Is there a "pandemic effect" on individuals' willingness to take genetic tests?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Deruelle T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9646467 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Is there a "pandemic effect" on individuals' willingness to take genetic tests?
Deruelle Thibaud T Kalouguina Veronika V Trein Philipp P Wagner Joël J
European journal of human genetics : EJHG 20221110 3
In this cross-sectional, semi-longitudinal and quasi-experimental study, our goal was to determine the effect of data storage conditions on willingness to take a genetic test. We compared individuals' preferences regarding how they want to store health data collected from genetic tests through two survey experiments fielded in Switzerland in March 2020 and January 2022. We tested for differences whether genetic data are presented as private goods or public goods. Results confirm our initial rese ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundA recent systematic review shows high COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in fully-vaccinated people in Africa. However, vaccine uptake has varied across populations. We assessed the uptake, perceptions of and willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine among unvaccinated individuals at two Ugandan border points of entry.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional quantitative study conducted at Malaba and Mutukula points of entry into Uganda between February and March 2023. We targeted people living in, working at, or transiting through the two points of entry, including truck drivers, point-of-entry customs officers and female sex workers, market vendors, among others. Data were collected on socio-demographic characteristics, vaccine uptake, perceptions and willingness to take the vaccine among unvaccinated individuals. We computed descriptive statistics and determined the factors associated with uptake of and willingness to take the vaccine using a modified Poisson regression model. Data analysis was conducted using STATA statistical package (version 14.0).ResultsOf the 854 respondents, 50% (n = 427) were from Mutukula. Overall, 80.3% (n = 686) of the respondents reported that they had received at least one vaccine dose; no booster doses were reported. Respondents perceived that the vaccine was efficacious against COVID-19. COVID-19 vaccine uptake was associated with age-group 35-44 years [adjusted Prevalence Ratio [aPR] (95%CI) = 1.13 (1.01, 1.27)] or 45 + years [aPR (95%CI) = 1.19 (1.07, 1.33)]; being a truck driver [aPR (95%CI) = 1.16 (1.04, 1.29)] or health worker [aPR (95%CI) = 1.18 (1.05, 1.32)]; and the belief that the COVID-19 vaccine is protective against COVID-19 [aPR (95%CI) = 1.32 (1.10, 1.58)]. Nearly 60% of unvaccinated respondents (n = 99) were willing to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Willingness to take the vaccine was associated with the belief that one can contract the coronavirus if not vaccinated [aPR (95%CI) = 3.67 (1.90, 7.10)] or the community was at risk of COVID-19 [aPR (95%CI) = 1.86 (1.33, 2.62)].ConclusionCOVID-19 vaccine uptake was high in this setting while nearly six out of every ten unvaccinated individuals were willing to take the vaccine. Our findings lend credence for ongoing vaccination efforts at points of entry to contain the importation of new COVID-19 variants into the country.
| S-EPMC11603881 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pandemics, such as the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, represents a health threat to humans worldwide. During times of heightened health risks, the public's perceptions, and acceptance of evidence-based preventive measures, such as vaccines, is of high relevance. Moreover, people might seek other preventive remedies to protect themselves from getting infected (e.g., herbal remedies, nutritional supplements). A recent study on consumers' preference for naturalness showed that people put more weight on perceived naturalness of a preventive remedy compared to a curative one. This result was attributed to the increased focus on perceived effectiveness as opposed to perceived risk. This raises the question whether the current pandemic would shift people's perceptions from prevention to curing and thus, exhibit a preference for synthetic remedies because they are seen as more effective. The present online experiment (conducted in April 2021) investigated people's perceptions of vaccines and remedies within the context of the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. A 2x2 between-subject design with type of remedy (natural vs. synthetic) and salience of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (high vs. low) was conducted in Switzerland in spring 2021 (N = 452). The data did not provide evidence of a curative mindset for preventive remedies, as the participants exhibited a clear preference for the natural remedy compared to the synthetic remedy. Our study stresses the importance of understanding people's mindsets on how to protect themselves from infection with a virus during an ongoing pandemic to tackle misinformation and vaccine hesitancy.
