ObjectivesTo 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 analysisOverall, 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 15.0ResultsAmong 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.ConclusionsOur 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 numberTCTR20200401002.

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 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 use online/remote methods for collecting data. Study participant will be adults who have provided informed consent from different demographic, socio-economic and risk groups. Discussion: At the time of writing, United Kingdom, Italy, Malaysia and Thailand have initiated strict public health measures and varying degrees of “lockdowns” to curb the pandemic. It is anticipated that these public health measures will continue in some countries (e.g. Italy, Malaysia) or be tightened further in other countries (e.g. Thailand, UK) to control the spread of the disease in the coming weeks and months. The data generated from our study could inform these strategies in real time.

Background: Any government needs to react quickly to a pandemic and make decisions on healthcare interventions locally and internationally with little information regarding the perceptions of people and the reactions they may receive during the implementation of restrictions. Methods: We report an anonymous online survey in Thailand conducted in May 2020 to assess public perceptions of three interventions in the Thai context: isolation, quarantine and social distancing. A total of 1,020 participants, of whom 52% were women, responded to the survey. Results: Loss of income was the main concern among respondents (>80% for all provinces in Thailand). Traditional media and social media were important channels for communication during the pandemic. A total of 92% of respondents reported that they changed their social behaviour even before the implementation of government policy with 94% reporting they performed social distancing, 97% reported using personal protective equipment such as masks and 95% reported using sanitizer products. Conclusions: This study showed a high level of compliance from individuals with government enforced or voluntarily controls such as quarantine, isolation and social distancing in Thailand. The findings from this study can be used to inform future government measures to control the pandemic and to shape communication strategies.

In the absence of a vaccine and widely available treatments for COVID-19, governments have relied primarily on non-pharmaceutical interventions to curb the pandemic. To aid understanding of the impact of these 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 SEBCOV anonymous online survey of adults. Overall, 5,058 respondents from Thailand, Malaysia, the United Kingdom, Italy and Slovenia completed the self-administered survey between May and June 2020. Post-stratification weighting was applied, and associations between categorical variables assessed. Among the five countries, Thai respondents appeared to have been most, and Slovenian respondents least, affected economically. Overall, lower education levels, larger households, having children under 18 in the household, being 65 years or older and having flexible/no income were associated with worse economic impact. Regarding social impact, respondents expressed most concern about their social life, physical health, and mental health and wellbeing. 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 reporting 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, with 60% and 26% respectively able to cope with 29 days or longer. Many respondents reported seeing news that seemed fake to them, the proportion varying between countries, and with education level and self-reported levels of understanding of COVID-19. Our data showed that COVID-19 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 on people's lives.