23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Dutch COVID-19 lockdown measures increased trust in government and trust in science: A difference-in-differences analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          Many governments have implemented strict lockdown measures to prevent the transmission of the new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Compliance with these restrictions is vital and depends greatly on the level of trust in the institutions central to their development and implementation. The objectives of this study were to assess: (1) the effects of the Dutch lockdown measures imposed in March 2020 on trust in government and trust in science; and (2) whether these differ across social groups. We draw on unique data from the high-quality Longitudinal Internet Studies for the Social Sciences panel, which comprises a true probability sample of Dutch households (average participation rate: 80.4%). Our data were collected on an ongoing basis from December 2017 to March 2020 ( n = 2219). Using the implementation of lockdown measures in mid-March as a natural experiment, we employed difference-in-differences analyses to assess the causal effect of the Dutch lockdown measures on trust in government and trust in science. We estimated that the imposition of the measures caused an 18% increase (95% confidence interval (CI):15%–21%)) in trust in government and a 6% increase (95% CI: 4%–8%) in trust in science. The impact on trust in government was greater among the participants aged 65 and older and those with poor self-assessed health, although the relevant CIs were wide and, in the case of self-assessed health, included the null. No differential effects were observed for trust in science. Our study indicates that the strict public-health measures imposed in the Netherlands during an acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic generated trust in the institutions involved in drafting and implementing them, especially among those with a higher risk of serious health outcomes. This suggests that, to prevent a major public-health crisis, people appreciate firm government intervention during the acute phase of an infectious disease pandemic.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

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

          Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response

          The COVID-19 pandemic represents a massive global health crisis. Because the crisis requires large-scale behaviour change and places significant psychological burdens on individuals, insights from the social and behavioural sciences can be used to help align human behaviour with the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts. Here we discuss evidence from a selection of research topics relevant to pandemics, including work on navigating threats, social and cultural influences on behaviour, science communication, moral decision-making, leadership, and stress and coping. In each section, we note the nature and quality of prior research, including uncertainty and unsettled issues. We identify several insights for effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight important gaps researchers should move quickly to fill in the coming weeks and months.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Severe Outcomes Among Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) — United States, February 12–March 16, 2020