| S-EPMC8809555 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Sacubitril/valsartan improves health outcomes for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction relative to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, but it carries higher out-of-pocket costs. Neither the impact of cost nor how to integrate cost into medical decisions is well studied. Methods and Results To evaluate the impact of out-of-pocket costs and a novel cost-priming intervention on willingness to take sacubitril/valsartan for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, participants with self-reported heart disease were surveyed using the online Ipsos Knowledge Panel. Participants were presented with a modified decision aid for sacubitril/valsartan and then, in a 3×2 factorial design, randomly assigned to 1 of 3 cost conditions ($10, $50, or $100/month) and to a control group or cost-priming intervention, defined by being asked questions about their financial situation before learning about the benefits of sacubitril/valsartan. Of the 1013 participants included in the analysis, 85% of respondents were willing to take sacubitril/valsartan at $10, 62% at $50, and 33% at $100 (P<0.0001). In a multivariable logistic regression model, participants were more likely to take sacubitril/valsartan at $10 versus $100 (odds ratio [OR], 14.3 [95% CI, 9.4-21.8]) and $50 compared with $100 (OR, 3.6 [95% CI, 2.5-5.1]). Overall, participants in the cost-primed group were more willing to take sacubitril/valsartan than those not primed to consider their financial situation (63% versus 56%, P=0.04). There was no statistically significant interaction between cost conditions and cost priming. Perceived benefit of sacubitril/valsartan over angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers decreased as cost increased but did not vary by cost priming. Conclusions Commonly encountered out-of-pocket costs of sacubitril/valsartan may impact individuals' willingness to take the medication even when recommended by their physicians. Priming individuals to consider personal finances before learning about the drug increased willingness to take sacubitril/valsartan.
| S-EPMC9238635 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn low-income countries, vaccination campaigns are lagging, and evidence on vaccine acceptance, a crucial public health planning input, remains scant. This is the first study that reports willingness to take COVID-19 vaccines and its socio-demographic correlates in Ethiopia, Africa's second most populous country.MethodsThe analysis is based on a nationally representative survey data of 2,317 households conducted in the informal economy in November 2020. It employs two logistic regression models where the two outcome variables are (i) a household head's willingness to take a COVID-19 vaccine or not, and (ii) if yes if they would also hypothetically pay (an unspecified amount) for it or not. Predictors include age, gender, education, marital status, income category, health insurance coverage, sickness due to COVID-19, chronic illness, trust in government, prior participation in voluntary activities, urban residence.ResultsWillingness to take the vaccine was high (88%) and significantly associated with COVID-19 cases in the family, trust in government and pro-social behavior. All other predictors such as gender, education, income, health insurance, chronic illness, urban residence did not significantly predict vaccine willingness at the 5% level. Among those willing to take the vaccine, 33% also answered that they would hypothetically pay (an unspecified amount) for it, an answer that is significantly associated with trust in government, health insurance coverage and income.ConclusionThe results highlight both opportunities and challenges. There is little evidence of vaccine hesitancy in Ethiopia among household heads operating in the informal economy. The role played by trust in government and pro-social behavior in motivating this outcome suggests that policy makers need to consider these factors in the planning of COVID-19 vaccine campaigns in order to foster vaccine uptake. At the same time, as the willingness to hypothetically pay for a COVID-19 vaccine seems to be small, fairly-priced vaccines along with financial support are also needed to ensure further uptake of COVID-19 vaccines.
