scholarly journals Facilitating Informed Decision Making: Determinants of University Students’ COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tugce Varol ◽  
Francine Schneider ◽  
Ilse Mesters ◽  
Robert A.C. Ruiter ◽  
Gerjo Kok ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Risk Perception ◽  
University Students ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Important Target

Objective: Although several COVID-19 vaccines are available, the current challenge is achieving high vaccine uptake. We aimed to explore university students’ intention to get vaccinated and select the most relevant determinants/beliefs to facilitate informed decision-making around COVID-19 vaccine uptake.Methods: A cross-sectional online survey with students (N = 434) from Maastricht University was conducted in March 2021. The most relevant determinants/beliefs of students’ COVID-19 vaccine intention (i.e., determinants linked to vaccination intention, and with enough potential for change) were visualized using CIBER plots. Results: Students’ intention to get the COVID-19 vaccine is high (80 %). Concerns about safety and side effects of the vaccine and trust in government, quality control, and the pharmaceutical industry are identified as the most relevant determinants of vaccine intention. Other predictors are risk perception, attitude, perceived norm, and self-efficacy beliefs. Conclusion: Our study identified several predictors of COVID-19 vaccine intention (e.g., safety, trust, risk perception, etc.) and helped to select the most relevant determinants/beliefs to target in an intervention to maximize the COVID-19 uptake. Where concerns and trust related to the COVID-19 vaccine are the most important target for future interventions, other determinants that were already positive (i.e., risk perception, attitudes, perceived norms, and self-efficacy) could be further confirmed.

scholarly journals Knowledge, socio-cognitive perceptions and the practice of hand hygiene and social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study of UK university students

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Barrett ◽  
Kei Long Cheung
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perception ◽  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
University Students ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Time Factors ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Hygiene Behaviour

Abstract Background During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, social distancing and hand hygiene have been the primary means of reducing transmission in the absence of effective treatments or vaccines, but understanding of their determinants is limited. This study aimed to investigate knowledge and socio-cognitive perceptions, and their associations with such protective behaviours, in UK university students. Methods A cross-sectional online survey of 293 students was undertaken on 13 May 2020. Survey questions addressed demographics, knowledge of the disease and effectiveness of the protective measures, risk perception, socio-cognitive perceptions (e.g. attitude, social support, and self-efficacy), habit, time factors and trust, as well as the hand hygiene and social distancing behaviours. Multiple linear regression was used to identify the strongest associations of potential determinants with behaviour. Results Participants reported high levels of social distancing with 88.9% answering “Mostly” or “Always” for every activity, but only 42.0% reporting the same for all hand hygiene activities. Knowledge of the effectiveness of each activity in preventing transmission was high, with 90.7% and 93.5% respectively identifying at least 7 of 8 hand hygiene or 9 of 10 social distancing activities correctly. Habit (β = 0.39, p = 0.001) and time factors (β = 0.28, p = 0.001) were the greatest contributors to unique variance in hand hygiene behaviour, followed by ethnicity (β = − 0.13, p = 0.014) and risk perception (β = 0.13, p = 0.016). For social distancing behaviour, the determinants were self-efficacy (β = 0.25, p < 0.001), perceived advantages (β = 0.15, p = 0.022), trust in policy (β = 0.14, p = 0.026) and gender (β = − 0.14, p = 0.016). Regression models explained 40% hand hygiene and 25% social distancing variance. Conclusions This study indicated that communications about effectiveness of hand hygiene and social distancing behaviours had been effective in terms of knowledge acquisition. However, in the light of likely second waves of COVID-19, attention to maintaining social distancing behaviour and improving hand hygiene behaviour may need to address more difficult areas of changing habits, overcoming time factors and building trust, as well as interventions to increase self-efficacy and address risk perception concerns.

scholarly journals Selecting relevant and changeable determinants and underlying beliefs of university students’ adherence to COVID-19-guidelines and translating the findings into a small intervention

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tugce Varol ◽  
Rik Crutzen ◽  
Francine Schneider ◽  
Ilse Mesters ◽  
Robert A.C. Ruiter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perception ◽  
University Students ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Adherence Behavior ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Adherence To Guidelines ◽  
Behavioral Determinants ◽  
Improvement Interventions ◽  
Prevention Guidelines

