When can individual partisanship be tempered? Mass behavior and attitudes across the COVID-19 pandemic

High levels of anxiety and depression were documented shortly after the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic and were more prevalent in younger adults than in older adults. Knowing whether these age disparities persisted throughout multiple years of the COVID-19 pandemic and identifying associated factors will help guide health policy. To investigate age disparities in anxiety and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-sectional study consisted of a nationally representative online survey administered between April 2020 and August 2022 and included US adults who were not incarcerated. Data were analyzed between March and September 2022. The first 27 months of the COVID-19 pandemic included wide variation in infection rates, turbulence in US political and social life, and geopolitical instability. Primary exposures include individuals' age and economic precarity and pandemic-related events (eg, weekly state-level case counts and individual vaccination status). Symptoms of anxiety and depression were assessed via responses to 2-item screeners (Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2-item for anxiety and Patient Health Questionnaire-2 for depression). An individual's symptoms were identified as clinically elevated if scores exceeded validated thresholds. This study included 3 028 923 respondents (mean [SD] age, 48.9 [17.0] years; 1 567 603 [51.8%] female). In multiple regression analyses that include state fixed effects and survey-week fixed effects, likely anxiety and depressive disorders among 291 382 (40%) and 238 505 (33%) of adults aged 18 to 39 years, respectively, compared with 357 820 (31%) and 274 534 (24%) of adults aged 40 to 59 years and 225 295 (20%) and 183 695 (16%) adults aged 60 years and older. Levels declined throughout the pandemic period for those aged 40 years and older but remained elevated for younger adults. Analyses identified several associated factors of these age disparities. Younger adults' anxiety and depression increased more than older adults' after surges in COVID-19 case counts but decreased less following vaccination against the virus. Additionally, approximately one third of the age gap among individuals with depression and anxiety was attributed to economic precarity, to which younger adults are disproportionately exposed. In this cross-sectional study of anxiety and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic, economic precarity was associated with high anxiety and depression among younger adults in the US compared with older adults in the US. These findings suggest a need for greater mental health care and economic policies targeted toward younger adults.

Panel data of our interest consist of a moderate number of panels, while the panels contain a small number of observations. An estimator of common breaks in panel means without a boundary issue for this kind of scenario is proposed. In particular, the novel estimator is able to detect a common break point even when the change happens immediately after the first time point or just before the last observation period. Another advantage of the elaborated change point estimator is that it results in the last observation in situations with no structural breaks. The consistency of the change point estimator in panel data is established. The results are illustrated through a simulation study. As a by-product of the developed estimation technique, a theoretical utilization for correlation structure estimation, hypothesis testing and bootstrapping in panel data is demonstrated. A practical application to non-life insurance is presented, as well.

Rise in oral cancer risk factors associated with the COVID-19 pandemic mandates a more diligent approach to oral cancer screening and treatment