| S-EPMC8893640 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Asthma, a chronic respiratory disease, can be aggravated by exposure to certain chemical irritants. The objectives were first to investigate the extent to which experimental observations on asthmatic subjects are taken into consideration in connection with the registration process under the EU REACH regulation, and second, to determine whether asthmatics are provided adequate protection by the derived no-effect levels (DNELs) for acute inhalation exposure. We identified substances for which experimental data on the pulmonary functions of asthmatics exposed to chemicals under controlled conditions are available. The effect concentrations were then compared with DNELs and other guideline and limit values. As of April 2015, only 2.6% of 269 classified irritants had available experimental data on asthmatics. Fourteen of the 22 identified substances with available data were fully registered under REACH and we retrieved 114 reliable studies related to these. Sixty-three of these studies, involving nine of the 14 substances, were cited by the REACH registrants. However, only 17 of the 114 studies, involving four substances, were regarded as key studies. Furthermore, many of the DNELs for acute inhalation were higher than estimated effect levels for asthmatics, i.e., lowest observed adverse effect concentrations or no-observed adverse effect concentrations, indicating low or no safety margin. We conclude that REACH registrants tend to disregard findings on asthmatics when deriving these DNELs. In addition, we found examples of DNELs, particularly among those derived for workers, which likely do not provide adequate protection for asthmatics. Copyright © 2016 The Authors Journal of Applied Toxicology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
| S-EPMC5089668 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Considering the high morbidity and mortality of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with malignancy, they are regarded as a priority for COVID-19 vaccination. However, general vaccine uptake rates among cancer patients are known to be lower than in their healthy counterparts. Thus, we aimed to investigate the attitude and acceptance rates for the COVID-19 vaccine in cancer patients and identify predictive factors for vaccination that could be modified to increase vaccine uptake rates, via a paper-based survey (58 items over six domains). A total of 1001 cancer patients participated in this nationwide, multicenter survey between February and April 2021. We observed that 61.8% of respondents were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Positive predictive factors found to be independently associated with vaccination were male gender, older age, obesity, previous influenza vaccination history, absence of cancer recurrence, time since cancer diagnosis over 5 years, and higher EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale scores. Along with the well-known factors that are positively correlated with vaccination, here, we report that patients' disease status and current health status were also associated with their acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccination. Moreover, 91.2% of cancer patients were willing to be vaccinated if their attending physicians recommend it, indicating that almost 30% could change their decision upon physicians' recommendation. Unlike other factors, which are unmodifiable, physicians' recommendation is the single modifiable factor that could change patients' behavior. In conclusion, we firstly report that Korean cancer patients' acceptance rate of the COVID-19 vaccination was 61.8% and associated with disease status and current health status. Physicians should play a major role in aiding cancer patients' decision-making concerning COVID-19 vaccines.
| S-EPMC8345425 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveOur aim was to examine the willingness to pay (WTP) for SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests and its correlates during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany.Study design/methodsA representative online survey was conducted in late summer 2021 (with n = 3075; the average age was 44.5 years; 14.8 years ranging from 18 to 70 years) in Germany. Two-part models were conducted. Various correlates (such as empathy or altruism) were included in the regression analysis.ResultsThe average WTP for SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests (in euros) was 6.6 (standard deviation 8.4) in the general adult population. It markedly differed between subgroups (e.g. the average WTP was 2.9 among individuals not vaccinated against COVID-19 and 7.5 among individuals vaccinated against COVID-19; it was 5.4 among the lowest income decile, whereas it was 8.6 among the highest income decile). Regressions showed that a higher WTP for SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests was associated with being male, being in the highest income group, being vaccinated against COVID-19, and having higher levels of empathy.ConclusionsAs the very first study in this area, our study described WTP for SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests and some interesting differences between population subgroups. In particular, individuals not vaccinated against COVID-19 reported a low WTP for SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests. Approximately one-fourth of the sample reported a WTP for SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests of €0 among individuals vaccinated against COVID-19, whereas approximately two-thirds of those not vaccinated against COVID-19 reported such a WTP. Knowledge about the WTP for COVID-19 rapid antigen tests is important for policy makers (e.g. for testing strategies) during this pandemic. It may also give a rough estimation of the acceptance of such rapid tests.
