff in Belgian NH (nursing homes). Starting from February 1st 2021, a cohort of 1,640 residents and 1.368 staff members in 69 Belgian NHs are being tested every two months on the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. This brief communication reports on the prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among vaccinated nursing home residents and staff. At the end of April 2021, the large scale vaccination campaign in Belgian nursing homes, which took place between January 5th and March 24th 2021, resulted in a vaccination coverage of 97% in NH residents and 84% in staff members. For these vaccinated groups, we describe the prevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies immediately following the vaccination campaign (April, 2021) and the seroprevalence evolution over the two following testing periods (in June and August 2021). Data collection of the August 2021 testing period was not finished at the time of compiling this brief communication. The August 2021 testing period comprises the data from 65 out of the 69 nursing homes. Additionally, some antibody test results are expected the coming weeks in case of self-sampling (for staff in particular). Results given here are preliminary. Small adaptations in some data might occur in future reports.SCOP

Vaccine hesitancy for the COVID-19 vaccine booster dose among nursing home staff fully vaccinated with the primary vaccination course in Belgium.

peer reviewedIn Belgium, nursing home (NH) staff (NHS) and residents were prioritised for the initial COVID-19 vaccination and successive booster doses. The vaccination campaign for the first booster started in September 2021 in Belgian NH. Our first study about vaccine hesitancy towards the COVID-19 vaccine in Belgian NHS already showed a degree of fear for the primary vaccination course (T1). This new study aims to evaluate vaccine hesitancy to get the first booster (T2) in a population of fully vaccinated (with two doses) NHS. A random stratified sample of NHS who received the primary vaccination course (N = 954) completed an online questionnaire on COVID-19 booster hesitancy (between 25/11/2021 and 22/01/2022). NHS who hesitated or refused the booster were asked for the main reason for their hesitation/refusal. Overall, 21.0 % of our population hesitated before, were still hesitating or refused the booster, NHS that were not hesitant at T1 being 5.7 times less likely to hesitate to get the first booster dose (Adjusted OR 0.179, 95 % CI: 0.120, 0.267). Although there was a slight reduction (23.5 % to 20.1 %) in the proportion of NHS who hesitated/refused vaccination at T1 compared to T2 (p = 0.034), the fear of unknown effects was the principal reason for hesitation/refusal, already mentioned in our first study. NHS were not reassured concerning their initial fears. Given the likelihood that booster vaccinations will be necessary over the coming years, a communication strategy specific to NHS should be implemented.CHARMIN

Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among Belgian nursing home residents and staff during the primary COVID-19 vaccination campaign.

peer reviewed[en] BACKGROUND: Nursing home residents (NHR) and staff have been disproportionally affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and were therefore prioritised in the COVID-19 vaccination strategy. However, frail older adults, like NHR, are known to have decreased antibody responses upon vaccination targeting other viral antigens. OBJECTIVES: As real-world data on vaccine responsiveness, we assessed the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among Belgian NHR and staff during the primary COVID-19 vaccination campaign. METHODS: In total, we tested 1629 NHR and 1356 staff across 69 Belgian NHs for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG antibodies using rapid tests. We collected socio-demographic and COVID-19-related medical data through questionnaires. Sampling occurred between 1 February and 24 March 2021, in a randomly sampled population that received none, one or two BNT162b2 vaccine doses. RESULTS: We found that during the primary vaccination campaign with 59% of the study population fully vaccinated, 74% had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Among fully vaccinated individuals only, fewer residents tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (77%) than staff (98%), suggesting an impaired vaccine-induced antibody response in the elderly, with lowest seroprevalences observed among infection naïve residents. COVID-19 vaccination status and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were predictors for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. Alternatively, age ≥ 80 years old, the presence of comorbidities and high care dependency predicted SARS-CoV-2 seronegativity in NHR. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the need for further monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 immunity upon vaccination in the elderly population, as their impaired humoral responses could imply insufficient protection against COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04738695)