Background: When reopening universities in times of COVID-19, students still have to adhere to COVID-19 behavioral guidelines. We explored what behavioral determinants (and underlying beliefs) related to the adherence to guidelines are both relevant and changeable, as input for future interventions.Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted (Oct-Nov 2020), identifying behavioral determinants (and underlying beliefs) of university students’ adherence to COVID-19-guidelines, including keeping 1.5m distance, getting tested, and isolating (N = 255).Results: Attitude, perceived norm, self-efficacy, and several beliefs (e.g., risk perception beliefs ‘I am not afraid because I am young’; attitudinal beliefs, e.g., ‘I feel responsible for telling people to adhere to guidelines’; self-efficacy beliefs, e.g., ‘COVID-19-prevention guidelines are difficult to adhere to’) were strongly associated with intention to adhere to guidelines, and for those beliefs there was room for improvement, making them suitable as possible intervention targets.Conclusions: Students mostly adhere to COVID-19 guidelines, but there is room for improvement. Interventions need to enhance students’ adherence behavior by targeting the most relevant determinants as identified in this study. Based on these findings, a small intervention was introduced targeting the determinants of students’ adherence to guidelines.

scholarly journals Knowledge, socio-cognitive perceptions and the practice of hand hygiene and social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study of UK university students

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Barrett ◽  
Kei Long Cheung
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perception ◽  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
University Students ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Time Factors ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Hygiene Behaviour

Abstract BackgroundDuring the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, social distancing and hand hygiene have been the primary means of reducing transmission in the absence of effective treatments or vaccines, but understanding of their determinants is limited. This study aimed to investigate knowledge and socio-cognitive perceptions, and their associations with such protective behaviours, in UK university students. MethodsA cross-sectional online survey of 293 students was undertaken on 13 May 2020. Survey questions addressed demographics, knowledge of the disease and effectiveness of the protective measures, risk perception, socio-cognitive perceptions (e.g. attitude, social support, and self-efficacy), habit, time factors and trust, as well as the hand hygiene and social distancing behaviours. Multiple linear regression was used to identify the strongest associations of potential determinants with behaviour.ResultsParticipants reported high levels of social distancing with 88.9 % answering “Mostly” or “Always” for every activity, but only 42.0% reporting the same for all hand hygiene activities. Knowledge of the effectiveness of each activity in preventing transmission was high, with 90.7% and 93.5% respectively identifying at least 7 of 8 hand hygiene or 9 of 10 social distancing activities correctly. Habit (β = 0.39, p =0.001) and time factors (β = 0.28, p =0.001) were the greatest contributors to unique variance in hand hygiene behaviour, followed by ethnicity (β = -0.13, p =0.014) and risk perception (β = 0.13, p = 0.016). For social distancing behaviour, the determinants were self-efficacy (β = 0.25, p <0.001), perceived advantages (β = 0.15, p = 0.022), trust in policy (β = 0.14, p = 0.026) and gender (β = -0.14, p = 0.016). Regression models explained 40% hand hygiene and 25% social distancing variance.ConclusionsThis study indicated that communications about effectiveness of hand hygiene and social distancing behaviours had been effective in terms of knowledge acquisition. However, in the light of likely second waves of COVID-19, attention to maintaining social distancing behaviour and improving hand hygiene behaviour may need to address more difficult areas of changing habits, overcoming time factors and building trust, as well as interventions to increase self-efficacy and address risk perception concerns.

scholarly journals Knowledge, Socio-cognitive Perceptions and the Practice of Hand Hygiene and Social Distancing During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-sectional Study of UK University Students

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Barrett ◽  
Kei Long Cheung
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perception ◽  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
University Students ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Time Factors ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Hygiene Behaviour

