-
1دورية أكاديمية
المؤلفون: Eleonore Batteux, Avri Bilovich, Samuel G B Johnson, David Tuckett
المصدر: BMJ Open, Vol 12, Iss 9 (2022)
مصطلحات موضوعية: Medicine
الوصف: Objective To examine the impact of the government communicating uncertainties relating to COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness on vaccination intention and trust after people are exposed to conflicting information.Design Experimental design where participants were randomly allocated to one of two groups.Setting Online.Participants 328 adults from a UK research panel.Intervention Participants received either certain or uncertain communications from a government representative about COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness, before receiving conflicting information about effectiveness.Main outcome measures Vaccination intention and trust in government.Results Compared with those who received the uncertain announcement from the government, participants who received the certain announcement reported a greater loss of vaccination intention (d=0.34, 95% CI (0.12 to 0.56), p=0.002) and trust (d=0.34, 95% CI (0.12 to 0.56), p=0.002) after receiving conflicting information.Conclusions Communicating with certainty about COVID-19 vaccines reduces vaccination intention and trust if conflicting information arises, whereas communicating uncertainties can protect people from the negative impact of exposure to conflicting information. There are likely to be other factors affecting vaccine intentions, which we do not account for in this study.Trial registration number Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/c73px/.
وصف الملف: electronic resource
-
2دورية أكاديمية
المؤلفون: Leah Ffion Jones, Richard Amlot, Dale Weston, Holly Carter, Theresa Marteau, Natalie Gold, Eleonore Batteux, Stefanie Bonfield
المصدر: BMJ Open, Vol 12, Iss 3 (2022)
مصطلحات موضوعية: Medicine
وصف الملف: electronic resource
-
3دورية أكاديمية
المؤلفون: Eleonore Batteux, Eamonn Ferguson, Richard J. Tunney
المصدر: BMC Palliative Care, Vol 19, Iss 1, Pp 1-12 (2020)
مصطلحات موضوعية: Surrogate decision-making, Self-other differences, End-of-life, Substituted judgment standard, Mixed methods, Special situations and conditions, RC952-1245
الوصف: Abstract Background A large number of end-of-life decisions are made by a next-of-kin for a patient who has lost their decision-making capacity. This has given rise to investigations into how surrogates make these decisions. The experimental perspective has focused on examining how the decisions we make for others differ from our own, whereas the qualitative perspective has explored surrogate insights into making these decisions. Methods We conducted a mixed methods study to bring these two perspectives together. This is crucial to comparing decision outcomes to the decision process. We asked older adult partners to make end-of-life decisions for each other. They then took part in a semi-structured interview about their decision process. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Results 24 participants took part in the study. Surrogates were more likely to take a life-saving treatment at the risk of a diminished quality of life for their partner than for themselves. This was consistent with their transcripts which showed that they wanted to give their partner a better chance of living. Although there was evidence of surrogate inaccuracy in the decision task, participants overwhelmingly reported their intention to make a decision which aligns with the substituted judgment standard. However, uncertainty about their wishes pushed them to consider other factors. Conclusions Taking a mixed methods approach allowed us to make novel comparisons between decision outcome and process. We found that the intentions of surrogates broadly align with the expectations of the substituted judgment standard and that previous discussions with their partner helps them to make a decision.
وصف الملف: electronic resource
-
4دورية أكاديمية
المؤلفون: Eleonore Batteux, Freya Mills, Leah Ffion Jones, Charles Symons, Dale Weston
المصدر: Vaccines, Vol 10, Iss 3, p 386 (2022)
مصطلحات موضوعية: COVID-19, vaccines, vaccine uptake, systematic review, interventions, behaviour change, Medicine
الوصف: Vaccination is vital to protect the public against COVID-19. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake. We searched a range of databases (Embase, Medline, Psychology & Behavioral Science, PsycInfo, Web of Science and NIH Preprints Portfolio) from March 2020 to July 2021 for studies which reported primary quantitative or qualitative research on interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Outcome measures included vaccination uptake and reported intention to vaccinate. Reviews, position papers, conference abstracts, protocol papers and papers not in English were excluded. The NHLBI quality assessment was used to assess risk of bias. In total, 39 studies across 33 papers met the inclusion criteria. A total of 28 were assessed as good quality. They included interventions relating to communication content, communication delivery, communication presentation, policy or vaccination delivery, with 7 measuring vaccination uptake and 32 measuring vaccination intention. A narrative synthesis was conducted, which highlighted that there is reasonable evidence from studies investigating real behaviour suggesting that personalising communications and sending booking reminders via text message increases vaccine uptake. Findings on vaccination intention are mixed but suggest that communicating uncertainty about the vaccine does not decrease intention, whereas making vaccination mandatory could have a negative impact. Although much of the research used experimental designs, very few measured real behavioural outcomes. Understanding which interventions are most effective amongst vaccine-hesitant populations and in the context of booster vaccinations will be important as vaccine roll outs continue across the world.
