| Literature DB >> 35087779 |
Wen Zhou1, Leshui He2, Xuanhua Nie1, Taoketaohu Wuri3, Jinhai Piao4, Dunshan Chen5, Hui Gao6, Jianmin Liu7, Kyedrub Tubden8, Ming He1, Jun He1.
Abstract
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread throughout China in January 2020. To contain the virus outbreak, the Chinese government took extraordinary measures in terms of public policy, wherein accurate and timely dissemination of information plays a crucial role. Despite all of the efforts toward studying this health emergency, little is known about the effectiveness of public policies that support health communication during such a crisis to disseminate knowledge for self-protection. Particularly, we focus on the accuracy and timeliness of knowledge dissemination on COVID-19 among people in remote regions-a topic largely omitted in existing research. In February 2020, at the early-stages of the COVID-19 outbreak, a questionnaire survey was carried out. In total, 8,520 participants from seven less economically developed provinces situated in the borderlands of China with large ethnic minority groups responded. We analyzed the data through poisson regression and logistic regression analyses. We found that (1) people in remote regions of China obtained accurate information on COVID-19. Further, they were able to take appropriate measures to protect themselves. (2) Result from both descriptive analysis and multivariable regression analysis revealed that there is no large difference in the accuracy of information among groups. (3) Older, less educated, and rural respondents received information with a significant delay, whereas highly educated, younger, urban residents and those who obtained information through online media were more likely to have received the news of the outbreak sooner and to be up to date on the information. This research provides evidence that disadvantage people in remote regions obtained accurate and essential information required to act in an appropriate manner in responses to the COVID-19 outbreak. However, they obtained knowledge on COVID-19 at a slower pace than other people; thus, further improvement in the timely dissemination of information among disadvantage people in remote regions is warranted.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; communication inequality; disadvantage groups; infectious diseases; risk communication
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35087779 PMCID: PMC8787119 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.554038
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Information gap in accuracy among groups.
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Sex | Female | 5.13 | 3.91 | 4.69 | |||
| Male | 5.09 | ( | 3.82 | ( | 4.52 | ( | |
| Age | 10 to 20 | 5.01 | 3.89 | 4.60 | |||
| 21 to 35 | 5.14 | ( | 3.89 | ( | 4.62 | ( | |
| 36 to 50 | 5.14 | 3.88 | 4.71 | ||||
| 51 to 65 | 5.01 | 3.84 | 4.61 | ||||
| >65 | 5.04 | 3.82 | 4.59 | ||||
| Education | Primary school | 4.31 | 3.60 | 4.29 | |||
| Middle school | 4.69 | ( | 3.78 | ( | 4.61 | ( | |
| High school | 4.81 | 3.86 | 4.69 | ||||
| College | 5.14 | 3.89 | 4.65 | ||||
| Post-graduate | 5.34 | 3.90 | 4.59 | ||||
| Residential | Rural | 4.91 | 3.84 | 4.55 | |||
| type | Suburban | 5.14 | ( | 3.90 | ( | 4.67 | ( |
| Urban | 5.23 | 3.90 | 4.67 | ||||
| Ethnicity | Minority | 4.87 | 3.84 | 4.60 | |||
| Han-Chinese | 5.21 | ( | 3.90 | ( | 4.64 | ( | |
The test in the table is multiple-comparison test by analysis-of-variance (ANOVA) models. The numbers in parentheses are p values for the significant test.
Multivariate regression analysis of the information gap in accuracy among groups.
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Age | −0.001 | −0.005 | 0.003 | 0.031 | 0.003 | 0.056 |
| (0.001) | (0.020) | (0.001) | (0.010) | (0.001) | (0.013) | |
| Age squared | 0.000 | −0.000 | −0.000 | −0.000 | −0.000 | −0.001 |
| (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | (0.000) | |
| Sex (female = 0) | −0.014 | −0.519 | 0.007 | 0.096 | −0.031 | −0.425 |
| (0.003) | (0.087) | (0.005) | (0.044) | (0.004) | (0.058) | |
| Education (primary = 0) | ||||||
| Middle school | 0.016 | 0.294 | 0.019 | 0.143 | 0.029 | 0.421 |
| (0.015) | (0.243) | (0.021) | (0.159) | (0.018) | (0.200) | |
| High school | 0.031 | 0.537 | 0.036 | 0.272 | 0.040 | 0.530 |
| (0.015) | (0.238) | (0.020) | (0.153) | (0.017) | (0.191) | |
| College | 0.039 | 0.866 | 0.096 | 0.776 | 0.037 | 0.456 |
| (0.014) | (0.225) | (0.019) | (0.146) | (0.017) | (0.179) | |
| Postgraduate | 0.034 | 0.706 | 0.129 | 1.152 | 0.017 | 0.066 |
| (0.014) | (0.242) | (0.020) | (0.152) | (0.017) | (0.187) | |
| Ethnic minority | −0.004 | −0.165 | −0.022 | −0.220 | −0.003 | −0.112 |
| (0.002) | (0.093) | (0.004) | (0.044) | (0.004) | (0.060) | |
| Area (rural=0) | ||||||
| Suburban | 0.011 | 0.341 | 0.036 | 0.348 | 0.020 | 0.306 |
| (0.004) | (0.154) | (0.008) | (0.073) | (0.006) | (0.098) | |
| Urban | 0.014 | 0.448 | 0.037 | 0.357 | 0.025 | 0.387 |
| (0.003) | (0.108) | (0.006) | (0.052) | (0.005) | (0.070) | |
| Observations | 8520 | 8520 | 8520 | 8520 | 8520 | 8520 |
| Log likelihood | −15638.07 | −10516.05 | −14009.01 | −2598.37 | −15049.64 | −5772.79 |
p < 0.05,
p < 0.01,
p < 0.001.
