Project Connect training aims to reduce barriers to screening for and intervening with women with histories of intimate partner violence and reproductive coercion. This study sought to assess the effectiveness of trainings, provider facility with Project Connect tools, and areas for improvement in a pilot state. Results indicated that providers found training useful, and those in supervisory roles particularly appreciated the universal tools and skill set given to participants. Providing these tools supports the provision of trauma-informed care. Areas for improvement included increased emphasis on initiating screening, enhancing training for different types of providers, and developing follow-up training.

Current estimates indicate that as few as 2% of health providers may be universally screening patients or clients for intimate partner violence and reproductive coercion. Barriers to screening have been well-described in the literature; however, little attention has been paid to the factors that motivate providers to carry out screenings. This study explored data from a sample of providers who had received specific screening and intervention training to ascertain what factors motivated them to complete screenings in practice. Patient-related, provider-related, and work setting factors were identified. Findings may support improved provider training and, ultimately, screening rates.

Social media platforms such as Pinterest are often used as venues for discussing relationships, making them ideal channels for promoting healthy relationships and preventing intimate partner violence (IPV). This is particularly relevant for IPV, which has been historically understood as a personal issue and lacked support as a significant public health issue. To explore its potential as a platform for prevention, this study examines the ways in which IPV messages on Pinterest reflect public health understandings of, and approaches to, prevention, and how Pinterest users engage with these posts. We analyzed 750 Pinterest posts about IPV using the Social Ecological Model as a theoretical framework for conceptualizing framing devices. The majority of pins (82.9%) used contextually focused thematic framing, while only 8.0% used individually focused episodic framing, and 4.4% used both. The predominance of thematic framing is contrary to findings in examinations of traditional media portrayals of IPV and is likely to facilitate sharing information and education about IPV. However, posts that mention individual causal attribution and individual solution responsibility elicit more engagement than pins that do not. Overall, the Pinterest sample was more reflective of the range of IPV experiences than previous, older analyses of traditional media content, possibly indicating that the public health approach to this issue is gaining momentum. Encouragingly, the study showed increased engagement with posts that discuss psychological abuse, indicating a potentially promising transition from an emphasis on physical abuse to the neglect of psychological abuse. Although Pinterest does still show some stereotypical portrayals of IPV similar to traditional media stories, it also shows much promise for shifting the narrative around IPV in line with the current public health approach and public health professionals should be encouraged to enter the dialogue on IPV on Pinterest.

Social media platforms like Twitter and Instagram have recently been used as venues for discussing abusive relationships and sexual violence. This study examines the ways in which social media users and how Twitter and Instagram users engaged with these posts by analyzing 500 Twitter and 500 Instagram posts focused on #NotOkay using a quantitative content analysis. There were marked differences between the posts on the two platforms as well as between engagement with these posts: Instagram overall elicited a higher median level of engagement than Twitter as well as more frequent expressions of social support; in addition, #NotOkay posts on Instagram were more likely to focus on specific acts of sexual assault. On Twitter, posts that included expressions of instrumental social support produced higher engagement. However, mentioning sexual assault produced higher engagement on both platforms. Providers and other interacting with sexual assault survivors should be aware of how these types of violence may be framed and expressed by different populations on different social media platforms.

Background

In September 2018, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford accused then-nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault. When then-U.S. President Donald Trump questioned her credibility on Twitter, sexual assault survivors began tweeting their reasons for not reporting using the hashtag #WhyIDidntReport. This study examined how these posts were discussed on Twitter and to what extent the tweets fit within levels of the Social Ecological Model (SEM).

Method

This study used quantitative content analysis to code 1,000 tweets with #WhyIDidntReport for violence type, reasons for not reporting, and SEM levels.

Results

Overall, 68.7% of posts mentioned a specific reason for not reporting; of these, 24.1% referred to the perpetrator being in a position of power, 36.3% feared not being believed, and 20.6% mentioned that others invalidated the assault. In addition, 47.6% mentioned a specific form of violence. Within the SEM, 47.6% referred to individual, 52.6% to relational, 43.2% to community, and 21.7% to societal reasons for not reporting.

Conclusion

Reading social media content allows healthcare providers to directly discover how survivors talk about their experiences, priorities in the care environment, and how to support a patient-centered and trauma-informed approach.

Implications

Understanding reasons people do not report sexual assault is critical for healthcare professionals to engage patients in open, honest screening and intervention efforts.