وصف الملف: electronic resource
-
5دورية أكاديمية
المؤلفون: Eleonore Batteux, Eamonn Ferguson, Richard J. Tunney
المصدر: Frontiers in Psychology, Vol 10 (2019)
مصطلحات موضوعية: surrogate decision-making, self-other differences, accountability, medical decision-making, DMfO, Psychology, BF1-990
الوصف: In the event that a patient has lost their decision-making capacity due to illness or injury, a surrogate is often appointed to do so on their behalf. Research has shown that people take less risk when making treatment decisions for other people than they do for themselves. This has been discussed as surrogates employing greater caution for others given the accountability they are faced with. We tested the prediction that making accountability salient reduces risk-taking for others relative to the self by manipulating the information shown to participants while they made treatment choices. One group was asked to focus on the consequences for the recipient’s family, another on the legal implications of their decisions, and another was not given additional information. Participants reduced their risk-taking for others compared to themselves, irrespective of the condition they were in. Although participants in each condition reported thinking about these factors to different extents, there were no clear differences in risk-taking between groups. However, we did find that, across all participants, thinking about legal consequences reduces risk-taking. We suggest that future research investigates how the effect of thinking about accountability on surrogate choices is mediated by feelings of accountability, in order to further examine the explanations suggested in the literature.
وصف الملف: electronic resource
-
6دورية أكاديمية
المؤلفون: Eleonore Batteux, Eamonn Ferguson, Richard J Tunney
المصدر: PLoS ONE, Vol 14, Iss 5, p e0216566 (2019)
الوصف: BackgroundAre we more risk-averse or risk-seeking when we make decisions on behalf of other people as opposed to ourselves? So far, findings have not been able to provide a clear and consistent answer.MethodWe propose a meta-analysis to assess whether self-other differences vary according to particular features of the decision. We reviewed 78 effect sizes from 49 studies (7,576 participants).ResultsThere was no overall self-other difference, but there were moderating effects of domain and frame. Decisions in the interpersonal domain were more risk-averse for self than for other. Decisions in the medical domain were more risk-seeking for self than for other. There were no overall self-other differences in the financial domain, however there was a moderating effect of frame: decisions in a gain frame were more risk-averse for self than other whereas decisions in a loss frame were more risk-seeking for self than other. This effect of frame was slightly different overall and in the medical domain, where self-other differences occurred in a loss frame but not in a gain frame.ConclusionFuture work should continue to investigate how the specific content and context of the decision impacts self-other differences in order to understand the effects of domain and frame we report.
وصف الملف: electronic resource
Relation: https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203
-
7
المؤلفون: Eleonore Batteux, Stefanie Bonfield, Leah Ffion Jones, Holly Carter, Natalie Gold, Richard Amlot, Theresa Marteau, Dale Weston
المساهمون: Batteux, Eleonore [0000-0002-5494-7385], Bonfield, Stefanie [0000-0001-7513-2575], Jones, Leah Ffion [0000-0002-0448-3471], Carter, Holly [0000-0002-2084-7263], Gold, Natalie [0000-0003-0706-1618], Amlot, Richard [0000-0003-3481-6588], Marteau, Theresa [0000-0003-3025-1129], Weston, Dale [0000-0001-5304-7572], Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository
المصدر: BMJ open. 12(3)
مصطلحات موضوعية: Adult, SARS-CoV-2, RA0421 Public health. Hygiene. Preventive Medicine, public health, COVID-19, Humans, General Medicine, Negative Results, HV Social pathology. Social and public welfare. Criminology
الوصف: ObjectivesIndividuals who receive a negative lateral flow coronavirus test result may misunderstand it as meaning ‘no risk of infectiousness’, giving false reassurance. This experiment tested the impact of adding information to negative test result messages about residual risk and the need to continue protective behaviours.Design.4 (residual risk) × 2 (post-test result behaviours) between-subjects design.Setting.Online.Participants1200 adults from a representative UK sample recruited via Prolific (12–15 March 2021).InterventionsParticipants were randomly allocated to one of eight messages. Residual risk messages were: (1) ‘Your coronavirus test result is negative’ (control); (2) message 1 plus ‘It’s likely you were not infectious when the test was done’ (current NHS Test & Trace (T&T); (3) message 2 plus ‘But there is still a chance you may be infectious’ (elaborated NHS T&T); and (4) message 3 plus infographic depicting residual risk (elaborated NHS T&T+infographic). Each message contained either no additional information or information about the need to continue following guidelines and protective behaviours.Outcome measures(1) Proportion understanding residual risk of infectiousness and (2) likelihood of engaging in protective behaviours (scales 1–7).ResultsThe control message decreased understanding relative to the current NHS T&T message: 54% versus 71% (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR)=0.56 95% CI 0.34 to 0.95, p=0.030). Understanding increased with the elaborated NHS T&T (89%; AOR=3.25 95% CI 1.64 to 6.42, p=0.001) and elaborated NHS T&T+infographic (91%; AOR=5.16 95% CI 2.47 to 10.82, p2(1)=0.18, p=0.669), being high (M=6.4, SD=0.9) across the sample.ConclusionsA considerable proportion of participants misunderstood the residual risk following a negative test result. The addition of a single sentence (‘But there is still a chance you may be infectious’) to current NHS T&T wording increased understanding of residual risk.Trial registration numberOSF: https://osf.io/byfz3/
