Dataset Information

Policies to influence perceptions about COVID-19 risk: The case of maps.

ABSTRACT: Choropleth disease maps are often used to inform the public about the risks posed by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In a survey conducted in the U.S. state of Georgia in June 2020, we randomly assigned respondents to view either of two maps. The first map reported county-level COVID case counts; the second displayed case rates per 100,000 people. Respondents who saw case rate maps were less likely to perceive COVID as mostly an urban problem and reported higher levels of concerns about the virus. Case rate maps also increased support for policies aimed at mitigating the spread of the virus, although, for this outcome, the effect was quantitatively small and the maps did not change individuals' self-reported behavior. For several outcomes, the impact of the case rate map was strongest for rural residents and self-identified Republicans, both of whom were less worried about the virus and more skeptical about public health measures to mitigate its spread.

SUBMITTER: Engel C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8932671 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Policies to influence perceptions about COVID-19 risk: The case of maps.

Engel Claudia C Rodden Jonathan J Tabellini Marco M

Science advances 20220318 11

Choropleth disease maps are often used to inform the public about the risks posed by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In a survey conducted in the U.S. state of Georgia in June 2020, we randomly assigned respondents to view either of two maps. The first map reported county-level COVID case counts; the second displayed case rates per 100,000 people. Respondents who saw case rate maps were less likely to perceive COVID as mostly an urban problem and reported higher levels of concerns about the ...[more]

PMID: 35302842

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLittle is understood of the consequences of restrictive visitor policies that were implemented in hospitals to minimize risk of infection during the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of this study was to describe physician experiences with these policies and reflections of their effects.MethodsWe conducted semistructured phone interviews from September 2020 to March 2021 with physicians practising in Ontario hospitals, recruited via professional networks and snowball sampling. We audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed interviews to describe and interpret overarching themes by thematic analysis.ResultsWe interviewed 21 physicians (5 intensivists, 5 internists, 11 specialists in palliative care). Four main thematic categories emerged, including provider, system, patient and caregiver effects. Provider-related factors included increased time and effort on communication with a need to establish limits; increased effort to develop rapport with caregivers; lack of caregiver input on patient care; the need to act as a caregiver surrogate; and the emotional toll of being a gatekeeper or advocate for visitors, exacerbated by lack of evidence for restrictions and inconsistent enforcement. System effects included the avoidance of hospital admission and decreased length of stay, leading to readmissions, increased deaths at home and avoidance of transfer to other facilities with similar policies. Patient-related factors included isolation and dying alone; lack of caregiver advocacy; and prioritization of visitor presence that, at times, resulted in a delay or withdrawal of aspects of care. Caregiver-related factors included inability to personally assess patient health, leading to poor understanding of patient status and challenging decision-making; perceived inadequate communication; difficulty accessing caregiver supports; and increased risk of complicated grief. Participants highlighted a disproportionate effect on older adults and people who did not speak English.InterpretationOur study highlights substantial negative consequences of restrictive visitor policies, with heightened effects on older adults and people who did not speak English. Research is required to identify whether the benefits of visitor restrictions on infection control outweigh the numerous deleterious consequences to patients, families and care providers.

Project description:BackgroundSubstantial strategies to reduce clinical documentation were implemented by health care systems throughout the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at national and local levels. This natural experiment provides an opportunity to study the impact of documentation reduction strategies on documentation burden among clinicians and other health professionals in the United States.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess clinicians' and other health care leaders' experiences with and perceptions of COVID-19 documentation reduction strategies and identify which implemented strategies should be prioritized and remain permanent post-pandemic.MethodsWe conducted a national survey of clinicians and health care leaders to understand COVID-19 documentation reduction strategies implemented during the pandemic using snowball sampling through professional networks, listservs, and social media. We developed and validated a 19-item survey leveraging existing post-COVID-19 policy and practice recommendations proposed by Sinsky and Linzer. Participants rated reduction strategies for impact on documentation burden on a scale of 0 to 100. Free-text responses were thematically analyzed.ResultsOf the 351 surveys initiated, 193 (55%) were complete. Most participants were informaticians and/or clinicians and worked for a health system or in academia. A majority experienced telehealth expansion (81.9%) during the pandemic, which participants also rated as highly impactful (60.1-61.5) and preferred that it remain (90.5%). Implemented at lower proportions, documenting only pertinent positives to reduce note bloat (66.1 ± 28.3), changing compliance rules and performance metrics to eliminate those without evidence of net benefit (65.7 ± 26.3), and electronic health record (EHR) optimization sprints (64.3 ± 26.9) received the highest impact scores compared with other strategies presented; support for these strategies widely ranged (49.7-63.7%).ConclusionThe results of this survey suggest there are many perceived sources of and solutions for documentation burden. Within strategies, we found considerable support for telehealth, documenting pertinent positives, and changing compliance rules. We also found substantial variation in the experience of documentation burden among participants.

Dataset Information

Policies to influence perceptions about COVID-19 risk: The case of maps.

Publications

Policies to influence perceptions about COVID-19 risk: The case of maps.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets