Search results

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused severe challenges to ethnic minorities in the UK. While the experiences of migrants are both complex and varied depending on individuals' social class, race, cultural proximity to the host country and acculturation levels, more in-depth studies are necessary to fully understand how COVID-19 affects specific migrant groups and their health. Taiwanese migrants were selected because they are an understudied group. Also, there were widespread differences in pandemic management between the UK and Taiwan, making this group an ideal case for understanding how their acculturation journey can be disrupted by a crisis.

Qualitative data were collected at two different time points, at the start of the UK pandemic (March/April 2020) and six months on (October/November 2020), to explore migrant coping experiences over time. Theoretically, the authors apply acculturation theory through the lens of coping, while discussing health-consumption practices, as empirical evidence.

Before the outbreak of the pandemic, participants worked hard to achieve high levels of integration in the UK. The pandemic changed this; participants faced unexpected changes in the UK’s sociocultural structures. They were forced to exercise the layered and complex “coping with coping” in a hostile host environment that signalled their new marginalised status. They faced impossible choices, from catching a life-threatening disease to being seen as overly cautious. Such experience, over time, challenged their integration to the host country, resulting in a loss of faith in the UK’s health system, consequently increasing separation from the host culture and society.

It is important to note that the Taiwanese sample recruited through Facebook community groups is biased and has a high level of homogeneity. These participants were well-integrated, middle-class migrants who were highly educated, relatively resourceful and active on social media. More studies are needed to fully understand the impact on well-being and acculturation of migrants from different cultural, contextual and social backgrounds. This being the case, the authors can speculate that migrants with less resource are likely to have found the pandemic experience even more challenging. More studies are needed to fully understand migrant experience from different backgrounds.

Public health policymakers are advised to dedicate more resources to understand migrants' experiences in the host country. In particular, this paper has shown how separation, especially if embraced temporarily, is not necessarily a negative outcome to be corrected with specific policies. It can be strategically adopted by migrants as a way of defending their health and well-being from an increasingly hostile environment. Migrants' home country experience provides vicarious learning opportunities to acquire good practices. Their voices should be encouraged rather than in favour of a surprising orthodox and rather singular approach in the discussion of public health management.

The paper has clear public health policy implications. Firstly, public health policymakers are advised to dedicate more resources to understand migrants' experiences in the host country. Acknowledging migrants' voice is a critical first step to contribute to the development of a fair and inclusive society. Secondly, to retain skilful migrants and avoid a future brain-drain, policymakers are advised to advance existing infrastructure to provide more incentives to support and retain migrant talents in the post-pandemic recovery phase.

This paper reveals how a group of previously well-integrated migrants had to exercise “coping with coping” during the COVID crisis. This experience, over time, challenged their integration to the host country, resulting in a loss of faith in the UK’s health system, consequently increasing separation from the host culture and society. It contributes to the understanding of acculturation by showing how a such crisis can significantly disrupt migrants' acculturation journey, challenging them to re-acculturate and reconsider their identity stance. It shows how separation was indeed a good option for migrants for protecting their well-being from a newly hostile host environment.

The manoeuvring of everyday spaces to nudge the population towards a physically active lifestyle or active living has been the hallmark of the policy modes of instrumental thinking for combating physical inactivity, particularly in urban spaces across the world. Thus, the active promotion of fitness activities by the postcolonial state signifies the centrality of the body in disciplining docile and inactive individuals to produce fit and active citizens. Such a population-based approach has often raised concerns about social and spatial justice and expressions of identity, liberty, and surveillance, even as everyday spaces in cities continue to exhibit elements of colonial governmentality. In the midst of this, the body continues to be central to the ways in which such a population makes sense of being physically active and ‘being healthy’ in their everyday lives. By employing a multi-sited ethnography conducted over a period of 10 months in different public parks in Delhi, the present chapter aims to understand the ways in which fitness activities are performed, produced, and practised in the city. While public parks themselves are a product of colonial urban governmentalities in Delhi, this chapter argues that active bodies engaged in everyday sports in the parks also emerge as the critical site for the bodily inscription of global standards of physical activity. Driven by Western fitness regimes, individuals tend to understand themselves as entrepreneurial selves that can bring to life this imagination of the body ideal even while being engaged in various fitness and leisure activities aimed at being ‘healthy’.

COVID-19 has caused unprecedented disruption to health systems. There is much to be gained by capturing what was learned from changes and adaptations made by health services and systems. The Ministry of Health in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, sought to prioritise health services research (HSR) to address critical issues arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. We tested a priority setting methodology to create priorities for a specific funding opportunity and to extract generalisable lessons.

A virtual roundtable meeting of key stakeholders was held in June 2020. We used a modified Nominal Group Technique (NGT) for priority setting, with potential items (n = 35) grouped under headings. Data was analysed through a reflective deliberative process.