وصف الملف: text; text/xml; application/pdf
-
8
المؤلفون: Leah Ffion Jones, Eleonore Batteux, Stefanie Bonfield, Jaskiran Kaur Bhogal, Jo Taylor, Camila Caiado, Jacqui Ramagge, Dale Weston
المصدر: BMJ Open
BMJ Open, 2021, Vol.11(12), pp.e055644 [Peer Reviewed Journal]مصطلحات موضوعية: public health, COVID-19, General Medicine, qualitative research
الوصف: ObjectivesTo evaluate the asymptomatic coronavirus testing programme at Durham University by exploring students’ barriers and facilitators to taking part and provide recommendations to improve the programme.DesignQualitative interviews.SettingOnline.Participants30 students enrolled at Durham University were interviewed in March 2021.Main outcome measuresAttitudes towards testing, experiences of testing and barriers and facilitators to engaging in testing at Durham University.ResultsKey motivations for testing included protecting oneself and others and accessing facilities and events. The process of booking, accessing and doing a test was mostly easy and convenient, although some may prefer home testing. There were concerns about the accuracy of tests and the implications of a positive result. Some highlighted they might be less likely to engage in testing if vaccinated. A negative test result provided confidence to engage in their daily activities, while encouraging some to socialise more.ConclusionsThe findings show that the testing programme at Durham University is convenient and well organised, with testing as a potential requirement to access social events, and self-isolation support being key contributor to uptake. These findings provide insights into young adults’ attitudes towards testing and can inform testing programmes in other universities and settings with asymptomatic testing programmes.
وصف الملف: application/pdf
-
9
المؤلفون: Yih Jiun Tan, Marieke de Vries, Elizabeth Sheppard, Meryem Betul Yasdiman, Sabrina Cader, Eleonore Batteux, Lucy Colleer
المصدر: Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
مصطلحات موضوعية: Adult, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Male, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, medicine.medical_specialty, Universities, Interaction, Beliefs, Culture, Developmental psychology, Cultural background, Young Adult, Cultural diversity, Developmental and Educational Psychology, medicine, Humans, Cross-cultural, Autistic Disorder, Students, Attitudes acceptance, Cultural influence, Original Paper, Mediation (Marxist theory and media studies), Public health, Knowledge level, Malaysia, medicine.disease, United Kingdom, Autism, Female, Psychology
الوصف: Cultural background might influence knowledge and attitudes regarding autism, influencing willingness to interact. We studied whether beliefs, knowledge, contact, and attitude differed between the UK and Malaysia. With mediation analyses, we studied how these factors influenced willingness to interact. Autism was more often linked to food in the UK, and to upbringing in Malaysia. Knowledge, contact, and acceptance were greater in the UK. When excluding psychology students, Malaysian students were less willing to interact with autistic people. Knowledge and contact appeared to improve acceptance, but acceptance did not mediate the relation between country, beliefs, knowledge, and experience; and willingness to interact. Knowledge and contact regarding autism might improve acceptance in different cultures, but how acceptance could improve interaction is unclear.
-
10
المؤلفون: Jo Taylor, Holly Carter, Eleonore Batteux
مصطلحات موضوعية: Gerontology, education.field_of_study, Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), Pandemic, Population, Ethnic group, Psychological intervention, Young adult, Psychology, education, Mental health, Qualitative research
الوصف: BackgroundThere is evidence that the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the mental health of the UK population, but this needs synthesising to guide effective policy recommendations and ensure support is targeted to populations most at risk. We conducted a rapid systematic review of the evidence of the impact of COVID-19 and associated restrictions on the mental health of UK adults, including risk and protective factors.MethodA range of databases were searched to identify eligible studies. Studies were eligible if they reported primary quantitative or qualitative research on the mental health of UK adults between March 2020 and March 2021. Journal publications and pre-prints were included. Reviews, position papers, protocol papers and studies published in languages other than English were excluded. The study authors screened papers for eligibility and included 102 papers in the analysis.ResultsThe evidence from this review indicates that the mental health of UK adults has declined since the start of the pandemic, with different populations being unequally affected. Populations particularly affected are women, young adults, ethnic minorities, people from lower socio-economic backgrounds, people with pre-existing conditions and people who have had COVID-19. Other risk factors include having to isolate and time spent watching pandemic related news. Protective factors include social contact and maintaining healthy behaviours, such as physical activity.ConclusionsPolicy should aim to discourage risky behaviours while ensuring support is available for people to engage in protective behaviours. Interventions should be directed towards populations that have been most adversely affected. Addressing the decline in mental health across the UK population since the COVID-19 pandemic will require increasing mental health provision and ensuring equitable access to support.
URL الوصول: https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::ca433c70ced97f724a9de65b85b2d693
https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.23.21262469
Full Text Finder 
Find this article in full text from Springer Verlag.