Search results

This study aims to explore the efficacy of government policy directions in mitigating the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic by employing a panel of 22 countries throughout the 2020-second quarter of 2022.

The panel autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) model is employed to examine this phenomenon and to investigate the long-run effects of government policy decisions on infection and mortality rates from the pandemic.

The study reveals the following key findings: (1) Income support and debt relief facilities and stringent standards of governments are associated with reduced infection and death rates. (2) The response of governments has resulted in decreased mortality rates while simultaneously leading to an unexpected increase in infection rates. (3) Containment and healthcare practices have led to a decrease in infection rates but an increase in mortality rates, presenting another counterintuitive outcome. Despite the expectation that robust government responses would decrease infection rates and that healthcare containment practices would reduce mortality, these results highlight a lack of health equity and the challenge of achieving high vaccination rates across countries.

To effectively combat the spread of COVID-19, it is crucial to implement containment health practices in conjunction with tracing and individual-level quarantine. Simply implementing containment health measures without these interconnected strategies would be ineffective. Therefore, policy implications derived from containment health measures should be accompanied by targeted, aggressive, and rapid containment strategies aimed at significantly reducing the number of individuals infected with COVID-19.

This study concludes by suggesting the importance of implementing economic support in terms of income, and debt relief has played a crucial role in mitigating the spread of COVID-19 infections and reducing fatality rates.

To effectively combat the spread of COVID-19, it is crucial to implement containment health practices in conjunction with tracing and individual-level quarantine. Simply implementing containment health measures without these interconnected strategies would be ineffective. Therefore, policy implications derived from containment health measures should be accompanied by targeted, aggressive, and rapid containment strategies aimed at significantly reducing the number of individuals infected with COVID-19.

This research makes a unique contribution to the existing literature by investigating the impact of government responses on reducing COVID-19 infections and fatalities, specifically focusing on the period before COVID-19 vaccinations became available.

Disinformation on social media is a serious issue. This study examines the effects of disinformation on COVID-19 vaccination decision-making to understand how social media users make healthcare decisions when disinformation is presented in their social media feeds. It examines trust in post owners as a moderator on the relationship between information types (i.e. disinformation and factual information) and vaccination decision-making.

This study conducts a scenario-based web survey experiment to collect extensive survey data from social media users.

This study reveals that information types differently affect social media users' COVID-19 vaccination decision-making and finds a moderating effect of trust in post owners on the relationship between information types and vaccination decision-making. For those who have a high degree of trust in post owners, the effect of information types on vaccination decision-making becomes large. In contrast, information types do not affect the decision-making of those who have a very low degree of trust in post owners. Besides, identification and compliance are found to affect trust in post owners.

This study contributes to the literature on online disinformation and individual healthcare decision-making by demonstrating the effect of disinformation on vaccination decision-making and providing empirical evidence on how trust in post owners impacts the effects of information types on vaccination decision-making. This study focuses on trust in post owners, unlike prior studies that focus on trust in information or social media platforms.

Personal Protective Equipment plays an inevitable part in the current scenario of pandemics in the world. A novel coronavirus, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Corona Virus-2 (SARS-Cov 2), began as an outbreak of pneumonia in Wuhan, China, in late December 2019, and quickly spread worldwide. It quickly escalated into an international public health crisis. This opened up the high demand for the innovation and research of new materials in the Personal Protective Equipment industry.

PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar were searched for relevant literature regarding personal protective equipment and the information was organized in a systematic way.

There are no adequate number of studies taken up in the field of use of textiles in medical applications especially with PPEs.

This structured review will generate a sense of the significance of using PPE for controlling pandemics and also awaken need for additional research and innovations in this area.

The authorities of the management should take timely intervention in choosing the right material for their PPE in their hospitals. Hence health care professionals teams have an inevitable role in preventing the adverse environmental impact due to the inadvertent disposal of PPEs.

There is a lack of systematic way of disposing contaminated single-use face masks in a safe, environmentally acceptable manner. The dumping of single-use PPE in domestic garbage has had an adverse effect on the environment. Mismanaged plastic waste endangers the health of ecosystems by polluting marine and terrestrial environments, posing a significant risk of ingestion or injury to animals and contaminating habitats.

This review article provides an in-depth review of the use of different materials in PPE and challenges regarding its long-term use and implications on the environment.

The increasing prevalence of a wide range of infectious diseases, as well as the underwhelming results of vaccination rates that may be traced back to problems with vaccine procurement and distribution, have brought to the fore the importance of vaccine supply chain (VSC) management in recent years. VSC is the cornerstone of effective vaccination; hence, it is crucial to enhance its performance, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where immunization rates are not satisfactory.