Racial and ethnic minority groups disproportionately experience food insecurity. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the US enacted temporary food assistance policies, including emergency allotments for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits. The effects of the pandemic and these policies on food insecurity by race and ethnicity are unclear. To examine prevalence trends in food insecurity by racial and ethnic groups and SNAP use before and during the pandemic. This cross-sectional survey study analyzed National Health Interview Survey data before (January 2019 to March 2020) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (April 2020 to December 2022). Participants were noninstitutionalized US adults (≥18 years) with low income (<200% federal poverty level). Statistical analysis was performed from September 25, 2023, to February 27, 2024. COVID-19 pandemic time period. Food insecurity was measured using the 10-item US Department of Agriculture Adult Food Security Survey module, categorizing participants as food secure (high or marginal food security) or insecure (low or very low food security). Survey-weighted Poisson regressions were modeled to examine changes in food insecurity prevalence over time by race and ethnicity (Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White) and by race and ethnicity and SNAP use (yes or no) including a 3-way interaction term (time × race and ethnicity × SNAP). Among 30 396 adults with low income, approximately one-half were female (56.0% [95% CI, 54.7%-57.2%] during the pre-COVID-19 time period; 57.4% [95% CI, 56.4%-58.4%] during the COVID-19 time period). Food insecurity prevalence decreased from 20.9% (95% CI, 19.9%-22.0%) before the COVID-19 pandemic to 18.8% (95% CI, 17.9%-19.7%) during the pandemic (P < .001). SNAP use prevalence increased overall (from 31.5% [95% CI, 30.1%-32.9%] to 36.0% [95% CI, 34.8%-37.3%]; P < .001) and for each racial and ethnic group. There were no significant differences in food insecurity changes over time by racial and ethnic group (Wald test F = 1.29; P = .28 for 2-way interaction). Among SNAP participants, food insecurity decreased for Asian, Hispanic, and White adults but did not change for Black adults; among non-SNAP participants, food insecurity did not change for Black, Hispanic, and White adults but increased for Asian adults (Wald test F = 4.43; P = .02 for 3-way interaction). During the COVID-19 pandemic, food insecurity decreased among SNAP participants in most racial and ethnic groups but did not decrease among non-SNAP participants in any group. These results suggest that during the pandemic, increased SNAP benefit amounts were associated with ameliorating food insecurity for many US adults who were able to access SNAP but did not reduce racial and ethnic disparities in food insecurity.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic represented a unique and widespread challenge that profoundly impacted the well-being of individuals across all age groups. This study aimed to identify the latent classes of resilience among a nationwide sample of US adults and characterize these classes according to their socio-demographic profiles.MethodsWe conducted a survey of 3,340 US adults from March to June 2020 through Qualtrics panel participants, stratified demographically to represent the US population by gender, race, age, and geographic region. A latent class analysis was performed to identify distinct profiles of resilience based on emotions, behaviors, physical symptoms, coping resources, and social support.ResultsFour latent classes of resilience were identified among US adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: Low Mental/Physical Resilience (5.6%), Low Mental/Social Resilience (12.9%), Low Social Resilience (24.9%), and High Resilience (56.5%). The Low Mental/Physical Resilience class, which faced the highest mental risk, was notably distinguished by its members being younger, essential workers, and having children at home. Socially vulnerable groups, such as females and those with lower income, were more likely to be part of the Low Mental/Social Resilience and Low Social Resilience classes.ConclusionDifferent groups of US adults may exhibit varying profiles of physical, mental, and social resilience during crises like the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings may help inform policies and interventions for mental health in future global health crises like COVID-19. During such crises, mental health support should be prioritized to essential workers and socially vulnerable groups, while accessible childcare services may particularly benefit parents who work.

In 2020, the Food and Drug Administration granted emergency use authorization for two COVID-19 vaccines. Two years later, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that more than 250 million individuals had received at least one dose of the vaccine. Despite the large numbers of individuals vaccinated against COVID-19, partisan differences surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine emerged, creating a potential challenge for health communications aimed at increasing vaccine uptake. A better understanding of partisan differences in attitudes and intentions towards vaccination may help guide public health strategies aimed at increasing vaccine uptake. To determine whether a commonly used theory of behavioral intentions used to craft public health messages explains partisan differences in intentions. Data were drawn from a national panel of US adults and collected between February 21, 2022, and March 3, 2022, using an online survey (n = 1845). Among respondents identifying as either Democrat or Republican (n = 1466), path analysis models were estimated to test whether partisan differences in vaccination or booster intentions were explained by the theoretical constructs of protection motivation theory (PMT). PMT accounted for approximately half of the covariate-adjusted mean difference in COVID-19 vaccination intentions between Democrats and Republicans, and nearly all the mean difference in booster intentions. Party affiliation indirectly affected intentions via its association with perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, vaccine/booster efficacy, and perceived costs of getting a COVID-19 vaccine or booster dose. Compared with Democrats, Republicans may be less likely to get vaccinated or receive a booster dose because of beliefs that they are less susceptible to COVID-19, that the vaccine is less effective, and that vaccination comes with disadvantages. Theories of behavioral intentions can help to identify the underlying theoretical determinants driving behavioral differences between political groups.

