The distinct associations of ingroup attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic: evidence from a multilevel investigation in 21 countries

While public health crises such as the coronavirus pandemic transcend national borders, practical efforts to combat them are often instantiated at the national level. Thus, national group identities may play key roles in shaping compliance with and support for preventative measures (e.g., hygiene and lockdowns). Using data from 25,159 participants across representative samples from 21 nations, we investigated how different modalities of ingroup identification (attachment and glorification) are linked with reactions to the coronavirus pandemic (compliance and support for lockdown restrictions). We also examined the extent to which the associations of attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic are mediated through trust in information about the coronavirus pandemic from scientific and government sources. Multilevel models suggested that attachment, but not glorification, was associated with increased trust in science and compliance with federal COVID-19 guidelines. However, while both attachment and glorification were associated with trust in government and support for lockdown restrictions, glorification was more strongly associated with trust in government information than attachment. These results suggest that both attachment and glorification can be useful for promoting public health, although glorification's role, while potentially stronger, is restricted to pathways through trust in government information

Real-World Effectiveness of Reslizumab in Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma - "First Initiators" and "Switchers"

BACKGROUND: Reslizumab, a biologic targeting interleukin-5 has been shown to reduce asthma exacerbations and maintenance oral corticosteroid (OCS) use in randomized controlled trials and pre-post studies in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. However, real-world effectiveness data of reslizumab are scarce, and it is unknown whether reslizumab has added value after switching from another type-2 biologic. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate (1) real-world effectiveness of reslizumab on severe asthma exacerbations, maintenance OCS-use and overall treatment response, both in biologic naïve patients who initiated reslizumab, and in patients who switched from another type-2 biologic. (2) physicians experience with reslizumab treatment. METHODS: This observational real-world study evaluated data from 134 adults with severe eosinophilic asthma included in the Dutch severe asthma registry (RAPSODI) who initiated reslizumab treatment (4-weekly infusions, 0.3 mg/kg) before April 2020 and had follow-up data ≥6 months. Clinical asthma experts completed surveys on their experience with reslizumab treatment. RESULTS: Overall, reslizumab reduced exacerbation rate (OR(95%CI): 0.10(0.05-0.21), p<0.001), oral corticosteroid use (OR(95%CI) 0.2(0.0-0.5), p<0.001) and maintenance dose, median(CI): 5.0(0.0-10.0) to 0.0(0.0-5.0), p<0.001), with comparable results in biologic-naïve reslizumab initiators and switchers. The overall response to reslizumab was graded 'good' or 'excellent' in 59.2% of patients. The additive effectiveness of reslizumab after switching from another biologic was reflected in physicians' surveys. CONCLUSION: Real-world data show that reslizumab reduces severe asthma exacerbations and oral corticosteroid use in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, both in biologic-naïve reslizumab initiators and in those who switched from another type-2 biologic. This additional value of reslizumab was recognized by clinical asthma experts

Real-World Effectiveness of Reslizumab in Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma - "First Initiators" and "Switchers"

BACKGROUND: Reslizumab, a biologic targeting interleukin-5 has been shown to reduce asthma exacerbations and maintenance oral corticosteroid (OCS) use in randomized controlled trials and pre-post studies in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. However, real-world effectiveness data of reslizumab are scarce, and it is unknown whether reslizumab has added value after switching from another type-2 biologic. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate (1) real-world effectiveness of reslizumab on severe asthma exacerbations, maintenance OCS-use and overall treatment response, both in biologic naïve patients who initiated reslizumab, and in patients who switched from another type-2 biologic. (2) physicians experience with reslizumab treatment. METHODS: This observational real-world study evaluated data from 134 adults with severe eosinophilic asthma included in the Dutch severe asthma registry (RAPSODI) who initiated reslizumab treatment (4-weekly infusions, 0.3 mg/kg) before April 2020 and had follow-up data ≥6 months. Clinical asthma experts completed surveys on their experience with reslizumab treatment. RESULTS: Overall, reslizumab reduced exacerbation rate (OR(95%CI): 0.10(0.05-0.21), p<0.001), oral corticosteroid use (OR(95%CI) 0.2(0.0-0.5), p<0.001) and maintenance dose, median(CI): 5.0(0.0-10.0) to 0.0(0.0-5.0), p<0.001), with comparable results in biologic-naïve reslizumab initiators and switchers. The overall response to reslizumab was graded 'good' or 'excellent' in 59.2% of patients. The additive effectiveness of reslizumab after switching from another biologic was reflected in physicians' surveys. CONCLUSION: Real-world data show that reslizumab reduces severe asthma exacerbations and oral corticosteroid use in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, both in biologic-naïve reslizumab initiators and in those who switched from another type-2 biologic. This additional value of reslizumab was recognized by clinical asthma experts

Trust in scientifc information mediates associations between conservatism and coronavirus responses in the U.S., but few other nations

U.S.-based research suggests conservatism is linked with less concern about contracting coronavirus and less preventative behaviors to avoid infection. Here, we investigate whether these tendencies are partly attributable to distrust in scientific information, and evaluate whether they generalize outside the U.S., using public data and recruited representative samples across three studies (Ntotal = 34,710). In Studies 1 and 2, we examine these relationships in the U.S., yielding converging evidence for a sequential indirect effect of conservatism on compliance through scientific (dis)trust and infection concern. In Study 3, we compare these relationships across 19 distinct countries. Although the relationships between trust in scientific information about the coronavirus, concern about coronavirus infection, and compliance are consistent cross-nationally, the relationships between conservatism and trust in scientific information are not. These relationships are strongest in North America. Consequently, the indirect effects observed in Studies 1–2 only replicate in North America (the U.S. and Canada) and in Indonesia. Study 3 also found parallel direct and indirect effects on support for lockdown restrictions. These associations suggest not only that relationships between conservatism and compliance are not universal, but localized to particular countries where conservatism is more strongly related to trust in scientific information about the coronavirus pandemic