Background: After the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) globally, upgraded quarantine and physical distancing strategy, strict infection measures, and government's strict lockdown have been abided to confront the spread of the COVID-19 in Thailand. During the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns about the mental health and psychosocial problems among health care workers and the general population are now arising. Yet, information on mental health and psychosocial problems among health care workers and the general population have not been comprehensively reported in Thailand. As such, we conduct a cross-sectional study, a national online survey to describe the short- and long-term consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health and psychosocial problems among health care workers and the general population in Thailand. Methods: This study is a repeated cross-sectional study, an open online voluntary national-based survey during the wave I (April 21–May 4, 2020) follow-up in the wave II (August 3–16, 2020), wave III (November 15–28, 2020), and a 1-year follow-up survey (wave IV: April 21–May 4, 2021) in Thailand. Health care workers at the hospitals and the adult general population will be invited to participate in the online survey via the SurveyMonkey that limits one-time participation per unique internet protocol address. The target sample size of at least 1182 health care workers and 1310 general populations will be required to complete the online survey for each wave of the survey. Sociodemographic characteristics and a set of measurement tools for mental and psychosocial problems for each subcohort including depression, anxiety, stress, resilient copings, neuroticism, perceived social support, wellbeing, somatic symptoms, insomnia, burnout (for healthcare workers), and public stigma toward COVID-19 infection (for the general population) will be collected. For all estimates of prevalence, we will weigh data for all wave analyses under the complex design of the survey. Subgroup analyses stratified by key characteristics will also be done to analyze the proportion differences. For the repeated cross-sectional survey, we will combine the data from the wave I to wave IV survey to analyze changes in the mental health status. We will perform multilevel logistic regression models with random intercepts to explore associations with individual-level and region-level/hospital-level predictors. We also plan to perform an ancillary systematic review and meta-analysis by incorporating data from our findings to all available evidence. Results: Our findings will provide information on the short- and long-term mental health status as well as the psychosocial responses to the COVID-19 outbreak in a national sample of health care workers and the general population in Thailand. Conclusion: This prospective, nationally based, a repeated cross-sectional study will describe the mental health status and psychosocial problems among health care workers and the general population in Thailand during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Faculty of Public Health and Faculty of Pharmacy, Chiang Mai University. The findings will be disseminated through public, scientific, and professional meetings, and publications in peer-reviewed journals. Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR) registration number: TCTR20200425001.

ObjectiveAmid the COVID-19 pandemic, social stigma towards COVID-19 infection has become a major component of public discourse and social phenomena. As such, we aimed to develop and validate the COVID-19 Public Stigma Scale (COVID-PSS).Design and settingNational-based survey cross-sectional study during the lockdown in Thailand.ParticipantsWe invited the 4004 adult public to complete a set of measurement tools, including the COVID-PSS, global fear of COVID-19, perceived risk of COVID-19 infection, Bogardus Social Distance Scale, Pain Intensity Scale and Insomnia Severity Index.MethodsFactor structure dimensionality was constructed and reaffirmed with model fit by exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and non-parametric item response theory (IRT) analysis. Psychometric properties for validity and reliability were tested. An anchor-based approach was performed for classifying the proper cut-off scores.ResultsAfter factor analysis, IRT analysis and test for model fit, we created the final 10-item COVID-PSS with a three-factor structure: stereotype, prejudice and fear. Face and content validity were established through the public and experts’ perspectives. The COVID-PSS was significantly correlated (Spearman rank, 95% CI) with the global fear of COVID-19 (0.68, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.70), perceived risk of COVID-19 infection (0.79, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.80) and the Bogardus Social Distance Scale (0.50, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.53), indicating good convergent validity. The correlation statistics between the COVID-PSS and the Pain Intensity Scale and Insomnia Severity Index were <0.2, supporting the discriminant validity. The reliability of the COVID-PSS was satisfactory, with good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α of 0.85, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.86) and test–retest reproducibility (intraclass correlation of 0.94, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.96). The proposed cut-off scores were as follows: no/minimal (≤18), moderate (19–25) and high (≥26) public stigma towards COVID-19 infection.ConclusionsThe COVID-PSS is practical and suitable for measuring stigma towards COVID-19 in a public health survey. However, cross-cultural adaptation may be needed.

Background The roles of literacy, fear and hesitancy were investigated for acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine (AV) types among village health volunteers (VHVs) in Thailand. Materials and methods A cross-sectional study was conducted using an unidentified online questionnaire to assess literacy, fear and hesitancy of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among Thai VHVs between 1 and 15 October 2021. The questionnaire was developed based on the HLVa-IT (Health Literacy Vaccinale degli adulti in Italiano) for vaccine literacy (VL), using an adult Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (aVHS) for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (VH) and Fear of COVID-19 scale (FCoV-19S) for the distress of COVID-19 vaccine. The effects of VL, VH and vaccine fear (VF) on AV were estimated using multivariable logistic regression. Results A total of 5,312 VHVs completed the questionnaire. After adjustment with variables in the multivariable analysis, the VL score was insignificantly associated with increased vaccination (aOR = 1.002; (95%CI: 0.994–1.01)), while VF and VH significantly decreased the chance of vaccination, aOR = 0.966 (95%CI: 0.953–0.978) and aOR = 0.969; (95%CI: 0.960–0.979), respectively and VF and VH were negatively associated with AV for all types of vaccine preference, with VL showing a reverse relationship only for mRNA-based vaccines. Conclusion VL may not increase AV among VHVs. To increase attitudes toward receiving COVID-19 vaccination in Thailand, the government and health-related organizations should instigate policies to significantly reduce VF and VH among Thai VHVs.

Pregnancy rates and unprotected sex among Thai adolescents continue to increase. The aim of this community‐based participatory study was to identify gender differences in sexual behaviors and sexual risk factors, and to examine factors associated with sexual risk behaviors among 397 adolescents in northern Thailand. Twenty two community researchers facilitated the data collection by using smart phones or tablet computers on a privacy basis. Ordinal and logistic regressions identified predictors influencing pre‐coital behaviors and sexual behaviors. The results showed that males were more likely than females to engage in pre‐coital and sexual behaviors. Significant predictors of higher pre‐coital behaviors were age, sexual refusal self‐efficacy, having boyfriends/girlfriends, authoritarian parenting style, parental approval of sex, and perceived peer norms. Pre‐coital behaviors were positively correlated with sexual behaviors, and significant predictors of sexual behaviors were age, parent–adolescent communication, parental monitoring, perceived peer norms, and type of school. To better address the sexual risk behaviors of adolescents, we need to include key stakeholders to develop multi‐modal culturally‐ and gender‐specific sexual‐prevention programs to account for information delivery, acceptability, and dealing with peer pressure.