冠状病毒大流行期间不利和歧视的交叉因素及其对日常生活的影响:CICADA-ME混合方法研究

Carol Rivas, Amanda P Moore, Alison Thomson, Kusha Anand, Zainab Zuzer Lal, Alison Fang-Wei Wu, Ozan Aksoy
{"title":"冠状病毒大流行期间不利和歧视的交叉因素及其对日常生活的影响:CICADA-ME混合方法研究","authors":"Carol Rivas, Amanda P Moore, Alison Thomson, Kusha Anand, Zainab Zuzer Lal, Alison Fang-Wei Wu, Ozan Aksoy","doi":"10.3310/KYTF4381","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated pre-existing societal inequities. Our study addresses the dearth of studies on how intersecting factors of disadvantage and discrimination affected pandemic daily life for disabled people from minoritised ethnic groups, aiming to improve their experiences and social, health and well-being outcomes.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Through an intersectionality lens, to: explore and compare, by location and time, survey and qualitative data on changing needs for social, health and well-being outcomes relate coping strategies/solutions to these explore formal and informal network issues/affordances gain insights from synthesising our data contextualise and explore transferability of findings co-create outputs with stakeholders.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Mixed-methods, asset-based, underpinned by embodiment disability models and intersectionality, integrating three strands: (secondary): analysis of existing cohort/panel data, literature review (primary: quantitative): new survey (<i>n</i> = 4326), three times over 18 months (primary: qualitative): semistructured interviews (<i>n</i> = 271), interviewee co-create workshops (<i>n</i> = 104) 5 and 10 months later, mixed stakeholder co-design workshops (<i>n</i> = 30) for rapid-impact solutions to issues, key informant interviews (<i>n</i> = 4).</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Strand 2: community-dwelling migrants, White British comparators, with/without disability. Strand 3: focus on Arab, South Asian, African, Central/East European, or White British heritage with/without disability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found strong adherence to pandemic restrictions (where accommodation, economic situations and disability allowed) due to COVID-19 vulnerabilities. High vaccine hesitancy (despite eventual uptake) resulted from side-effect concerns and (mis)trust in the government. Many relied on food banks, local organisations, communities and informal networks. Pandemic-related income loss was common, particularly affecting undocumented migrants. Participants reported a crisis in mental health care, non-holistic social and housing care, and inaccessible, poor-quality and discriminatory remote health/social care. They preferred private care (which they could not easily afford), community or self-help online support. Lower socioeconomic status, mental health and mobility issues reduced well-being. Individual and community assets and coping strategies mitigated some issues, adapted over different pandemic phases, and focused on empowerment, self-reflection, self-care and social connectivity. Technology needs cut across these.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>We could not explore area-level social distancing and infection rates. Data collection was largely online, possibly excluding some older, digitally deprived or more disabled participants. Participants engaged differently in online and face-to-face co-create workshops. Our qualitative data over-represent England and South Asian people and use contestable categories.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Different intersecting factors led to different experiences, with low socioeconomic status particularly significant. Overall, disability and minoritised ethnic identities led to worse pandemic experiences. Our co-design work shows how to build on the assets and strengths; simple changes in professional communication and understanding should improve experience. Minoritised groups can easily be involved in policy and practice decision-making, reducing marginalisation, with better сare and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>More research is needed on: (1) the impact of the post-pandemic economic situation and migration policies on migrant mental health/well-being; (2) supporting empowerment strategies across disadvantaged intersecting identities; and (3) technological deprivation and the cultural and disability-relevant acceptability of remote consultations. We found some differences in the devolved nations, which need elucidation.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>This study is registered as ISRCTN40370, PROSPERO CRD42021262590 and CRD42022355254.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132914) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 13, No. 2. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>","PeriodicalId":519880,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":"13 2","pages":"1-185"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intersecting factors of disadvantage and discrimination and their effect on daily life during the coronavirus pandemic: the CICADA-ME mixed-methods study.\",\"authors\":\"Carol Rivas, Amanda P Moore, Alison Thomson, Kusha Anand, Zainab Zuzer Lal, Alison Fang-Wei Wu, Ozan Aksoy\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/KYTF4381\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated pre-existing societal inequities. Our study addresses the dearth of studies on how intersecting factors of disadvantage and discrimination affected pandemic daily life for disabled people from minoritised ethnic groups, aiming to improve their experiences and social, health and well-being outcomes.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Through an intersectionality lens, to: explore and compare, by location and time, survey and qualitative data on changing needs for social, health and well-being outcomes relate coping strategies/solutions to these explore formal and informal network issues/affordances gain insights from synthesising our data contextualise and explore transferability of findings co-create outputs with stakeholders.