Abstract BackgroundDuring the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, social distancing and hand hygiene have been the primary means of reducing transmission in the absence of effective treatments or vaccines, but understanding of their determinants is limited. This study aimed to investigate knowledge and socio-cognitive perceptions, and their associations with such protective behaviours, in UK university students. MethodsA cross-sectional online survey of 293 students was undertaken on 13 May 2020. Survey questions addressed demographics, knowledge of the disease and effectiveness of the protective measures, risk perception, socio-cognitive perceptions (e.g. attitude, social support, and self-efficacy), habit, time factors and trust, as well as the hand hygiene and social distancing behaviours. Multiple linear regression was used to identify the strongest associations of potential determinants with behaviour.ResultsParticipants reported high levels of social distancing with 88.9 % answering “Mostly” or “Always” for every activity, but only 42.0% reporting the same for all hand hygiene activities. Knowledge of the effectiveness of each activity in preventing transmission was high, with 90.7% and 93.5% respectively identifying at least 7 of 8 hand hygiene or 9 of 10 social distancing activities correctly. Habit (β = 0.39, p <0.001) and time factors (β = 0.28, p <0.001) were the greatest contributors to unique variance in hand hygiene behaviour, followed by ethnicity (β = -0.13, p =0.014) and risk perception (β = 0.13, p = 0.016). For social distancing behaviour, the determinants were self-efficacy (β = 0.25, p <0.001), perceived advantages (β = 0.15, p = 0.022), trust in policy (β = 0.14, p = 0.026) and gender (β = -0.14, p = 0.016). Regression models explained 40% hand hygiene and 25% social distancing variance.ConclusionsThis study indicated that communications about effectiveness of hand hygiene and social distancing behaviours had been effective in terms of knowledge acquisition. However, in the light of likely second waves of COVID-19, attention to maintaining social distancing behaviour and improving hand hygiene behaviour may need to address more difficult areas of changing habits, overcoming time factors and building trust, as well as interventions to increase self-efficacy and address risk perception concerns.

Does participation in case competitions improve career decision-making self-efficacy of university students?

2020 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. 659-675
Author(s):  
Maria S. Plakhotnik ◽  
Anastasiia V. Krylova ◽  
Anna D. Maslikova
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
University Students ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Career Decision ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Career Decision Making ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Significant Difference

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between participation in case competitions and career decision-making self-efficacy (CDMSE) of university students.Design/methodology/approachThe sample included 273 Russian university students; 109 (40%) of them had never participated in case competitions, whereas 164 (60%) participated at least once in case competitions related to business, management and economics. Data were collected via an online survey that included the CDMSE scale–short form. Descriptive, correlation and linear regression analyses of data were conducted to test five hypotheses.FindingsThe research study showed a significant difference in CDMSE between those who had never participated in case competitions and those who had participated at least once. However, the study did not show a significant influence of participation in case competitions on the level of CDMSE. The results also indicated that the level of CDMSE could be explained by the participants' work experience, career choice status and age, as well as the highest level achieved during participation in case competitions.Research limitations/implicationsThe study provides limitations and implications for future research as well as practice, including career centers and career counselors, university faculty, organizers of case competitions and recruitment specialists in organizations.Originality/valuePrior research suggests that participation in case competitions helps students’ transition into the workplace. Despite their global popularity, empirical research on case competitions is very limited and focused primarily on skill development. This study contributes to the knowledge base by exploring links between case participation and CDMSE.

Evaluation of a Computer-Based Decision Aid for Promoting Informed Prostate Cancer Screening Decisions Among African American Men: iDecide

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 267-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Otis L. Owens ◽  
Tisha Felder ◽  
Abbas S. Tavakoli ◽  
Asa A. Revels ◽  
Daniela B. Friedman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
African American ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Technology Use ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
African American Men ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Informed Decision Making

Purpose: To evaluate the effects of iDecide on prostate cancer knowledge, informed decision-making self-efficacy, technology use self-efficacy, and intention to engage in informed decision-making among African American men. Design: One-group, pretest/posttest. Setting: Community settings in South Carolina. Participants: African American men, ages 40 years +, without a prior prostate cancer diagnosis (n = 354). Intervention: iDecide, an embodied conversational agent-led, computer-based prostate cancer screening decision aid. Measures: Prostate cancer knowledge, informed decision-making self-efficacy, technology use self-efficacy, and intention to engage in informed decision-making. Analysis: Descriptive statistics, paired t tests, general linear modeling, Spearman correlations. Results: On average, participants experienced significant improvements in their prostate cancer knowledge ( P ≤ .001), informed decision-making self-efficacy ( P ≤ .001), and technology use self-efficacy ( P ≤ .001), postintervention. Additionally, 67% of participants reported an intention to engage in informed decision-making. Conclusion: Given the significant improvements across all measures, this research demonstrates that embodied conversational agent-led decision aids can be used to enhance the capacity for making informed prostate cancer screening decisions among African American men and increase their technology use self-efficacy. One critical limitation of this study is that most men had received prostate cancer screening prior to engaging in our intervention, so the implications of this intervention may be different for men who do not have a history of screening. Additionally, actual engagement in informed decision-making postintervention was not assessed.

