4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Preferences for public engagement in decision-making regarding four COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions in the Netherlands: A survey study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Worldwide, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were implemented during the COVID-19 crisis, which heavily impacted the daily lives of citizens. This study considers public perspectives on whether and how public engagement (PE) can contribute to future decision-making about NPIs.

          Methods

          An online survey was conducted among a representative sample of the public in the Netherlands from 27 October to 9 November 2021. Perceptions and preferences about PE in decision-making on NPIs to control COVID-19 were collected. Preferences regarding four NPIs were studied: Nightly curfew (NC); Digital Covid Certificate (DCC); Closure of elementary schools and daycares (CED); and physical distancing (1.5M). Engagement was surveyed based on the five participation modes of the IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation, namely inform, consult, advice, collaborate and empower.

          Results

          Of the 4981 respondents, 25% expressed a desire to engage in decision-making, as they thought engagement could improve their understanding and the quality of NPIs, as well as increase their trust in the government. Especially for the NPIs DCC and NC, respondents found it valuable to engage and provide their perspective on trade-offs in values (e.g. opening up society versus division in society by vaccination status). Respondents agreed that the main responsibility in decision-making should stay with experts and policy-makers. 50% of respondents did not want to engage, as they felt no need to engage or considered themselves insufficiently knowledgeable. Inform was deemed the most preferred mode of engagement, and empower the least preferred mode of engagement.

          Conclusion

          We reveal large variations in public preferences regarding engagement in NPI decision-making. With 25% of respondents expressing an explicit desire to engage, and considering the benefit of PE in other areas of (public) health, opportunities for PE in NPI decision-making might have been overlooked during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our results provide guidance into when and how to execute PE in future outbreaks.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Ranking the effectiveness of worldwide COVID-19 government interventions

            Assessing the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 is critical to inform future preparedness response plans. Here we quantify the impact of 6,068 hierarchically coded NPIs implemented in 79 territories on the effective reproduction number, Rt, of COVID-19. We propose a modelling approach that combines four computational techniques merging statistical, inference and artificial intelligence tools. We validate our findings with two external datasets recording 42,151 additional NPIs from 226 countries. Our results indicate that a suitable combination of NPIs is necessary to curb the spread of the virus. Less disruptive and costly NPIs can be as effective as more intrusive, drastic, ones (for example, a national lockdown). Using country-specific 'what-if' scenarios, we assess how the effectiveness of NPIs depends on the local context such as timing of their adoption, opening the way for forecasting the effectiveness of future interventions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Community engagement for COVID-19 prevention and control: a rapid evidence synthesis

              Introduction Community engagement has been considered a fundamental component of past outbreaks, such as Ebola. However, there is concern over the lack of involvement of communities and ‘bottom-up’ approaches used within COVID-19 responses thus far. Identifying how community engagement approaches have been used in past epidemics may support more robust implementation within the COVID-19 response. Methodology A rapid evidence review was conducted to identify how community engagement is used for infectious disease prevention and control during epidemics. Three databases were searched in addition to extensive snowballing for grey literature. Previous epidemics were limited to Ebola, Zika, SARS, Middle East respiratory syndromeand H1N1 since 2000. No restrictions were applied to study design or language. Results From 1112 references identified, 32 articles met our inclusion criteria, which detail 37 initiatives. Six main community engagement actors were identified: local leaders, community and faith-based organisations, community groups, health facility committees, individuals and key stakeholders. These worked on different functions: designing and planning, community entry and trust building, social and behaviour change communication, risk communication, surveillance and tracing, and logistics and administration. Conclusion COVID-19’s global presence and social transmission pathways require social and community responses. This may be particularly important to reach marginalised populations and to support equity-informed responses. Aligning previous community engagement experience with current COVID-19 community-based strategy recommendations highlights how communities can play important and active roles in prevention and control. Countries worldwide are encouraged to assess existing community engagement structures and use community engagement approaches to support contextually specific, acceptable and appropriate COVID-19 prevention and control measures.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: ValidationRole: Writing – original draft
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS One
                plos
                PLOS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                5 October 2023
                2023
                5 October 2023
                : 18
                : 10
                : e0292119
                Affiliations
                [1 ] National Coordination Centre for Communicable Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands
                [2 ] Athena Institute, Faculty of Science, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [3 ] Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                St John’s University, UNITED STATES
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4133-5344
                Article
                PONE-D-22-27762
                10.1371/journal.pone.0292119
                10553365
                37796885
                84c4a0fe-5cb5-4236-abb9-10658546a412
                © 2023 Kemper et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 7 October 2022
                : 12 September 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 3, Pages: 18
                Funding
                The authors received no specific funding for this work.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Neuroscience
                Cognitive Science
                Cognitive Psychology
                Decision Making
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Cognitive Psychology
                Decision Making
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Cognitive Psychology
                Decision Making
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Neuroscience
                Cognitive Science
                Cognition
                Decision Making
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Viral Diseases
                Covid 19
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Research Design
                Survey Research
                Surveys
                People and places
                Geographical locations
                Europe
                European Union
                Netherlands
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Infectious Disease Control
                Social Distancing
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Epidemiology
                Pandemics
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Diagnostic Medicine
                Virus Testing
                Social Sciences
                Sociology
                Education
                Educational Attainment
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files. Minor changes have been made to the underlying dataset to secure the privacy of our respondents.
                COVID-19

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article