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Mixed-methods, asset-based, underpinned by embodiment disability models and intersectionality, integrating three strands: (secondary): analysis of existing cohort/panel data, literature review (primary: quantitative): new survey (<i>n</i> = 4326), three times over 18 months (primary: qualitative): semistructured interviews (<i>n</i> = 271), interviewee co-create workshops (<i>n</i> = 104) 5 and 10 months later, mixed stakeholder co-design workshops (<i>n</i> = 30) for rapid-impact solutions to issues, key informant interviews (<i>n</i> = 4).</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Strand 2: community-dwelling migrants, White British comparators, with/without disability. Strand 3: focus on Arab, South Asian, African, Central/East European, or White British heritage with/without disability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found strong adherence to pandemic restrictions (where accommodation, economic situations and disability allowed) due to COVID-19 vulnerabilities. High vaccine hesitancy (despite eventual uptake) resulted from side-effect concerns and (mis)trust in the government. Many relied on food banks, local organisations, communities and informal networks. Pandemic-related income loss was common, particularly affecting undocumented migrants. Participants reported a crisis in mental health care, non-holistic social and housing care, and inaccessible, poor-quality and discriminatory remote health/social care. They preferred private care (which they could not easily afford), community or self-help online support. Lower socioeconomic status, mental health and mobility issues reduced well-being. Individual and community assets and coping strategies mitigated some issues, adapted over different pandemic phases, and focused on empowerment, self-reflection, self-care and social connectivity. Technology needs cut across these.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>We could not explore area-level social distancing and infection rates. Data collection was largely online, possibly excluding some older, digitally deprived or more disabled participants. Participants engaged differently in online and face-to-face co-create workshops. Our qualitative data over-represent England and South Asian people and use contestable categories.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Different intersecting factors led to different experiences, with low socioeconomic status particularly significant. Overall, disability and minoritised ethnic identities led to worse pandemic experiences. Our co-design work shows how to build on the assets and strengths; simple changes in professional communication and understanding should improve experience. Minoritised groups can easily be involved in policy and practice decision-making, reducing marginalisation, with better сare and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>More research is needed on: (1) the impact of the post-pandemic economic situation and migration policies on migrant mental health/well-being; (2) supporting empowerment strategies across disadvantaged intersecting identities; and (3) technological deprivation and the cultural and disability-relevant acceptability of remote consultations. We found some differences in the devolved nations, which need elucidation.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>This study is registered as ISRCTN40370, PROSPERO CRD42021262590 and CRD42022355254.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132914) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 13, No. 2. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":519880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health and social care delivery research\",\"volume\":\"13 2\",\"pages\":\"1-185\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health and social care delivery research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/KYTF4381\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and social care delivery research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/KYTF4381","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:2019冠状病毒病大流行加剧了原有的社会不平等。我们的研究解决了缺乏关于弱势和歧视的交叉因素如何影响少数民族残疾人流行病日常生活的研究,旨在改善他们的经历和社会、健康和福祉结果。目标:通过交叉性视角,按地点和时间探索和比较社会、健康和福祉需求变化的调查和定性数据,结果与应对策略/解决方案相关,探索正式和非正式网络问题/能力,从综合我们的数据背景中获得见解,探索结果的可转移性,与利益相关者共同创造产出。设计:混合方法,基于资产,以体现残疾模型和交叉性为基础,整合三个方面:(次要):现有队列/面板数据分析,文献回顾(主要:定量):新调查(n = 4326), 18个月内三次(主要:定性);半结构化访谈(n = 271), 5个月和10个月后受访者共同创建研讨会(n = 104),混合利益相关者共同设计研讨会(n = 30),快速影响问题解决方案,关键线人访谈(n = 4)。背景:联合王国和爱尔兰共和国。参与者:第二组:居住在社区的移民,有/无残疾的英国白人比较者。族群3:专注于阿拉伯人、南亚人、非洲人、中欧/东欧人,或英国白人,有/没有残疾。结果:我们发现,由于COVID-19的脆弱性,人们强烈遵守了大流行限制(在允许住宿、经济状况和残疾的情况下)。对疫苗的高度犹豫(尽管最终接受)是由于对副作用的担忧和对政府的(错误)信任。许多人依靠食品银行、当地组织、社区和非正式网络。与大流行病有关的收入损失很常见,尤其影响到无证件移徙者。与会者报告了精神保健、非整体社会和住房保健以及难以获得、质量差和歧视性的远程保健/社会保健方面的危机。他们更喜欢私人护理(他们负担不起)、社区或在线自助支持。较低的社会经济地位、心理健康和流动性问题降低了幸福感。个人和社区的资产和应对战略缓解了一些问题,在不同的大流行阶段进行了调整,并侧重于增强权能、自我反思、自我照顾和社会联系。技术需求跨越了这些。局限性:我们无法探索区域层面的社会距离和感染率。数据收集主要是在网上进行的,可能排除了一些年龄较大、缺少数字设备或残疾程度较高的参与者。参与者在在线和面对面的共同创造研讨会上的参与方式不同。我们的定性数据过多地代表了英格兰和南亚人,并使用了可争议的类别。结论:不同的交叉因素导致不同的体验,社会经济地位低的影响尤为显著。总的来说,残疾和少数民族身份导致了更糟糕的大流行经历。我们的协同设计工作展示了如何利用资产和优势;专业沟通和理解的简单改变应该会改善体验。少数群体可以很容易地参与政策和实践决策,减少边缘化,从而获得更好的回报和结果。未来的工作:需要更多的研究:(1)大流行后经济形势和移民政策对移民心理健康/福祉的影响;(2)支持跨弱势交叉身份的赋权策略;(3)技术剥夺以及远程咨询的文化和残疾相关可接受性。我们在权力下放的国家中发现了一些差异,需要加以说明。研究注册:本研究注册号为ISRCTN40370, PROSPERO CRD42021262590和CRD42022355254。资助:该奖项由国家卫生和保健研究所(NIHR)卫生和社会保健提供研究项目(NIHR奖励编号:NIHR132914)资助,全文发表在《卫生和社会保健提供研究》上;第13卷第2期有关进一步的奖励信息,请参阅美国国立卫生研究院资助和奖励网站。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Intersecting factors of disadvantage and discrimination and their effect on daily life during the coronavirus pandemic: the CICADA-ME mixed-methods study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated pre-existing societal inequities. Our study addresses the dearth of studies on how intersecting factors of disadvantage and discrimination affected pandemic daily life for disabled people from minoritised ethnic groups, aiming to improve their experiences and social, health and well-being outcomes.