scholarly journals A goal-systems perspective on plant-based eating: keys to successful adherence in university students

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-83
Author(s):  
Maricarmen Vizcaino ◽  
Linda S Ruehlman ◽  
Paul Karoly ◽  
Katy Shilling ◽  
Andrew Berardy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
University Students ◽  
Discriminant Function ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Medical Condition ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Ethical Beliefs ◽  
Goal Systems

AbstractObjective:To explore adherence to a plant-based diet from the perspective of goals- and motivations-based systems.Design:A cross-sectional, survey-based study was conducted regarding eating patterns, goals and motivations for current eating habits.Setting:Data were collected using an online survey platform, including the Goal Systems Assessment Battery (GSAB) and other survey tools.Participants:University students were recruited, including thirty-three students reporting successful maintenance of a plant-based diet (Adherents) and sixty-three students trying to adhere to a plant-based diet (Non-adherents).Results:Using GSAB subscale scores, discriminant function analyses significantly differentiated adherents v. non-adherents, accounting for 49·0 % of between-group variance (χ2 (13) = 42·03, P < 0·000). It correctly classified 72·7 % of adherents and 88·9 % of non-adherents. Constructs including value, self-efficacy, planning/stimulus control and positive affect were significant and included in the discriminant function. Logistic regression results suggested that participants who successfully adhered to a plant-based diet were seventeen times more likely to report ‘To manage or treat a medical condition’ as motivation and almost seven times more likely to report ‘To align with my ethical beliefs’ as motivation compared with non-adherents. However, these participants were 94 % less likely to report ‘To maintain and/or improve my health’ as motivation compared with non-adherents. Controlling for motivations, hierarchical logistic regression showed that only planning as part of the GSAB self-regulatory system predicted adherence to a plant-based diet.Conclusions:Values-based approaches to plant-based diets, including consideration for ethical beliefs, self-efficacy and proper planning, may be key for successful maintenance of this diet long-term.

scholarly journals How is cervical cancer screening information communicated in UK websites? Cross-sectional analysis of content and quantitative presentation formats

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. e029551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasmina Okan ◽  
Samuel G Smith ◽  
Wändi Bruine de Bruin
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Cancer Statistics ◽  
Presentation Formats ◽  
Sectional Analysis

ObjectivesTo investigate whether UK websites about cervical cancer screening targeted to the public include (1) information about benefits and risks of screening, possible screening results and cervical cancer statistics, (2) quantitative presentation formats recommended in the risk communication literature and (3) appeals for participation and/or informed decision-making.DesignCross-sectional analysis of websites using a comprehensive checklist of information items on screening benefits, risks, possible results and cervical cancer statistics.Outcome measuresWe recorded the number of websites that contained each of the information items, and the presentation format used for probabilistic information (no quantification provided, verbal quantifiers only, different types of numerical formats and/or graphs). We also recorded the number of websites containing appeals for participation and/or informed decision-making.SettingWebsites were identified through the most common Google search terms used in the UK to find information on cervical screening, according to GoogleTrends and a commercial internet-monitoring programme. Two additional websites were identified by the authors as relevant.ResultsAfter applying exclusion criteria, 14 websites were evaluated, including websites of public and private health service providers, charities, a medical society and a pharmacy. The websites mentioned different benefits, risks of screening and possible results. However, specific content varied between websites. Probabilistic information was often presented using non-recommended formats, including relative risk reductions to express screening benefits, and verbal quantifiers without numbers to express risks. Appeals for participation were present in most websites, with almost half also mentioning informed decision-making.ConclusionsUK websites about cervical cancer screening were generally balanced. However, benefits and risks were presented using different formats, potentially hindering comparisons. Additionally, recommendations from the literature to facilitate understanding of quantitative information and facilitate informed decisions were often not followed. Designing websites that adhere to existing recommendations may support informed screening uptake.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document