In this paper, the authors focus on VSC performance improvement of India by proposing supply contracts under demand uncertainty. The authors propose three contracts – wholesale price (WSP), cost sharing (CS) and incentive mechanism (IM) for the government-operated immunization program of India.

The authors' findings indicate that IM is capable of coordinating the supply chain, whereas the other two contracts are inefficient for the government. To validate the model, it is applied to a real-world scenario of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in India, and the findings show that an IM contract improves the overall efficiency of the system by 23.72%.

Previous studies focused mainly on the influenza VSC industry within developed nations. Nonetheless, there exists a dearth of literature pertaining to the examination of supply contracts and their feasibility for immunization programs that are administered by the government and aimed at optimizing societal benefits. The authors' findings can be beneficial to the immunization program of India to optimize their VSC cost.

The purpose is to offer a critique of the process of decision-making by top university administrators and to analyze how their decisions imposed their preferences and expanded administrative control.

In the fall of 2021, the top administrators at Boston-based Northeastern University required that all members of the university community return to fully on-campus face-to-face work. That decision involved a return to what was labeled “normal operations” and followed a year-and-a-half of adjustments to the COVID-19 pandemic. Building on that case example, the analysis then ranges backward and forward in time. Other decisions – by Northeastern University leaders as well as leaders at other schools – are considered as well.

Leaders impose labels on complex contingencies as a way of constructing meaning. No label is objectively true or indisputable. In the hands of individuals who possess hierarchical power and authority, the application of a label such as “new normal” represents an exercise of power. Through an exploration and analysis of the underlying, unspoken, assumptions behind the application of the “new normal” label, the article suggests how the interests of university leaders were being advanced.

Because of its reliance on labeling, the paper focuses mainly on the words of administrators – at Northeastern University and elsewhere – that are called upon to explain/justify decisions. The multiplicity of interests forwarded by the “new normal” label are explored. No attempt is made – nor would it be possible – to understand what was in the hearts and minds of these administrators.

The article makes a case that any and all pronouncements of leaders should be understood as assertions of power and statements of interests. The practical impact is to suggest a critical analysis to be applied to all such pronouncements.

The approach taken in this article is situated within post-modernist analysis that critiques dominant narratives, disputes epistemological certainty and ontological objectivity and takes cognizance of coded messages contained in language.

Everyone has been through a traumatic period of time with the pandemic. The author has focused on a specific community – university administrators and tenure/tenure track faculty – as a window to help explain how decision-makers shaped their response. The author wants to emphasize the labels imposed by leaders and the assumptions behind the application of those labels.

While vaccines are an effective preventative measure to defend against the spread and harmful symptoms of COVID-19, information about COVID vaccines can be difficult to find and conflicting in its coverage of vaccines’ benefits and risks. This study aims to examine the extent to which Americans are searching for information about the three major vaccine producers (Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen) in relation to the amount of reliable scholarly information that has been produced about each one.

Data were retrieved from Google Trends for the US Web users alongside scientific research output of the US scientists toward three Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-authorized COVID-19 vaccines in Web of Science, Scopus and PubMed. The authors searched for descriptive statistical analyses to detect coronavirus-seeking behavior versus coronavirus releases in the USA from May 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021.

Of the three COVID-19 vaccines, Pfizer has attracted more attention from the US population. However, the greatest number of articles about COVID-19 vaccines published by the US scholars belonged to Moderna (M = 8.17), with Pfizer (M = 7.75) having slightly less, and Janssen (M = 0.83) well behind. A positive association was found between COVID-19 vaccine information-seeking behavior (ISB) on Google and the amount of research produced about that vaccine (P <0.001).

As the researchers use the single search engine, Google, to retrieve data from the USA, thus, selection bias will be existing as Google only gathers the data of people who chose to get the information by using this search engine.

If the policymakers in the US Department of Health and Human Services or the US CDC desire to improve the country’s health ISB and the scientific publication behavior (SPB) of the US researchers regarding COVID-19 vaccines studies, they should reference the results of such a study.

From an infodemiological viewpoint, these findings may support the health policymakers, as well as researchers who work on COVID-19 vaccines in the USA.

During COVID-19, this study aims to evaluate the crisis communication strategies (CCS) of Fortune 500 medical device businesses. These companies’ CCS adoption is evaluated using data from the microblogging site Twitter.