Smoking cessation is an urgent public health priority given that smoking is associated with increased risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes and other diseases. It is unknown how smoking cessation changed nationally during the COVID-19 pandemic. To investigate changes in smoking cessation-related behaviors in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-sectional study was conducted using 2011 to 2020 data on 788 008 individuals who had smoked in the past year from the nationally representative Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey. Representative retail scanner sales data between January 2017 and July 2021 for 1004 unique nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) universal product codes in 31 US states from NielsenIQ were also used. Calendar year and 4-week sales periods. Changes in annual self-reported prevalence of past-year quit attempts and recent successful cessation before (ie, 2011-2019) and during (ie, 2020) the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in sales volumes in millions of pieces of nicotine gum, lozenge, and patch brands before (1271 four-week sales periods between January 2017 and February 2020) and during (558 four-week sales periods between March 2020 and July 2021) the COVID-19 pandemic were calculated. The 2011 to 2020 pooled BRFSS sample (response rate range, 45.2%-49.9%) included 788 008 respondents (243 061 individuals ages 25-44 years [weighted percentage, 42.5%]; 374 519 men [weighted percentage, 55.7%]). For the first time since 2011, annual past-year quit attempt prevalence decreased between 2019 and 2020, from 65.2% (95% CI, 64.5% to 65.9%) to 63.2% (95% CI, 62.3% to 64.0%), with the largest relative decreases among individuals ages 45 to 64 years (61.4% [95% CI, 60.3% to 62.5%] vs 57.7% [95% CI, 56.3% to 59.2%]), those with 2 or more comorbidities (67.1% [95% CI, 66.0% to 68.2%] to 63.0% [95% CI, 61.6% to 64.4%]), and Black individuals (72.5% [95% CI, 70.3 to 74.6] vs 68.4% [95% CI, 65.3% to 71.3%]). Recent successful cessation remained unchanged during 2019 to 2020. Observed mean (SD) 4-week NRT sales volume in the prepandemic period was 105.6 (66.2) million gum pieces, 51.9 (31.6) million lozenges, and 2.0 (1.1) million patches. Compared with expected sales, observed sales during the COVID-19 pandemic were lower by 13.0% (95% CI, -13.7% to -12.3%) for lozenges, 6.4% (95% CI, -7.3% to -5.5%) for patches, and 1.2% (95% CI, -1.7% to -0.7%) for gum. This study found that serious smoking cessation activity among US adults decreased immediately and remained depressed for more than a year during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings suggest that smokers experiencing disproportionately negative outcomes during the pandemic should be reengaged and assisted in quit attempts.

How selfish is memory for cheaters? Evidence for moral and egoistic biases

The COVID-19 pandemic impacted some dietary habits of Americans. We examined characteristics associated with a high intake of sweet foods and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) during the COVID-19 pandemic among US adults. This was a cross-sectional study. The SummerStyles survey data were collected in 2021 among 4034 US adults (≥18 years). The frequencies were measured of consuming various sweet foods (chocolate/candy, doughnuts/sweet rolls/Danish/muffins/Pop-Tarts, cookies/cake/pie/brownies, and ice cream/frozen desserts) and SSB (regular sodas, sweetened coffee/tea drinks fruit drinks, sports drinks, and energy drinks) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The responses were categorized into 0, >0 to <1, 1 to <2, and ≥2 times/day. The descriptive variables were sociodemographics, food insecurity, weight status, metropolitan status, census regions, and eating habit changes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Multinomial regressions were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (AOR) for being a high consumer of sweet foods and SSB after controlling for characteristics. During 2021, 15% of adults reported consuming sweet foods ≥2 times/day, and 30% reported drinking SSB ≥2 times/day. The factors that were significantly associated with greater odds of high sweet food intake (≥2 times/day) were lower household income (AOR = 1.53 for <$35,000 vs. ≥$100,000), often/sometimes experiencing food insecurity (AOR = 1.41 vs. never), and eating more sweet foods than usual since start of the pandemic (AOR = 2.47 vs. same as usual). The factors that were significantly associated with greater odds of high SSB intake (≥2 times/day) were males (AOR = 1.51), lower education (AOR = 1.98 for ≤high school; AOR = 1.33 for some college vs. college graduate), currently having children (AOR = 1.65), living in nonmetropolitan areas (AOR = 1.34), and drinking more SSB than usual since the pandemic began (AOR = 2.23 vs. same as usual). Younger age, Black race, and reductions in consumption during COVID-19 were related to lower sweet food and SSB intakes. Our findings, which identified high consumers of sweet foods or SSB, can be used to inform efforts to reduce consumers' added sugars intake during pandemic recovery and support their health.

Trust in physicians and hospitals has been associated with achieving public health goals, but the increasing politicization of public health policies during the COVID-19 pandemic may have adversely affected such trust. To characterize changes in US adults' trust in physicians and hospitals over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic and the association between this trust and health-related behaviors. This survey study uses data from 24 waves of a nonprobability internet survey conducted between April 1, 2020, and January 31, 2024, among 443 455 unique respondents aged 18 years or older residing in the US, with state-level representative quotas for race and ethnicity, age, and gender. Self-report of trust in physicians and hospitals; self-report of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza vaccination and booster status. Survey-weighted regression models were applied to examine associations between sociodemographic features and trust and between trust and health behaviors. The combined data included 582 634 responses across 24 survey waves, reflecting 443 455 unique respondents. The unweighted mean (SD) age was 43.3 (16.6) years; 288 186 respondents (65.0%) reported female gender; 21 957 (5.0%) identified as Asian American, 49 428 (11.1%) as Black, 38 423 (8.7%) as Hispanic, 3138 (0.7%) as Native American, 5598 (1.3%) as Pacific Islander, 315 278 (71.1%) as White, and 9633 (2.2%) as other race and ethnicity (those who selected "Other" from a checklist). Overall, the proportion of adults reporting a lot of trust for physicians and hospitals decreased from 71.5% (95% CI, 70.7%-72.2%) in April 2020 to 40.1% (95% CI, 39.4%-40.7%) in January 2024. In regression models, features associated with lower trust as of spring and summer 2023 included being 25 to 64 years of age, female gender, lower educational level, lower income, Black race, and living in a rural setting. These associations persisted even after controlling for partisanship. In turn, greater trust was associated with greater likelihood of vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 4.94; 95 CI, 4.21-5.80) or influenza (adjusted OR, 5.09; 95 CI, 3.93-6.59) and receiving a SARS-CoV-2 booster (adjusted OR, 3.62; 95 CI, 2.99-4.38). This survey study of US adults suggests that trust in physicians and hospitals decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic. As lower levels of trust were associated with lesser likelihood of pursuing vaccination, restoring trust may represent a public health imperative.