Coefficients (log odds from ordered logit models and log count from Poisson models) have been presented. The numbers in parentheses are standard errors. All regressions control for provinces fixed effects; self-reported health statues; and SC-RFC, SC-SV, and SC-NV. Their estimates are omitted here but are available upon request.
Figure 1Percentage of resident communities or local governments that adopted various prevention and control measures to fight COVID-19.
Information gap in timeliness among groups.
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Sex | Male | 67.87 | 63.6 | ||
| Female | 65.95 | ( | 54.39 | ( | |
| Age | 10–20 | 79.77 | 53.96 | ||
| 21–35 | 70.35 | ( | 61.11 | ( | |
| 36–50 | 58.36 | 64.31 | |||
| 51–65 | 57.27 | 56.38 | |||
| >65 | 49.12 | 66.67 | |||
| Education | Primary school | 55.95 | 39.88 | ||
| Middle school | 55.14 | ( | 52.78 | ( | |
| High school | 58.86 | 56.17 | |||
| College | 70.44 | 60.79 | |||
| Post-graduate | 68.33 | 66.89 | |||
| Residential type | Rural | 68.84 | 52.42 | ||
| Suburban | 68.11 | ( | 63.67 | ( | |
| Urban | 66.26 | 64.01 | |||
| Ethnicity | Han-Chinese | 66.19 | 63.72 | ||
| Minority | 68.71 | ( | 56.02 | ( | |
The numbers in column 1 and column 3 are the proportion of early-known and the proportion of newly-known. The numbers in parentheses are p values for the significant test.
Regression analysis of the information gap in timeliness among groups.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Age | −0.118 | 0.002 | −0.123 | −0.022 | 0.004 |
| (0.012) | (0.011) | (0.004) | (0.002) | (0.002) | |
| Sex (female = 0) | 0.072 | −0.347 | −0.867 | 0.112 | −0.332 |
| (0.051) | (0.049) | (0.071) | (0.052) | (0.049) | |
| Education (primary = 0) | |||||
| Middle school | −0.017 | 0.205 | 1.556 | −0.024 | 0.227 |
| (0.185) | (0.186) | (0.760) | (0.184) | (0.185) | |
| High school | 0.049 | 0.293 | 1.745 | 0.092 | 0.282 |
| (0.179) | (0.179) | (0.748) | (0.177) | (0.178) | |
| College | 0.341 | 0.473 | 2.756 | 0.338 | 0.462 |
| (0.172) | (0.172) | (0.740) | (0.170) | (0.171) | |
| Postgraduate | 0.434 | 0.562 | 3.075 | 0.331 | 0.624 |
| (0.178) | (0.178) | (0.743) | (0.177) | (0.177) | |
| Ethnic minority | 0.011 | −0.150 | 0.063 | 0.006 | −0.149 |
| (0.052) | (0.049) | (0.062) | (0.052) | (0.049) | |
| Area (rural = 0) | |||||
| Suburban | 0.144 | 0.315 | 0.199 | 0.105 | 0.327 |
| (0.087) | (0.082) | (0.101) | (0.087) | (0.081) | |
| Urban | 0.184 | 0.235 | 0.503 | 0.120 | 0.254 |
| (0.063) | (0.058) | (0.071) | (0.063) | (0.058) | |
| Media type (tradition = 0) | 0.509 | 0.041 | |||
| (0.066) | (0.059) | ||||
| Constant | 2.334 | −0.791 | 0.864 | 0.649 | 0.076 |
| (0.326) | (0.313) | (0.789) | (0.280) | (0.275) | |
| Observations | 8520 | 8520 | 8520 | 8520 | 8520 |
| Pseudo-R2 | 0.037 | 0.030 | 0.220 | 0.037 | 0.027 |
| Log likelihood | −5187.199 | −5545.856 | −3640.407 | −5187.765 | −5562.692 |
p < 0.05,
p < 0.01,
p < 0.001.
Number (1)–(5) in the table means the number of regression models. Coefficients (log odds) from logit models are presented. The numbers in parentheses are standard errors. All regressions control for province fixed effects; self-reported health statues; and SC-RFC, SC-SV, and SC-NV. Their estimates are omitted here but are available upon request.
The results of Sobel and Bootstrap intermediary effect test for media type.
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Sobel | Age | −0.001 | 18.80% | 0.001 | −44.7% |
| Education | 0.011 | 22.90% | 0.001 | 1.7% | |
| Residential type | 0.001* | 9.70% | 0.001 | 0.5% | |
| Ethnic minority | 0.003 | 12.80% | 0.001 | −0.8% | |
| Bootstrap | Age | −0.001 | 18.80% | −0.001 | −44.7% |
| Education | 0.011 | 22.90% | 0.001 | 1.7% | |
| Residential type | 0.001 | 9.70% | 0.001 | 0.5% | |
| Ethnic minority | 0.003 | 12.80% | 0.001 | −0.8% | |
p < 0.10, p < 0.05,
p < 0.01,
p < 0.001.
To estimate the total effect and make the result easy to understood, the categorical variables education, residential type and ethnicity are treated as continuous variable.