            On March 18, 2020, this report was posted online as an MMWR Early Release. Globally, approximately 170,000 confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) have been reported, including an estimated 7,000 deaths in approximately 150 countries ( 1 ). On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic ( 2 ). Data from China have indicated that older adults, particularly those with serious underlying health conditions, are at higher risk for severe COVID-19–associated illness and death than are younger persons ( 3 ). Although the majority of reported COVID-19 cases in China were mild (81%), approximately 80% of deaths occurred among adults aged ≥60 years; only one (0.1%) death occurred in a person aged ≤19 years ( 3 ). In this report, COVID-19 cases in the United States that occurred during February 12–March 16, 2020 and severity of disease (hospitalization, admission to intensive care unit [ICU], and death) were analyzed by age group. As of March 16, a total of 4,226 COVID-19 cases in the United States had been reported to CDC, with multiple cases reported among older adults living in long-term care facilities ( 4 ). Overall, 31% of cases, 45% of hospitalizations, 53% of ICU admissions, and 80% of deaths associated with COVID-19 were among adults aged ≥65 years with the highest percentage of severe outcomes among persons aged ≥85 years. In contrast, no ICU admissions or deaths were reported among persons aged ≤19 years. Similar to reports from other countries, this finding suggests that the risk for serious disease and death from COVID-19 is higher in older age groups. Data from cases reported from 49 states, the District of Columbia, and three U.S. territories ( 5 ) to CDC during February 12–March 16 were analyzed. Cases among persons repatriated to the United States from Wuhan, China and from Japan (including patients repatriated from cruise ships) were excluded. States and jurisdictions voluntarily reported data on laboratory-confirmed cases of COVID-19 using previously developed data collection forms ( 6 ). The cases described in this report include both COVID-19 cases confirmed by state or local public health laboratories as well as those with a positive test at the state or local public health laboratories and confirmation at CDC. No data on serious underlying health conditions were available. Data on these cases are preliminary and are missing for some key characteristics of interest, including hospitalization status (1,514), ICU admission (2,253), death (2,001), and age (386). Because of these missing data, the percentages of hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths (case-fatality percentages) were estimated as a range. The lower bound of these percentages was estimated by using all cases within each age group as denominators. The corresponding upper bound of these percentages was estimated by using only cases with known information on each outcome as denominators. As of March 16, a total of 4,226 COVID-19 cases had been reported in the United States, with reports increasing to 500 or more cases per day beginning March 14 (Figure 1). Among 2,449 patients with known age, 6% were aged ≥85, 25% were aged 65–84 years, 18% each were aged 55–64 years and 45–54 years, and 29% were aged 20–44 years (Figure 2). Only 5% of cases occurred in persons aged 0–19 years. FIGURE 1 Number of new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases reported daily*,† (N = 4,226) — United States, February 12–March 16, 2020 * Includes both COVID-19 cases confirmed by state or local public health laboratories, as well as those testing positive at the state or local public health laboratories and confirmed at CDC. † Cases identified before February 28 were aggregated and reported during March 1–3. The figure is a histogram, an epidemiologic curve showing 4,226 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, by date of case report, in the United States during February 12–March 16, 2020. Figure 2 Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations,* intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, † and deaths, § by age group — United States, February 12– March 16, 2020 * Hospitalization status missing or unknown for 1,514 cases. † ICU status missing or unknown for 2,253 cases. § Illness outcome or death missing or unknown for 2,001 cases. The figure is a bar chart showing the number of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations, intensive care unit admissions, and deaths, by age group, in the United States during February 12– March 16, 2020. Among 508 (12%) patients known to have been hospitalized, 9% were aged ≥85 years, 36% were aged 65–84 years, 17% were aged 55–64 years, 18% were 45–54 years, and 20% were aged 20–44 years. Less than 1% of hospitalizations were among persons aged ≤19 years (Figure 2). The percentage of persons hospitalized increased with age, from 2%–3% among persons aged ≤19 years, to ≥31% among adults aged ≥85 years. (Table). TABLE Hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and case–fatality percentages for reported COVID–19 cases, by age group —United States, February 12–March 16, 2020 Age group (yrs) (no. of cases) %* Hospitalization ICU admission Case-fatality 0–19 (123) 1.6–2.5 0 0 20–44 (705) 14.3–20.8 2.0–4.2 0.1–0.2 45–54 (429) 21.2–28.3 5.4–10.4 0.5–0.8 55–64 (429) 20.5–30.1 4.7–11.2 1.4–2.6 65–74 (409) 28.6–43.5 8.1–18.8 2.7–4.9 75–84 (210) 30.5–58.7 10.5–31.0 4.3–10.5 ≥85 (144) 31.3–70.3 6.3–29.0 10.4–27.3 Total (2,449) 20.7–31.4 4.9–11.5 1.8–3.4 * Lower bound of range = number of persons hospitalized, admitted to ICU, or who died among total in age group; upper bound of range = number of persons hospitalized, admitted to ICU, or who died among total in age group with known hospitalization status, ICU admission status, or death. Among 121 patients known to have been admitted to an ICU, 7% of cases were reported among adults ≥85 years, 46% among adults aged 65–84 years, 36% among adults aged 45–64 years, and 12% among adults aged 20–44 years (Figure 2). No ICU admissions were reported among persons aged ≤19 years. Percentages of ICU admissions were lowest among adults aged 20–44 years (2%–4%) and highest among adults aged 75–84 years (11%–31%) (Table). Among 44 cases with known outcome, 15 (34%) deaths were reported among adults aged ≥85 years, 20 (46%) among adults aged 65–84 years, and nine (20%) among adults aged 20–64 years. Case-fatality percentages increased with increasing age, from no deaths reported among persons aged ≤19 years to highest percentages (10%–27%) among adults aged ≥85 years (Table) (Figure 2). Discussion Since February 12, 4,226 COVID-19 cases were reported in the United States; 31% of cases, 45% of hospitalizations, 53% of ICU admissions, and 80% of deaths occurred among adults aged ≥65 years with the highest percentage of severe outcomes among persons aged ≥85 years. These findings are similar to data from China, which indicated >80% of deaths occurred among persons aged ≥60 years ( 3 ). These preliminary data also demonstrate that severe illness leading to hospitalization, including ICU admission and death, can occur in adults of any age with COVID-19. In contrast, persons aged ≤19 years appear to have milder COVID-19 illness, with almost no hospitalizations or deaths reported to date in the United States in this age group. Given the spread of COVID-19 in many U.S. communities, CDC continues to update current recommendations and develop new resources and guidance, including for adults aged ≥65 years as well as those involved in their care ( 7 , 8 ). Approximately 49 million U.S. persons are aged ≥65 years ( 9 ), and many of these adults, who are at risk for severe COVID-19–associated illness, might depend on services and support to maintain their health and independence. To prepare for potential COVID-19 illness among persons at high risk, family members and caregivers of older adults should know what medications they are taking and ensure that food and required medical supplies are available. Long-term care facilities should be particularly vigilant to prevent the introduction and spread of COVID-19 ( 10 ). In addition, clinicians who care for adults should be aware that COVID-19 can result in severe disease among persons of all ages. Persons with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 should monitor their symptoms and call their provider for guidance if symptoms worsen or seek emergency care for persistent severe symptoms. Additional guidance is available for health care providers on CDC’s website (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nCoV/hcp/index.html). This report describes the current epidemiology of COVID-19 in the United States, using preliminary data. The findings in this report are subject to at least five limitations. First, data were missing for key variables of interest. Data on age and outcomes, including hospitalization, ICU admission, and death, were missing for 9%–53% of cases, which likely resulted in an underestimation of these outcomes. Second, further time for follow-up is needed to ascertain outcomes among active cases. Third, the initial approach to testing was to identify patients among those with travel histories or persons with more severe disease, and these data might overestimate the prevalence of severe disease. Fourth, data on other risk factors, including serious underlying health conditions that could increase risk for complications and severe illness, were unavailable at the time of this analysis. Finally, limited testing to date underscores the importance of ongoing surveillance of COVID-19 cases. Additional investigation will increase the understanding about persons who are at risk for severe illness and death from COVID-19 and inform clinical guidance and community-based mitigation measures.* The risk for serious disease and death in COVID-19 cases among persons in the United States increases with age. Social distancing is recommended for all ages to slow the spread of the virus, protect the health care system, and help protect vulnerable older adults. Further, older adults should maintain adequate supplies of nonperishable foods and at least a 30-day supply of necessary medications, take precautions to keep space between themselves and others, stay away from those who are sick, avoid crowds as much as possible, avoid cruise travel and nonessential air travel, and stay home as much as possible to further reduce the risk of being exposed ( 7 ). Persons of all ages and communities can take actions to help slow the spread of COVID-19 and protect older adults. † Summary What is already known about this topic? Early data from China suggest that a majority of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) deaths have occurred among adults aged ≥60 years and among persons with serious underlying health conditions. What is added by this report? This first preliminary description of outcomes among patients with COVID-19 in the United States indicates that fatality was highest in persons aged ≥85, ranging from 10% to 27%, followed by 3% to 11% among persons aged 65–84 years, 1% to 3% among persons aged 55-64 years, <1% among persons aged 20–54 years, and no fatalities among persons aged ≤19 years. What are the implications for public health practice? COVID-19 can result in severe disease, including hospitalization, admission to an intensive care unit, and death, especially among older adults. Everyone can take actions, such as social distancing, to help slow the spread of COVID-19 and protect older adults from severe illness.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Meta-analysis of the relationship between risk perception and health behavior: the example of vaccination.