A total of 11,569 tweets were collected over the course of a year, from 31 December 2019 to 31 December 2020, and analysed using COVID-19’s pre-crisis, crisis and new normal stages. The data acquired from Twitter is assessed using latent Dirichlet allocation-based topic modelling, valence aware dictionary for sentiment reasoning sentiment analysis and emotion recognition analysis and then further examined using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis to build a configurational model. The findings were compared to Cheng’s (2018, 2020) integrated strategy toolkit for organisational CCS, which included 28 strategies.

With positive sentiments across stages, companies chose “information providing”, “monitoring” and “good intentions” as the CCS. In the crisis and new normal stages of COVID, the emotion of “depression” was observed.

Researchers would be able to assess the CCS used through visual aids in the future by conducting a cross-industry examination using image analytics. Furthermore, by prolonging the study’s duration, long-term changes in the CCS can be investigated.

Companies should send real-time information to their stakeholders via social media during a pandemic, conveying good intentions and positive sentiments while remaining neutral.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is one of the first studies to investigate the CCS patterns used by medical device businesses to communicate via social media during a pandemic.

The author examined effects of endorser type and message framing on visual attention and ad effectiveness in health ads, including the moderator of involvement. This paper aims to discuss this issue.

An experiment was conducted with a 2 (celebrity vs. expert) × 2 (positive vs. negative framing) between-subject factorial design. Eye-tracking measured visual attention and a questionnaire measured ad effectiveness and product involvement.

Experimental data from 78 responses showed no vampire effect in the health advertisements. Celebrity endorsement with negative message framing received more attention and had less ad recall than that with positive message framing. Negative and positive message framing attracted the same amount of attention and ad recall in the expert endorsement condition. High involvement participants paid more attention to the ad message with the expert than that with the celebrity, but ad recall was not significantly increased. Low involvement participants exhibited the same attention to the ad message with the expert and with the celebrity, but had greater recall of the ad message with the expert. Visual attention to the endorser was associated with ad attitude but not with ad recall. Ad attitude impacted behavioral intention.

Studies examining influences of celebrity and message framing on ad effectiveness have focused on the response to advertising stimuli, not the information process. The author provides empirical evidence of the viewers' information processing of endorsers and health messages, and its relationship with ad effectiveness. The study contributes to the literature by combining endorser and message framing in health ads to promote public health communication from the information processing perspective.

This review aims to provide synoptic documentation on acclaimed anecdotal plant-based remedies used by Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) communities to manage COVID-19. The theoretical approaches that form the basis for using the anecdotally claimed phytotherapies were reviewed against current scientific evidence.

In this paper plant-based remedies for managing COVID-19 were searched on social and print media to identify testimonies of people from different communities in LAC countries. Information was extracted, evaluated and reviewed against current scientific evidence based on a literature search from databases such as Journal Storage (JSTOR), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), SpringerLink, Scopus, ScienceDirect, PubMed, Google Scholar and Medline to explore the scientific basis for anecdotal claims.

A total of 23 medicinal plants belonging to 15 families were identified as phytotherapies used in managing COVID-19 in LAC communities.

The plant-based remedies contained valuable phytochemicals scientifically reported for their anti-inflammatory, antiviral, antioxidant and anticancer effects. Anecdotal information helps researchers investigate disease patterns, management and new drug discoveries. The identified acclaimed plant-based remedies are potential candidates for pharmacological evaluations for possible drug discovery for future pandemics.

The authors explored the impact of a popular supply chain collaboration initiative – the shopper solution – on both retailers and manufacturers, as well as on the shopper.

The authors conducted a quasi-experimental field study, an experimental online study and an experimental behavioral lab study.

Overall, results revealed that shopper solutions increase the quantity and breadth of displayed products sold, along with sales totals. Shoppers also expressed higher willingness-to-pay (WTP) for products displayed in solutions. Shoppers positively (negatively) attributed the presence (absence) of solutions more strongly to retailers than to manufacturers due to perceived differences in manufacturers' concern for shoppers. Specifically, shoppers expressed higher (lower) word-of-mouth (WOM) and loyalty intentions toward retailers than manufacturers when solutions were (not) provided.

The authors provide a more holistic view of supply chain collaboration by showing how different chain members (retailers vs manufacturers) can experience disparate benefits from collaboration. The authors explain this within the context of shopper solutions by demonstrating that differences in perceived concern for shoppers underlies these effects. Thus, findings suggest that shopper marketing initiatives, such as solutions, are not always “win-win-win” outcomes for retailers, manufacturers and shoppers as intended. Overall, this is the first research to assess the implications of shopper solutions for retailers, manufacturers and shoppers, alike.