Social media platforms like Instagram are often used as venues for discussing relationships, making them ideal channels for promoting healthy relationships and preventing intimate partner violence (IPV). This is particularly relevant for IPV, which has been historically understood as a personal issue and lacked support for consideration as a significant public health issue. To explore a potential platform for IPV prevention, this study examines the ways in which IPV messages on Instagram reflect public health understandings of, and approaches to, prevention and how Instagram users engage with these posts. We analyzed 700 Instagram posts about IPV using the social ecological model as the theoretical framework for conceptualizing framing devices. Posts that mentioned individual causal attribution and individual solution responsibility were both present in the majority of posts and elicited more engagement than posts that did not. Encouragingly, the Instagram sample was more reflective of a range of different types of IPV experiences than previous analyses of traditional media content, possibly indicating that a public health approach to this issue is gaining traction.

As COVID-19 vaccines become available to the public, there will be a massive worldwide distribution effort. Vaccine distribution has historically been unequal primarily due to the inability of nations with developing economies to purchase enough vaccine to fully vaccinate their populations. Inequitable access to COVID-19 vaccines will not just cause humanitarian suffering, it will likely also be associated with increased economic suffering worldwide. This study focuses on the U.S. population and its beliefs about future COVID-19 vaccine donation by the U.S. to low- and middle-income countries. This study carried out a survey among 788 U.S. adults. Variables include demographics, COVID-19 vaccine priority status, COVID-19 vaccine donation beliefs, and Social Dominance Orientation. Analyses showed that older respondents were both less likely to endorse higher levels of COVID-19 vaccine donations and were more likely to want to wait until all in the U.S. who want the vaccine have received it; those who identified as Democrats were more likely to endorse higher levels of future COVID-19 vaccine donation than Republicans; and those scoring higher on SDO were both less likely to endorse higher levels of COVID-19 vaccine donations as well as more likely to want to wait until all in the U.S. who want the vaccine have received it. Policymakers, as well as healthcare providers and public health communication professionals, should give consideration to those messages most likely to engender support for global prevention efforts with each audience segment.

Background

This study assessed psychosocial predictors of U.S. adults' willingness to get a future COVID-19 vaccine and whether these predictors differ under an emergency use authorization (EUA) release of the vaccine.

Methods

A survey of 788 U.S. adults was conducted to explore the relationships between demographics and psychosocial predictors of intent to get a future COVID-19 vaccine as well as willingness to get such a vaccine under EUA.

Results

Significant predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions were education, having insurance, scoring high on subjective norms, a positive attitude toward the vaccine, as well as high perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, high perceived benefits of the vaccine, scoring low on barriers to the vaccine, and scoring high on self-efficacy. Predictors of willingness to take a COVID-19 vaccine under EUA were age, race/ethnicity, positive subjective norms, high perceived behavioral control, positive attitudes toward the vaccine, as well as high perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, high perceived benefits of the vaccine, low barriers to the vaccine, and scoring high on self-efficacy for getting the vaccine. Concerns about rushed vaccine development appear to reduce vaccine uptake intent, as well as willingness to get the vaccine under EUA.

Conclusions

COVID-19 vaccine-related messages should both address concerns about the vaccine and its development and reinforce benefits of the vaccine (both factors significant in both models). Vaccine efforts may need to go beyond just communications campaigns correcting misinformation about a COVID-19 vaccine to also focus on re-establishing public trust in government agencies.

Evangelical Christians are among the most hesitant to get the COVID-19 vaccine. This study examined the extent to which COVID-19 vaccination uptake among Evangelicals is explained by demographic characteristics, Health Belief Model constructs, and faith-based support factors. Survey research firm Qualtrics recruited 531 U.S. adults and conducted a survey to explore predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people who self-identified as Evangelicals in September 2021. A logistic regression showed that those reporting high perceived benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine were more likely to be vaccinated, while those reporting high perceived barriers were less likely to be vaccinated. Those whose healthcare provider asked them about the vaccine were more likely to be vaccinated than those whose healthcare provider did not ask. Finally, while those who reported information seeking from religious leaders were less likely to be vaccinated, those who reported more faith-based support for vaccination were more likely to be vaccinated. In addition to beliefs about benefits and barriers to vaccination, the role of healthcare providers and clergy were important factors influencing vaccination status. Intervention efforts that capitalize on partnerships between health providers and clergy in supportive congregations may be able to reach undecided Evangelicals.