Search

Suicide is a major public health concern and leading cause of death among men in Canada. This study reports the feasibility and acceptability of Buddy Up, a peer-based suicide prevention campaign for men. A mixed-methods approach was used to analyze respondent survey questionnaires ( n = 48) and individual participant interviews ( n = 19) collected from campaign users. Survey respondents reported that they enjoyed their involvement in the campaign (92%), were more confident to talk with men about mental health and suicide (95%), and would recommend Buddy Up to others (95%). Qualitative interviews were thematically analyzed to develop three inductively derived themes: (a) Engaging men with relatable masculine content and design: “Buddy Up really spoke to them in their language,” highlighting the importance of understanding and working with gendered practices and motivations to legitimize and motivate involvement in suicide prevention; (b) Leveraging campaign participation to initiate conversations and promote mental health: “It gives men language and license to start asking questions,” revealing ways in which participants utilized Buddy Up to negotiate and norm checking-in to promote men’s mental health; and (c) Driving new masculine cultures: “We start every meeting with a mental health moment,” identifying how participants fostered healthy milieus for disclosing mental health challenges with teamwork and preventive action under the banner of Buddy Up. The study findings support the feasibility of Buddy Up and highlight the acceptability of peer-based approaches to mental health promotion. The findings can also empirically guide future efforts for systematically building men’s peer-based suicide prevention programs.

Knowledge of cervical cancer and HPV testing are important factors in proactive and continued engagement with screening and are critical considerations as countries move towards the implementation of HPV-based primary screening programs. However, existing scales measuring knowledge of both cervical cancer and HPV testing are not up to date with the current literature, lack advanced psychometric testing, or have suboptimal psychometric properties. Updated, validated scales are needed to ensure accurate measurement of these factors. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop and validate two scales measuring cervical cancer knowledge and HPV testing knowledge. A pool of items was generated by retaining relevant existing items identified in a 2019 literature search and developing new items according to themes identified in recent systematic reviews. Items were assessed for relevance by the research team and then refined through seven cognitive interviews with Canadian women. A web-based survey including the remaining items (fourteen for each scale development) was administered to a sample of Canadian women in October and November of 2021. After data cleaning, N = 1027 responses were retained. Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis were conducted, and Item Response Theory was used to select items. The final cervical cancer knowledge scale (CCKS) and HPV testing knowledge scale (HTKS) were unidimensional, and each consisted of eight items. CFA demonstrated adequate model fit for both scales. The developed scales will be important tools to identify knowledge gaps and inform communications about cervical cancer screening, particularly in the context of HPV-based screening implementation.

BackgroundThe human papillomavirus (HPV) test has emerged as a significant improvement over cytology for primary cervical cancer screening. In Canada, provinces and territories are moving toward implementing HPV testing in cervical cancer screening programs. Although an abundance of research exists on the benefits of HPV-based screening, there is a dearth of research examining women’s understanding of HPV testing. In other countries, failure to adequately address women’s concerns about changes has disrupted the implementation of HPV-based screening. ObjectiveThe aims of the multipart study described in this paper are to develop psychometrically valid measures of cervical cancer screening–related knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs; to examine the feasibility of a questionnaire examining psychosocial factors related to HPV-based screening; and to investigate psychosocial correlates of women’s intentions to participate in HPV-based screening. MethodsWe conducted a web-based survey (study 1) of Canadian women to assess the acceptability and feasibility of a questionnaire, including the validation of scales examining cervical cancer knowledge, HPV testing knowledge, HPV testing attitudes and beliefs, and HPV test self-sampling attitudes and beliefs. Preferences for cervical cancer screening were assessed using the best-worst scaling methodology. A second web-based survey (study 2) will be administered to a national sample of Canadian women between June 2022 and July 2022 using the validated scales. Differences in the knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and preferences of women who are currently either underscreened or adequately screened for cervical cancer will be examined through bivariate analyses. Multinomial logistic regression will be used to estimate the associations between psychosocial and sociodemographic factors and intentions to undergo HPV-based screening. ResultsBetween October 2021 and November 2021, a total of 1230 participants completed the questionnaire in study 1, and 1027 (83.49%) responses were retained after data cleaning methods were applied. Feasibility was comparable with similar population-based surveys in terms of survey length, participant attrition, and the number of participants excluded after data cleaning. As of May 2022, analysis of study 1 is ongoing, and results are expected to be published in the summer of 2022. Data collection is expected to begin for study 2 in the summer of 2022. Results are expected to be published between late 2022 and early 2023. ConclusionsFindings will provide direction for Canadian public health authorities to align guidelines to address women’s concerns and optimize the acceptability and uptake of HPV-based primary screening. Validated scales can be used by other researchers to improve and standardize the measurement of psychosocial factors affecting HPV test acceptability. Study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal articles; conference presentations; and direct communication with researchers, clinicians, policy makers, media, and specialty organizations. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/38917