              Risk perceptions are central to many health behavior theories. However, the relationship between risk perceptions and behavior, muddied by instances of inappropriate assessment and analysis, often looks weak. A meta-analysis of eligible studies assessing the bivariate association between adult vaccination and perceived likelihood, susceptibility, or severity was conducted. Thirty-four studies met inclusion criteria (N = 15,988). Risk likelihood (pooled r = .26), susceptibility (pooled r = .24), and severity (pooled r = .16) significantly predicted vaccination behavior. The risk perception-behavior relationship was larger for studies that were prospective, had higher quality risk measures, or had unskewed risk or behavior measures. The consistent relationships between risk perceptions and behavior, larger than suggested by prior meta-analyses, suggest that risk perceptions are rightly placed as core concepts in theories of health behavior. (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Soc Sci Med
                Soc Sci Med
                Social Science & Medicine (1982)
                The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
                0277-9536
                1873-5347
                5 March 2021
                April 2021
                5 March 2021
                : 275
                : 113819
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
                [b ]Department of Public Administration and Sociology, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, 3000, DR, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
                Article
                S0277-9536(21)00151-9 113819
                10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113819
                9756755
                33725488
                e852e909-0307-4785-b952-faf68b18cde5
                © 2021 The Authors

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 23 February 2021
                : 2 March 2021
                Categories
                Article

                Health & Social care
                covid-19 lockdown measures,difference-in-differences,institutional trust,netherlands,trust in government,trust in science

                Comments

                Comment on this article