Table 1 Distribution of respondents by their background characteristics (n=120) Variables Frequency Percentage

Highlights Panic buying is an emerging phenomenon observed during COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to evaluate the nature, extent, and impact of panic buying as reported in the media. A high proportion of reports have been found from the developed countries. There is a need for further studies to explore the issue as well as to prevent the episodes.

Background: Panic buying is an erratic human behavior that has been reported irregularly and episodically. There is a dearth of studies exploring the identifiable factors accounting for it. We aimed to identify the factors responsible for panic buying extracted from online media reports. Methods: We scrutinized the media reports published in English discussing the different aspects of panic buying. We collected data until May 30, 2020, and searched the possible mentioned reasons responsible for panic buying. Results: We analyzed a total of 784 media reports. The majority of the reports were found in Bing (18%), Ecosia (12.6%), Google (26.4%), and Yahoo (12.5%). Panic buying was reported in 93 countries. Among the 784 responses, a total of 171 reports did not explain the responsible factors of panic buying. Therefore, we analyzed the remaining 613 reports to identify the same. A sense of scarcity was reportedly found as the important factor in about 75% of the reports followed by increased demand (66.07%), the importance of the product (45.02%), anticipation of price hike (23.33%), and due to COVID-19 and its related factors (13.21%). Other reported factors were a rumor, psychological factors (safety-seeking behavior, uncertainty, anxiety reduction, and taking control), social learning, lack of trust, government action, and past experience. Conclusions: The study revealed the responsible factors of panic buying extracted from media reports. Further, studies involving the individuals indulging in panic buying behavior are warranted to replicate the findings.

We examined the intention and predictors of accepting the COVID-19 vaccine in Saudi Arabia. We conducted a nation-wide, cross-sectional online survey between February and March 2021. A total of 1387 people (≥18 years) participated. Only 27.3% adults had a definite and 30.2% had a probable vaccination intent; 26.8% and 15.6% had a probable and definite negative vaccination intent. Older people (≥50 years) (p < 0.01), healthcare workers/professionals (p < 0.001), and those who received flu vaccine (p < 0.001) were more likely to have a positive intent. People from Riyadh were less likely to receive the vaccine (p < 0.05). Among the health belief model constructs, perceived susceptibility to and severity of COVID-19 (p < 0.001), and perceived benefit of the vaccine (p < 0.001) were positively associated with vaccination intent, whereas perceived barriers had a negative association (p < 0.001). Individuals were more likely to receive the vaccine after obtaining complete information (p < 0.001) and when the vaccine uptake would be more common amongst the public (p < 0.001).

ObjectivesMedia reporting has an influential role in panic buying (PB). We aimed to evaluate the media portrayal of PB during this COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe searched, collected, and analysed the news reports from the English media discussing the PB events. The search was done between 23 and 30 May 2020.ResultsA total of 525 news reports were analysed. Approximately half (49.3%) discussed the government action to handle the situation, 36.4% discussed the expert opinion regarding PB, 20.6% discussed the psychology of PB, 21.5% discussed the rumours, and 18.5% suggested remedial measures. Concerning the negative aspects, 96.6% of the titles mentioned panic buying, 75.4% mentioned the cause, and 62.3% mentioned the photos of empty shelves. The media in low–middle-income countries are 1.5 times more likely to include expert opinion (p = 0.03), 2.1 times more likely to discuss rumours regarding PB (p = 0.001), almost thrice more likely to report the cause of PB (p = 0.001), and thrice more likely to mention its impact (p = 0.001).ConclusionMedia has been portraying more negative aspects of PB. Further, there are variations in reporting patterns between high-income and low–middle-income countries.

Objectives In this study we compared two predictions of COVID-19 cases in the Kingdom Saudi Arabia (KSA) using pre–and post–relaxation of lockdown period data to provide an insight regarding rational exit strategies. We also applied these projections to understand economic costs versus health benefit of lockdown measures. Methods We analyzed open access data on COVID-19 cases from March 6 to January 16, 2021 in the KSA. To understand the epidemic projection during the pre- and post-lockdown period, we used two types of modeling: the SIR model, and the time series model. We also estimated the costs and benefits of lockdown- QALY gained compared to the costs of lockdown considering the payment threshold of the Government. Results Prediction using lockdown period data suggested that the epidemic might slow down significantly after 109 thousand cases and end on October 6, 2020. However, analysis with latest data after easing lockdown measures suggested that epidemic might be close to an end on October 28, 2021 with 358 thousand cases. The peak has also been shifted from May 18, 2020 to Jun 24, 2020. While earlier model predicted a steady growth in mid-June, the revised model with latest data predicted it in mid-August. In addition, we estimated that 4986 lives would have been saved if lockdown continued but the cost per life saved would be more than $378 thousand, which is way above not only the KSA threshold, but also the threshold of any other highly advanced economies such as the UK and the USA. Conclusions Our results suggest that relaxation of lockdown measures negatively impacts the epidemic. However, considering the negative impact of prolong lockdown measures on health and economy, countries must decide on the best timing and strategy to exit from such measures to safely return to normal life with minimum loss of lives and economy considering its economic and health systems’ capacity. Instead of focusing only on health, a balanced approach taking economy under consideration is recommended.

Female genital mutilation/cutting “FGM/C” is a deep-rooted damaging practice. Despite the growing efforts to end this practice, the current trends of its decline are not enough to overcome the population’s underlying growth. The aim of this research is to investigate the FGM/C household decision-making process and identify the main household decision-makers. A review of peer-reviewed articles was conducted by searching PubMed, JSTOR, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, EBSCO, and CINAHL Plus via systematic search using keywords. The found publications were screen using inclusion and exclusion criteria in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. After critical appraisal, seventeen articles were included in this review. The data extracted from the articles regarding FGM/C household-decision making process and decision-makers were analyzed using narrative analysis. FGM/C decision-making process varies from a region to another; however, it generally involves more than one individual, and each one has different power over the decision. Fathers, mothers, and grandmothers are the main decision-makers. It was shown from this review that opening the dialogue regarding FGM/C between sexes may lead to a productive decision-making process. The participation of fathers in the decision-making may free the mothers from the social-pressure and responsibility of carrying on traditions and create a more favorable environment to stop FGM/C practice.

COVID-19 online surveys need to follow standards and guidelines: Comment on "does COVID-19 pandemic affect sexual behavior? A cross-sectional, cross-national online survey" and "binge watching behavior during COVID 19 pandemic: A cross-sectional, cross-national online survey"authors' reply