Containing the COVID-19 pandemic is dependent on compliance with public health recommendations and mandates which is lower in younger compared to older adults. Furthermore, younger adults have demonstrated lower uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. The aim of this study was to assess preferences for COVID-19 related preventive health measures and vaccination and to explore their association with COVID-19 vaccine acceptability. Canadians aged 18–39 years were invited to participate in a web-based survey in August 2021. We used the Best-Worst-Scaling (BWS) methodology to collect and analyze preference data and multivariable binary logistic regression to estimate associations with vaccine acceptability. Based on 266 complete responses, we found strong preferences for physical distancing and wearing face masks, as compared to general hygiene and respiratory etiquette. High vaccine accessibility independent of the location, receiving successive doses of the same vaccine brand and higher vaccine uptake of people in younger adults’ social circle were highly preferred. Higher preferences for mandates requiring proof of vaccination and altruistic motives focused on protecting others by getting vaccinated were associated with vaccine acceptability. As the COVID-19 pandemic waxes and wanes, studies using larger, nationally representative samples are needed to replicate and validate these results to assess preferences for health behaviors corresponding to the latest recommendations. The use of this methodology could provide public health authorities with a unique opportunity to develop targeted, preference-based messaging that aligns with the latest guidelines to effectively encourage compliance and COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

COVID-19 vaccine-induced immunity wanes over time, and with the emergence of new variants, additional “booster” doses have been recommended in Canada. However, booster vaccination uptake has remained low, particularly amongst younger adults aged 18–39. A previous study by our research team found that an altruism-eliciting video increased COVID-19 vaccination intentions. Using qualitative methods, the present study aims to: (1) identify the factors that influence vaccine decision-making in Canadian younger adults; (2) understand younger adults’ perceptions of an altruism-eliciting video designed to increase COVID-19 vaccine intentions; and (3) explore how the video can be improved and adapted to the current pandemic context. We conducted three focus groups online with participants who: (1) received at least one booster vaccine, (2) received the primary series without any boosters, or (3) were unvaccinated. We used deductive and inductive approaches to analyze data. Deductively, informed by the realist evaluation framework, we synthesized data around three main themes: context, mechanism, and intervention-specific suggestions. Within each main theme, we deductively created subthemes based on the health belief model (HBM). For quotes that could not be captured by these subthemes, additional themes were created inductively. We found multiple factors that could be important considerations in future messaging to increase vaccine acceptance, such as feeling empowered, fostering confidence in government and institutions, providing diverse (such as both altruism and individualism) messaging, and including concrete data (such as the prevalence of vulnerable individuals). These findings suggest targeted messaging tailored to these themes would be helpful to increase COVID-19 booster vaccination amongst younger adults.

There are seemingly opposing findings on social media’s effect on mental well-being. Some studies report no detrimental effects, others no association and others even positive or buffering effects. However, social media has rapidly evolved in a short span of time and so has people’s use of the platforms. Collecting an accurate measure of social media use and other methodological challenges particularly affect data in this area. In this commentary, we discuss two longitudinal studies to elaborate these contracting findings on social media and mental health.