Few things bind disparate groups together like a common obstacle. Yet, numerous polls suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic has been subject to a deep partisan divide. Using geo-tracking data of over 17 million smartphone users around the United States, we examined whether partisan differences predict objective physical-distancing behaviors. U.S. counties that voted for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in 2016 exhibited 16% less physical distancing from March 9 to May 8, 2020, as assessed by overall movement and visits to nonessential services (e.g., restaurants). Counties that watched more conservative media (i.e., Fox News) also exhibited reduced physical distancing, as did states with higher Trump approval. Contrary to our preregistered predictions, these differences did not weaken with time and remained even in pro-Trump states with active stay-at-home orders. Finally, lower physical distancing in strongly pro-Trump counties (those whose pro-Trump margin was 2 SDs above the mean) was associated with a 27% higher growth rate in COVID-19 infections. Taken together, these data suggest that behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic is not immune to the partisan divide in the United States and that partisan differences in physical distancing predict subsequent coronavirus infections and fatalities.

I study the co-evolution between public opinion and party policy in situations of crises by investigating a policy U-turn of a major Austrian right-wing party (FPÖ) during the Covid-19 pandemic. My analysis suggests the existence of both i) a “Downsian” effect, which causes voters to adapt their party preferences based on policy congruence and ii) a “party identification” effect, which causes partisans to realign their policy preferences based on “their” party's platform. Specifically, I use individual-level panel data to show that i) “corona skeptical” voters who did not vote for the FPÖ in the pre-Covid-19 elections of 2019 were more likely to vote for the party after it embraced “corona populism”, and ii) beliefs of respondents who declared that they voted for the FPÖ in 2019 diverged from the rest of the population in three out of four health-related dimensions only after the turn, causing them to underestimate the threat posed by Covid-19 compared to the rest of the population. Using aggregate-level panel data, I study whether the turn has produced significant behavioral differences which could be observed in terms of reported cases and deaths per capita. Paradoxically, after the turn the FPÖ vote share is significantly positively correlated with deaths per capita, but not with the reported number of infections. I hypothesize that this can be traced back to a self-selection bias in testing, which causes a correlation between the number of “corona skeptics” and the share of unreported cases after the turn. I find empirical support for this hypothesis in individual-level data from a Covid-19 prevalence study that involves information about participants’ true vs. reported infection status. I finally study a simple heterogeneous mixing epidemiological model and show that a testing bias can indeed explain the apparent paradox of an increase in deaths without an increase in reported cases. My results can, among others, be used to enrich formal analyses regarding the co-evolution between voter and party behavior.

Several effective COVID-19 vaccines are administered to combat the COVID-19 pandemic globally. In most African countries, there is a comparatively limited deployment of vaccination programs. In this work, we develop a mathematical compartmental model to assess the impact of vaccination programs on curtailing the burden of COVID-19 in eight African countries considering SARS-CoV-2 cumulative case data for each country for the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The model stratifies the total population into two subgroups based on individual vaccination status. We use the detection and death rates ratios between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals to quantify the vaccine’s effectiveness in reducing new COVID-19 infections and death, respectively. Additionally, we perform a numerical sensitivity analysis to assess the combined impact of vaccination and reduction in the SARS-CoV-2 transmission due to control measures on the control reproduction number (). Our results reveal that on average, at least 60% of the population in each considered African country should be vaccinated to curtail the pandemic (lower the below one). Moreover, lower values of are possible even when there is a low (10%) or moderate (30%) reduction in the SARS-CoV-2 transmission rate due to NPIs. Combining vaccination programs with various levels of reduction in the transmission rate due to NPI aids in curtailing the pandemic. Additionally, this study shows that vaccination significantly reduces the severity of the disease and death rates despite low efficacy against COVID-19 infections. The African governments need to design vaccination strategies that increase vaccine uptake, such as an incentive-based approach.