We engaged 89 senior policy makers, health service executives, clinicians and researchers in the roundtable. The NGT proved an efficient method with participants reaching consensus on eight priorities. Findings included strong support for learning from the rapid response to COVID-19 and addressing needs of vulnerable populations and the health workforce. Opinions differed about strategic areas investment and where learnings should be via internal evaluation rather than funded research. Three of the eight recommended priorities were included in the funding opportunity.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) required unprecedented change and adaptations within health systems, and rapid, applied health services research can help to create, understand and (where relevant) sustain change beyond the immediate impact of the pandemic. While final decisions may be dependent on a wider range of considerations by government, stakeholder enthusiasm for engagement in priority setting exercises may be dampened if they do not perceive their application in decision-making.

A modified nominal group technique can be used to set research priorities in constrained conditions by engaging large numbers of stakeholders in rankings and then using an online delivery of a roundtable and to reach consensus on priorities in real time. Recommended priorities for health services research can be readily generated through rapid engagement but does not guarantee their application.

Australia’s swift response to COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 was perceived as a relative success due to the rapid public health and policy response and a relatively low number of cases. This response was underpinned by systematic knowledge mobilisation including support for targeted and prioritised health services research to fill knowledge gaps.

Setting priority processes can provide rich, engaged input to support government funding decisions about HSR. A wide range of dynamic and iterative processes influence decision-making in a rapidly evolving situation in the health system response to COVID-19. It is crucial to consider how major investment decisions will support a value-based healthcare system.

Mental health champions (MHCs) and young health ambassadors (YHAs) are two innovative public health interventions. MHCs are practitioners who work in schools and other youth settings and aim to be the “go to” person for mental health in these settings. YHAs are a linked parallel network of young people, who champion mental health and advocate for youth involvement, which was co-produced with young people across all stages of development implementation. This paper aims to identify the potential benefits, barriers and facilitators of these interventions.

Semi-structured qualitative interviews (n = 19) were undertaken with a purposive sample of n = 13 MHCs, and n = 6 YHAs, between June 2021 and March 2022. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, anonymised and then analysed following a thematic approach. Ethical approval was granted by Newcastle University’s Faculty of Medical Sciences Ethics Committee.

The findings are organised under five key themes: motivating factors and rewards for MHCs and YHAs; outcomes for children and young people (CYP) and others; impact on youth settings and culture; facilitators of successful implementation; and implementation challenges and opportunities.

These findings are intended to be of relevance to practice and policy, particularly to those exploring the design, commissioning or implementation of similar novel and low-cost interventions, which aim to improve mental health outcomes for CYP, within the context of youth settings.

The interventions reported on in the present paper are novel and innovative. Little research has previously been undertaken to explore similar approaches, and the individual experiences of those involved in the delivery of these types of interventions.

High levels of child obesity alongside rising stunting and the absence of a coherent food policy have deemed UK’s food system to be broken. The National Food Strategy (NFS) was debated intensely in media, with discussions on how and who should fix the food system.

Using a mixed methods approach, the authors conduct framing analysis on traditional media and sentiment analysis of twitter reactions to the NFS to identify frames used to shape food system policy interventions.

The study finds evidence that the media coverage of the NFS often utilised the tropes of “culture wars” shaping the debate of who is responsible to fix the food system – the government, the public or the industry. NFS recommendations were portrayed as issues of free choice to shift the debate away from government action correcting for market failure. In contrast, the industry was showcased as equipped to intervene on its own accord. Dietary recommendations made by the NFS were depicted as hurting the poor, painting a picture of helplessness and loss of control, while their voices were omitted and not represented in traditional media.

British media’s alignment with free market economic thinking has implications for food systems reform, as it deters the government from acting and relies on the invisible hand of the market to fix the system. Media firms should move beyond tropes of culture wars to discuss interventions that reform the structural causes of the UK’s broken food systems.

As traditional media coverage struggles to capture the diversity of public perception; the authors supplement framing analysis with sentiment analysis of Twitter data. To the best of our knowledge, no such media (and social media) analysis of the NFS has been conducted. The paper is also original as it extends our understanding of how media alignment with free market economic thinking has implications for food systems reform, as it deters the government from acting and relies on the invisible hand of the market to fix the system.

Purpose: This study investigates the role of telemedicine in sustaining healthcare systems in Europe, during the COVID-19 pandemic. It focusses on how telemedicine serves as a strategic response to modern healthcare challenges, emphasising its efficiency, accessibility, and patient-centred nature.

Need for the study: The need for this study arises from the escalating demands on healthcare systems, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. It aims to understand the adoption of telemedicine practices across European Union (EU) countries and their impact on healthcare sustainability.

Methodology: This study employs hierarchical and K-Means clustering to analyse EU citizens’ attitudes towards teleconsultations during COVID-19. Principal component analysis (PCA) is used for data compression and insight extraction. Data is sourced from Eurofound’s 2020 and 2021 surveys, involving extensive participant responses across the EU.

Findings: The study’s findings reveal significant shifts towards digital healthcare solutions, such as an increase in online consultations and prescriptions. It identifies different patterns of telemedicine use across EU countries, influenced by socioeconomic and geographical factors. These findings offer insights into future healthcare policy and strategy development.