Objectives: Through an intersectionality lens, to: explore and compare, by location and time, survey and qualitative data on changing needs for social, health and well-being outcomes relate coping strategies/solutions to these explore formal and informal network issues/affordances gain insights from synthesising our data contextualise and explore transferability of findings co-create outputs with stakeholders.

Design: Mixed-methods, asset-based, underpinned by embodiment disability models and intersectionality, integrating three strands: (secondary): analysis of existing cohort/panel data, literature review (primary: quantitative): new survey (n = 4326), three times over 18 months (primary: qualitative): semistructured interviews (n = 271), interviewee co-create workshops (n = 104) 5 and 10 months later, mixed stakeholder co-design workshops (n = 30) for rapid-impact solutions to issues, key informant interviews (n = 4).

Setting: United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland.

Participants: Strand 2: community-dwelling migrants, White British comparators, with/without disability. Strand 3: focus on Arab, South Asian, African, Central/East European, or White British heritage with/without disability.

Results: We found strong adherence to pandemic restrictions (where accommodation, economic situations and disability allowed) due to COVID-19 vulnerabilities. High vaccine hesitancy (despite eventual uptake) resulted from side-effect concerns and (mis)trust in the government. Many relied on food banks, local organisations, communities and informal networks. Pandemic-related income loss was common, particularly affecting undocumented migrants. Participants reported a crisis in mental health care, non-holistic social and housing care, and inaccessible, poor-quality and discriminatory remote health/social care. They preferred private care (which they could not easily afford), community or self-help online support. Lower socioeconomic status, mental health and mobility issues reduced well-being. Individual and community assets and coping strategies mitigated some issues, adapted over different pandemic phases, and focused on empowerment, self-reflection, self-care and social connectivity. Technology needs cut across these.

Limitations: We could not explore area-level social distancing and infection rates. Data collection was largely online, possibly excluding some older, digitally deprived or more disabled participants. Participants engaged differently in online and face-to-face co-create workshops. Our qualitative data over-represent England and South Asian people and use contestable categories.

Conclusions: Different intersecting factors led to different experiences, with low socioeconomic status particularly significant. Overall, disability and minoritised ethnic identities led to worse pandemic experiences. Our co-design work shows how to build on the assets and strengths; simple changes in professional communication and understanding should improve experience. Minoritised groups can easily be involved in policy and practice decision-making, reducing marginalisation, with better сare and outcomes.

Future work: More research is needed on: (1) the impact of the post-pandemic economic situation and migration policies on migrant mental health/well-being; (2) supporting empowerment strategies across disadvantaged intersecting identities; and (3) technological deprivation and the cultural and disability-relevant acceptability of remote consultations. We found some differences in the devolved nations, which need elucidation.

Study registration: This study is registered as ISRCTN40370, PROSPERO CRD42021262590 and CRD42022355254.

Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132914) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 13, No. 2. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信