Search

National differences in uncertainty, inequality, and trust have been accentuated by COVID-19. There are indications that the pandemic has impacted societies characterized by high uncertainty, inequality, and low trust harder than societies characterized by low uncertainty, equality, and high trust. This study investigates differential response strategies to COVID-19 as reflected in news media of two otherwise similar low uncertainty societies: Denmark and Sweden. The comparison is made using a recent approach to information dynamics in unstructured data. The main findings are that the news dynamics generally mirror public-health policies, capture fundamental socio-cultural variables related to uncertainty and trust, and may provide a measure of societal uncertainty. The findings can provide insights into evolutionary trajectories of decision-making under high uncertainty and, from a methodological level, be used to develop a media-based index of uncertainty and trust. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This case report describes entropy based on statistics of the novel coronavirus infection in the Russian Federation. Entropy (in bits) determined on the basis of the ratio of patients with clinical manifestations of the disease and asymptomatic carrier state, increased from 0.7219 by April 1, 2020, when the ratio of such patients was 4/5 to 1/5, to 0.8813 by April 14, 2020, when the ratio of the two groups of patients was 7/10 to 3/10. On May 3, 2020, the ratio of the two groups leveled off, reaching % to %, so the entropy was 1.0000. An analysis of the data from April 19, 2020 to June 1, 2020 allowed us to clarify the average proportion between patients with and without symptoms, which is 14/25 to 11/25 with a certain bias towards patients with clinical manifestations of the novel coronavirus infection, and the entropy for this ratio is 0.9896. We found a transformation of entropy of the novel coronavirus infection which is explained by different proportions of patients with and without symptoms of the disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Individuals' stress in responding to the current COVID-19 pandemic may be exacerbated by information uncertainty driven by inconsistent, unverified, and conflicting news from various sources. The current study aims to test if information uncertainty during the COVID-19 outbreak was related to acute stress disorder (ASD) over and above other psychosocial stressors.Methods: An anonymous online survey was conducted with 7800 college students throughout China from January 31 through February 11, 2020. Existing scales were modified to measure ASD and six potential stressors including information uncertainty during the COVID-19 outbreak. Hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to assess the unique association of information uncertainty with ASD. To minimize the effect of large sample size and also to get a sense of whether the effects of information uncertainty were similar to people at the center of the epidemic, we repeated the hierarchical regression among 10% of the students who were randomly selected from the entire sample ("10% random sample"; n = 780) and 226 students from Hubei Province where the outbreak started.Results: Information uncertainty was highly prevalent among the respondents (64%). It was significantly associated with ASD beyond other key variables and potential stressors across three samples. In the hierarchical regression among the entire sample, demographic variables accounted for 9.4% of the variance in ASD. The other five stressors added 5.1% of the variance. The information uncertainty (β = .159; p < .001) explained an additional 2.1% of the variance. Likewise, the information uncertainty explained an additional 2.1 and 3.4% of the variance in ASD beyond all other variables among the 10% random sample (β = .165; p < .001) and the Hubei sample (β = .196; p < .01), respectively.Conclusion: Information uncertainty is a unique correlate of psychological stress during the COVID-19 outbreak. Reducing information uncertainty is essential not only for halting virus transmission but also for mitigating negative impacts of the pandemic on people's psychosocial wellbeing. Transparent, timely, and accurate communication can reduce public confusion, fear, and stress. Capacity building in governments, communities, and media outlets to prevent, reduce and manage information uncertainty should be a critical part of the response to an emerging global health crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Older adults are more vulnerable to the negative impacts of infectious diseases than younger individuals. However, regardless of the importance and effectiveness of vaccines to reduce morbidity and mortality, issues remain with vaccine hesitancy among this population. Older adults' sources of immunization information and their level of trust in those sources may play a role in their vaccination behaviors. This research aimed to better understand the role of information sources and related issues of trust as related to vaccine uptake among older adults. A community-based, cross-sectional survey was conducted with 901 older adults in North Dakota in May-July 2022. Measures included extent of reliance on specific sources of immunization information, levels of trust, and uptake for influenza, pneumonia, shingles, and COVID-19 vaccinations. Immunization information sources were grouped into medical experts, informal, and public outlets. Results indicated older adults were more likely to rely on medical experts than informal sources or public outlets for immunization information. Greater reliance on medical experts was associated with a greater likelihood of vaccine uptake for all vaccines, while reliance on public outlets was associated with a greater likelihood of vaccine uptake only for COVID primary series and boosters. Reliance on informal sources for immunization information was associated with a reduced likelihood of vaccine uptake for all vaccines except shingles. Nearly half of respondents were uncertain who to trust for vaccine information. Uncertainty who to trust for immunization information significantly mediated the associations between reliance on medical experts and uptake for most vaccines indicating that trust in medical experts fosters vaccine uptake. Increasing reliance on medical experts as sources of immunization information is vital to increasing vaccine uptake among older adults. Additionally, this population must be assisted in increasing their ability to successfully assess the trustworthiness of immunization information sources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 surveillance across the United States is essential to tracking and mitigating the pandemic, but data representing cases and deaths may be impacted by attribute, spatial, and temporal uncertainties. COVID-19 case and death data are essential to understanding the pandemic and serve as key inputs for prediction models that inform policy-decisions; consistent information across datasets is critical to ensuring coherent findings. We implement an exploratory data analytic approach to characterize, synthesize, and visualize spatial-temporal dimensions of uncertainty across commonly used datasets for case and death metrics (Johns Hopkins University, the New York Times, USAFacts, and 1Point3Acres). We scrutinize data consistency to assess where and when disagreements occur, potentially indicating underlying uncertainty. We observe differences in cumulative case and death rates to highlight discrepancies and identify spatial patterns. Data are assessed using pairwise agreement (Cohen's kappa) and agreement across all datasets (Fleiss' kappa) to summarize changes over time. Findings suggest highest agreements between CDC, JHU, and NYT datasets. We find nine discrete type-components of information uncertainty for COVID-19 datasets reflecting various complex processes. Understanding processes and indicators of uncertainty in COVID-19 data reporting is especially relevant to public health professionals and policymakers to accurately understand and communicate information about the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aims to investigate how the public formed their need for information in the early stage of the COVID-19 outbreak. Exploring the formation of information needs can reveal why the public's information needs differ and provide insights on targeted information service during health crises at an essential level. Design/methodology/approach: The data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 46 participants and analyzed using the grounded theory approach. Concepts, sub-categories and categories were developed, and a model was built to examine how the public formed the need for information about the pandemic. Findings: The authors found that participants were stimulated by information asymmetry, severity of the pandemic and regulations to control the pandemic, which triggered their perceptions of information credibility, threat and social approval. After the participants perceived that there was a threat, it activated their basic needs and they actively formed the need for information based on cognitive activities. Moreover, information delivered by different senders resulted in a passive need for information. Participants' individual traits also influenced their perceptions after being stimulated. Research limitations/implications: Long-term follow-up research is needed to help researchers identify more detailed perspectives and do comparative studies. Besides, this study conducted interviews through WeChat voice calls and telephone calls, and might be limited compared with face-to-face interviews. Practical implications: The findings of this study provide theoretical contributions to the information needs research and practical implications for information services and public health management. Originality/value: There is little systematic research on how the public formed information needs in the early stage of the COVID-19 outbreak. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]