While most working-age adults in the US obtain health insurance through an employer, little is known about the implications of the massive pandemic-related job loss in March 2020 and subsequent rebound for rates of employer-sponsored coverage and uninsurance. To determine how health insurance coverage changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Analysis of trends in insurance coverage based on repeated cross sections of the US Census Bureau's Household Pulse Survey data, using linear regression to adjust for respondent's demographic and socioeconomic characteristics and state of residence. More than 1.2 million US adults aged 18 to 64 years were surveyed from April 23 through December 21, 2020. The COVID-19 pandemic, separated into spring and summer and fall and winter time periods during 2020, as well as state Medicaid expansion status. Regression-based estimates of the weekly percentage-point change in respondents' health insurance status, including having any health insurance, any employer-sponsored health insurance, or only nonemployer sponsored coverage. Nonemployer-sponsored coverage is categorized into private, Medicaid, and other public in some analyses. The study population included 1 212 816 US adults (51% female; mean [SD] age, 42 [13] years) across all 50 US states and Washington DC. Among these respondents, rates of employer-sponsored coverage declined by 0.2 percentage points each week during the COVID-19 pandemic. Other types of coverage, particularly from public sources, increased by 0.1 and 0.2 percentage points in the spring and summer and fall and winter periods, respectively. Overall, health insurance coverage of any type declined, particularly during the spring and summer period, during which uninsurance increased by 1.4 percentage points, representing more than 2.7 million newly uninsured people, over a 12-week period. In this cross-sectional study of data from the US Census Bureau's Household Pulse Survey, results showed that while public programs played an important role in protecting US adults from pandemic-driven declines in employment-sponsored coverage, many people became uninsured during 2020.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered stress, anxiety, and disruption to many individuals’ daily lives, which might impact eating habits. Objective: To examine changes in eating habits related to less healthy foods and beverages during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic among US adults. Design: Cross-sectional study. Participants/setting: Authors used SummerStyles data gathered in June 2020 among 3916 US adults (≥18 years). Main outcome measures: The outcome of interest was the reported frequency of consuming more (1) unhealthy snacks and desserts including chips, cookies, and ice cream and (2) sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) like regular soda, fruit drinks, sports/energy drinks, sweetened coffee/teas during the COVID-19 pandemic. Responses were categorized as Never/Rarely, Sometimes, or Often/Always. Explanatory variables were sociodemographics, weight status, and census regions. Statistical analyses performed: We used multinomial regressions to calculate adjusted odds ratios (AOR) for Sometimes or Often/Always consuming more unhealthy snacks/desserts (vs. Never/Rarely); and Sometimes or Often/Always more SSBs (vs. Never/Rarely). Results: Overall, 36% of adults reported sometimes consuming more unhealthy snacks/desserts; 16% did so often/always. Twenty-two percent of adults reported sometimes drinking more SSBs; 10% did so often/always. Factors significantly associated with higher odds of reporting often/always consuming more unhealthy snacks/desserts were younger adults (AOR range = 1.51–2.86 vs. adults ≥65 years), females (AOR = 1.58 vs. males), non-Hispanic Black (AOR = 1.89 vs. non-Hispanic White), lower household income (AOR = 2.01 for <USD 35,000 vs. ≥USD 100,000), and obesity (AOR = 1.56 vs. underweight/healthy weight). Factors significantly associated with odds of Often/Always drinking more SSBs were being younger (AOR range = 2.26–4.39 vs. adults ≥65 years), non-Hispanic Black (AOR = 3.25 vs. non-Hispanic White), Hispanic (AOR = 1.75 vs. non-Hispanic White), non-Hispanic Other race/ethnicity (AOR = 2.41 vs. non-Hispanic White), lower education (AOR = 2.03 for ≤high school; AOR = 1.80 for some college vs. college graduate), lower household income (AOR range = 1.64–3.15 vs. ≥USD 100,000), and obesity (AOR = 1.61 vs. underweight/healthy weight). Conclusions: Consuming more sugary foods and SSBs during the first phase of the pandemic was higher in younger adults, lower-income adults, people of racial/ethnic minority groups, and adults with obesity. Dietary shifts to less healthy foods and drinks may influence metabolic health if sustained long-term. Implementing strategies to support individual’s healthy eating habits during the ongoing pandemic and the pandemic recovery may benefit health and wellness.