| S-EPMC8968124 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Safe and effective HIV prevention strategies are needed for transwomen. Transwomen in the US have a 34 times greater odds of being infected with HIV than all adults age 15-49, and in San Francisco, California 42.4% of transwomen are estimated to be infected with HIV. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is the first biomedical intervention with promise for reducing HIV acquisition in transwomen. However, little is known about whether transwomen know about PrEP, are taking PrEP and would be good candidates for PrEP based on their risk profile and behaviors. A population-based dataset was analyzed to determine how many transwomen in San Francisco knew about PrEP by the end of 2013 - more than a year after iPrex results demonstrated efficacy of PrEP in preventing HIV. We found that of 233 transwomen, only 13.7% had heard of PrEP. Transwomen who were living with HIV compared to those who were HIV-negative, and those who recently injected drugs compared to non-injection drug users were more likely to have heard of PrEP. Based on CDC guidelines for PrEP among MSM and IDU, 45 (30.2%) transwomen of the 149 HIV-negative transwomen in the sample were candidates for PrEP. This estimate based on CDC criteria is arguably low. Given that almost half of transwomen in San Francisco are living with HIV, this findings points to a need for further consideration of PrEP criteria that are specific and tailored to the risks for HIV faced by transwomen that are different from MSM and injection drug users. Research to scale up access and test the effectiveness of PrEP for transwomen is also urgently needed.
| S-EPMC4454556 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundAsenapine has unique orally-related side effects, such as a bitter taste induced by sublingual administration, which often results in discontinuation of the medication. While the FDA has approved black-cherry-flavored asenapine, several countries have prescribed only unflavored versions. Specifically, Asians commonly report experiencing the bitterness of asenapine because they are more sensitive to bitter tastes than other ethnic groups. In this study, with the aim of improving adherence by reducing the bitterness of asenapine, we investigated the effects of D-sorbitol, which reduced the bitterness parameters of taste sensors in our previous basic study on the bitterness and continuity of asenapine among patients with schizophrenia.MethodsTwenty adult patients with schizophrenia were included in this single-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial. Participants rinsed their mouths with single-administration of D-sorbitol or a placebo prior to each administration of asenapine. We then conducted the questionnaires and assessed changes in the bitterness of asenapine (primary end point) and willingness to continue its use (secondary end point).ResultsD-sorbitol significantly improved the bitterness of asenapine (p = 0.038). Although it did not significantly increase the willingness to continue asenapine (p = 0.180), it did show improvement over the placebo in enhancing willingness to continue, especially in patients who were not accustomed to its taste.ConclusionOur findings indicate that single-administration of D-sorbitol significantly reduces the bitterness of asenapine. In countries where flavored asenapine is not available, this finding could benefit patients who were not accustomed to its bitter taste.Trial registrationThis study was registered in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCTs041210019) on May 14, 2021.
| S-EPMC10829201 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic required genetic counseling services, like most outpatient healthcare, to rapidly adopt a telemedicine model. Understanding the trends in patients' preferences for telemedicine relative to in-person service delivery both before and after the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic may aid in navigating how best to integrate telemedicine in a post-COVID-19 era. Our study explored how respondents' willingness to use, and preference for, telemedicine differed from before to after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents included patients, or their parent/guardian, seen in a general medical genetics clinic in 2018, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and in 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents were surveyed regarding their willingness to use telemedicine, preference for telemedicine relative to in-person care, and the influence of various factors. Among 69 pre-COVID-19 and 40 current-COVID-19 respondents, there was no shift in willingness to use, or preference for, telemedicine across these time periods. About half of respondents (50.6%) preferred telemedicine visits for the future. Of the 49.4% who preferred in-person visits, 79.1% were still willing to have visits via telemedicine. Predictors of these preferences included comfort with technology and prioritization of convenience of location. This study suggests that a hybrid care model, utilizing telemedicine and in-person service delivery, may be most appropriate to meet the needs of the diverse patients served. Concern for COVID-19 was not found to predict willingness or preference, suggesting that our findings may be generalizable in post-pandemic contexts.
| S-EPMC9261179 | biostudies-literature