Awareness, Attitudes, and Actions Related to COVID-19 Among Adults With Chronic Conditions at the Onset of the U.S. Outbreak

Wolf, Michael S.; Serper, Marina; Opsasnick, Lauren; O’Conor, Rachel; Curtis, Laura M.; Benavente, Julia Yoshino; Wismer, Guisselle; Batio, Stephanie; Eifler, Morgan; Zheng, Pauline; Russell, Andrea M.; Arvanitis, Marina; Ladner, Daniela P.; Kwasny, Mary J.; Persell, Stephen D.; Rowe, Theresa; Linder, Jeffrey A.; Bailey, Stacy Cooper

doi:10.7326/m20-1239

Cited by 525 publications

(715 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

578

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Among the three themes, pandemic related knowledge was most studied, followed by practices and attitudes (Tables 2-4). In the knowledge domain, symptoms (13,14,16,, transmission (14, 16, 22, 23, 25-29, 31-34, 37-49, 51, 52, 55-57, 59-78) and incubation period of the virus (16, 23, 26-28, 32, 37, 38, 41, 42, 46-50, 52-57, 59-64, 66-69, 78); management and treatment options (14, 16, 22-24, 26, 27, 29, 37, 39-43, 46, 48-51, 55, 56, 58, 60, 62, 64, 66-70, 78, 79); and clinical outcomes associated with infection (13, 16, 23-27, 29, 34, 37, 38, 40, 48, 50-52, 55, 56, 59, 61, 63-67, 69, 74-76, 78-81); high risk populations for infection (16, 23, 26, 27, 29, 37, 39-41, 48, 49, 55-59, 63, 65, 67, 68, 72, 78, 79); availability of vaccine (16, 29, 37, 39, 40, 42-44, 48, 52, 55, 56, 58, 60-63, 65, 68, 70, 74-76, 79); role of hand hygiene (14, 16, 24, 25, 28, 29, 42, 43, 45, 47, 48, 50, 52, 55-58, 60, 64, 66, 69-71, 82, 83) was most studied for medical and non-medical staff. (Table 2) For medical related populations specifically, knowledge about epidemiology (29, 37, 39, 42, 44, 53, 58, 59, 61-63, 65, 66, 78, 79) and diagnosis of infection (16, 46, 48, 49, 55, 56, 58-63, 67, 76) were also frequently evaluated.…”

Section: Themes Identified From Items Used In Health Literacy Questiomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For attitudes about pandemics, worry/fear/helplessness about pandemic (13, 14, 22, 28, 31, 33, 49, 51, 52, 60, 61, 63, 65, 68, 72, 76-78, 81, 83, 84), confidence in governments' ability to manage pandemic (13,23,28,30,33,41,61,63,65,68,70,77,78,82) and perceived severity of infection as a public health problem (13,29,39,41,44,45,59,65,70,72) was most commonly assessed. (Table 3) For practices in pandemics, behaviours related to mask utilization (14,16,23,26,28,30,32,33,35,38,40,48,59,61,63,65,70,73,80,82,(84)(85)…”

Section: Themes Identified From Items Used In Health Literacy Questiomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For health systems-based factors, increased experience in the healthcare system (48,56,63,76,77,89) and attendance in health education programs (28,33,58,60,71,78) were associated with better health literacy. For medical and psychiatric/psychological factors, increased general health literacy (13,30) and increased anxiety about the spread of infection (28,33,80,84) were associated with better health literacy. Lastly, other factors 1 associated with better health literacy included the use of traditional sources of information such as newspaper or television (28,33,75).…”

Section: Determinants Of Health Literacymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Pandemic related Health literacy – A Systematic Review of literature in COVID-19, SARS and MERS pandemics

Seng

Yeam

Huang

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Health literacy plays an essential role in ones ability to acquire and understand critical medical information in the COVID-19 infodemic and other pandemics. Purpose: To summarize the assessment, levels and determinants of pandemic related health literacy and its associated clinical outcomes. Data sources: Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL, arXiv, bioRxiv, medRxiv, and Social Science Research Network. The start date was unrestricted and current as of 22 April 2020. Study selection Studies which evaluated health literacy related to novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) or Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) Data extraction Data on the characteristics of study designs, instruments, participants and level of health literacy were collected. Items used in instruments were grouped under the themes of knowledge, attitudes and practices. Determinants of health literacy were grouped into five domains (socio-demographic, medical, psychological/psychiatric, health systems related and others). Data synthesis: Of 2,065 articles screened, 70 articles were included. 21, 17 and 32 studies evaluated health literacy related to COVID-19, SARS and MERS, respectively. The rates of low pandemic health literacy ranged from 4.3 to 57.9% among medical-related populations and 4.0% to 82.5% among non-medical populations. Knowledge about symptoms and transmission of infection; worry about infection and, practices related to mask usage and hand hygiene was most frequently evaluated. Socio-demographic determinants of health literacy were most studied, where higher education level, older age and female gender were associated with better health literacy. No studies evaluated outcomes associated with health literacy. Limitations Non-English articles were excluded. Conclusion: The level of pandemic related health literacy is sub-optimal. Healthcare administrators need to be aware of health literacy determinants when formulating policies in pandemics.

show abstract

Section: Themes Identified From Items Used In Health Literacy Questiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Themes Identified From Items Used In Health Literacy Questiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Determinants Of Health Literacymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pandemic related Health literacy – A Systematic Review of literature in COVID-19, SARS and MERS pandemics

Seng

Yeam

Huang

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The search results are summarised in Figure 1. In total, 1235 citations were identi ed, of which 16 were found to be relevant [39,40,[41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54] excluded 68 studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors impacting social distancing measures for preventing coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]: A systematic review

Regmi¹,

Lwin²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Social distancing measures (SDMs) protect the health of the public from coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection. However, the impact of SDMs has been inconsistent and unclear. This study aims to review the factors impacting SDMs (e.g. isolation, quarantine) for reducing the transmission of COVID-19.Methods: A systematic review was conducted. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied & Complementary Medicine, COVID-19 Research and WHO database on COVID-19 for primary studies assessing the enablers and barriers associated with SDMs, and reported in accordance with PRISMA statement. We used JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for the cross-sectional survey and Qualitative Research to assess the methodological qualities and synthesised performing thematic analysis. Two reviewers independently screened the papers and extracted data.Results: A total of 1235 citations were identified, of which 16 were found to be relevant. The studies reported in two broad categories, under seven separate themes: positive impact of SDMs, effective public health interventions, positive change in people’s behaviour, worries and concerns about COVID-19, roles of mass media, physical and psychological impacts, and ethnicity/age associated with COVID-19.Conclusion: The identified evidence signals that SDMs are generally effective for preventing or reducing transmission. There is a scope and need to find the best methods and approaches at the primary healthcare level in terms of developing objective measures and interventions to establish the link between different factors and SDMs and reducing transmission of COVID-19 trend effectively, efficiently and equitably.

show abstract

“…As an example, consider a single interval of social distancing (a one-shot pulse), represented mathematically as a time-varying transmission rate β(t) in Eq. (5). Here we assume that β can be effectively reduced from βn to β d during distancing.…”

Section: Single Interval Social Distancingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Universal Features of Epidemic Models Under Social Distancing Guidelines

Sadeghi

Greene

Sontag

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different epidemiological models, from the classical SIR system to more sophisticated ones involving population compartments for socially distanced, quarantined, infection aware, asymptomatic infected, and other individuals, share some remarkable dynamic characteristics when contact rates are subject to periodic or one-shot changes. In simple pulsed isolation policies, a linear relationship is found among optimal start time and duration for reduction of the infected peak. If a single interval social distancing starts too early or too late it will be ineffective with respect to decreasing the peak of infection. On the other hand, the nonlinearity of epidemic models leads to non-monotone behavior of the peak of infected population under periodic relaxation policies. This observation led us to hypothesize that an additional single interval social distancing at a proper time can significantly decrease the infected peak of periodic policies, and we verified this improvement.2. Modeling the effects of social distancing for an infection aware population. This can be done by changing the contact rates between the compartments, or by modeling the behavior of a population that alters its social interactions because of observed infections or deaths [44,45]. The latter technique has recently been applied to 47].3. Sub-dividing populations into regions, each described by local parameters. Such regions may be cities, neighborhoods, or communities [48]. This framework allows modelers to capture the virus spread and population mobility geographically [49,50,51,52,53]. These models have been recently used to understand the spread of COVID-19 in China [54], Italy [55], Belgium [56], and India [57,58].

show abstract

Awareness, Attitudes, and Actions Related to COVID-19 Among Adults With Chronic Conditions at the Onset of the U.S. Outbreak

Cited by 525 publications

References 21 publications

Pandemic related Health literacy – A Systematic Review of literature in COVID-19, SARS and MERS pandemics

Pandemic related Health literacy – A Systematic Review of literature in COVID-19, SARS and MERS pandemics

Factors impacting social distancing measures for preventing coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]: A systematic review

Universal Features of Epidemic Models Under Social Distancing Guidelines

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About