Practical implications: The findings provide valuable insights into the shifts in telemedicine adoption in the EU, highlighting the significance of economic and sociological factors in healthcare trends. This study stresses the importance of customising healthcare strategies to suit the unique needs and digital capabilities of different countries.

This study aims to investigate the relationship between COVID-19 impacts and auxiliary police officers’ mental health as well as the moderating role of supervisor procedural justice.

Based on the role theory and a police officer survey from China, this quantitative study investigates the relationship between COVID-19 impacts and mental health status among auxiliary police, a rarely examined police type. We also examine the moderating role of supervisor procedural justice.

Auxiliary police officers reported both negative and positive impacts from COVID-19, while the negative impacts were mainly in the work domain, but the positive impacts were primarily in the life area. OLS regression results indicate that negative impacts, especially work-related negative impacts, are significantly related to depression and anxiety, and supervisor procedural justice moderates the relationship between positive impacts and depression and anxiety.

Firstly, we adopted the role theory to examine how public health emergencies affect police officers in their work and life domains. Secondly, we advance the organizational justice literature by assessing whether supervisor procedural justice can moderate the relationship between COVID-19 impacts and their mental health. Thirdly, this research extends the literature on depression and anxiety of auxiliary police officers in China, who attracted less attention in current literature and policies.

Contact tracing apps have emerged to collect data and mitigate the spread of infectious diseases. However, privacy and security concerns have caused individuals to hesitate to adopt these solutions. Our objective is to evaluate the role of the political environment, information privacy, security and users’ intentions to use contact tracing apps.

We scraped the digital app store and collected 399 relevant reviews and other data from 21 contact tracing apps in the USA. A semi-supervised machine learning model was developed to extract information on privacy and security aspects from the reviews.

Our findings show a positive connection between security controls and user adoption, as reflected in star ratings. Users residing in states with blue political environments tend to assign higher ratings to apps, especially when robust security controls are in place. These findings confirm the influence of the political environment on the adoption of contact tracing apps. In times of a pandemic, our findings suggest that users prioritize security over privacy concerns, emphasizing the critical role of strong security features in promoting app acceptance.

This paper emphasizes the political environment of the state offering the app intersects with concerns about security and privacy as well as the effectiveness of security and privacy measures, influencing the app’s ratings. Also, it shows the importance of understanding and addressing the role of the political environment when designing and promoting such public health tools, regardless of the specific disease or outbreak.

This paper primarily aims to identify the multilevel learning processes emerging from abrupt telework implementation in a public knowledge-intensive organization (KIO) amid the COVID-19 crisis.

This single-case process research was guided by interpretivist epistemology. Empirical data from documentary research and 41 interviewed managers were processed by inductive qualitative analysis using the multilevel learning theoretical model.

Eight types and three modes of learning processes during the COVID-19 pandemic were identified in a public KIO, iteratively emerging in multilevel learning dynamics during the compulsory adoption of telework and replacing the face-to-face work mode conducted since its foundation.

As insider researchers, while daily and privileged access to the field was obtained, it also demanded their continuous effort to maintain transparency and scientific distancing; conceptual results are restricted to process theorisation studies, specifically the 4Is theoretical model in the scope of crisis learning process studies concerning KIOs.

This study provides evidence for managers to adopt interactive dynamics among eight multilevel types and three learning modes of emergent learning, developed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and support learning practices’ implementation and routinisation across three organizational levels in crisis situations. In addition, evidencing emergent types of learning enables organizational learning (OL) researchers to examine how organizational structures and work practices either promote or inhibit different learning types and impact multilevel learning when adopting teleworking during a crisis.

This research has theoretical value in two ways: (i) Providing empirically supported knowledge: This involves understanding multilevel learning processes resulting from emergent learning in a public KIO that abruptly adopted teleworking during a crisis context; (ii) deepening process theorization studies on OL: To achieve this, we enhance the 4I model by incorporating eight types and two modes of learning processes. These processes iteratively emerge from the individual and group levels towards the institutional level in a public KIO.

Social media played an irreplaceable role in young people’s online social life and information consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic. This research focuses on the impact of excessive information on social media about COVID-19 vaccines on Generation Z's (Gen Z) associated psychological states and long-term vaccine advocacy.

The research conducted structural equation modeling analysis with online survey data from 409 Gen Z citizens in the UK.

The findings suggest that excessive information increased Gen Z social media users' ambivalence and conspiracy beliefs around COVID-19 vaccines, which, in turn, reduced their long-term vaccine advocacy in terms of vaccine acceptance, vaccination intention and vaccine promotion. Importantly, Gen Z’s confidence in government and in the healthcare systems during COVID-19 was effective in helping them overcome the detrimental effects of conspiracy beliefs and ambivalence about long-term vaccine advocacy, respectively.

This research reveals the “dark side” of social media use in the post-pandemic period and highlights the significant roles played by social institutions in mitigating the detrimental effects of Gen Z’s support in social decisions. Beyond the context of COVID-19, this research has important implications for facilitating the civic engagement of Gen Z and boosting their confidence in social institutions in terms of social cohesion.