Parents' and Caregivers' Support for in-School COVID-19 Mitigation Strategies: A Socioecological Perspective.

IF 1.6 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Health Promotion Practice Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-04 DOI:10.1177/15248399231221160
Laura Prichett, Andrea A Berry, Gabriela Calderon, June Wang, Erin R Hager, Lauren M Klein, Lorece V Edwards, Yisi Liu, Sara B Johnson
{"title":"Parents' and Caregivers' Support for in-School COVID-19 Mitigation Strategies: A Socioecological Perspective.","authors":"Laura Prichett, Andrea A Berry, Gabriela Calderon, June Wang, Erin R Hager, Lauren M Klein, Lorece V Edwards, Yisi Liu, Sara B Johnson","doi":"10.1177/15248399231221160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Informed by the social ecological model, which asserts that health behaviors and beliefs are the result of multiple levels of influence, we examined factors related to parents' support for in-school COVID-19 mitigation strategies. Using data from a survey of 567 parents/caregivers of public elementary and middle school students in eight Maryland counties, we employed regression models to examine relationships between parent-, child-, family-, school-, and community-level factors and acceptability of mitigation strategies. Acceptance of COVID-19 mitigation strategies was positively correlated with child- and family-level factors, including child racial identity (parents of Black children were more accepting than those of White children, odds ratio [<i>OR</i>]: 2.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.5, 4.1]), parent receipt of the COVID-19 vaccine (<i>OR</i>: 2.4, 95% CI = [1.5, 3.7]), and parent Democrat or Independent political affiliation (compared with Republican affiliation, <i>OR</i>: 4.2, 95% CI = [2.6, 6.7]; <i>OR</i>: 2.2, 95%CI = [1.3, 3.8], respectively). Acceptance was also positively associated with parents' perceptions of their school's mitigation approach, including higher school mitigation score, indicating more intensive mitigation policies (<i>OR</i>: 1.1, 95% CI = [1.0, 1.1]), better school communication about COVID-19 (<i>OR</i>: 1.7, 95% CI = [1.4, 1.9]) and better school capacity to address COVID-19 (<i>OR</i>: 1.9, 95% CI = [1.5, 2.4]). Community-level factors were not associated with acceptance. Child- and parent-level factors identified suggest potential groups for messaging regarding mitigation strategies. School-level factors may play an important role in parents' acceptance of in-school mitigation strategies. Schools' capacity to address public health threats may offer an underappreciated and modifiable setting for disseminating and reinforcing public health guidance.</p>","PeriodicalId":47956,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11337969/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15248399231221160","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Informed by the social ecological model, which asserts that health behaviors and beliefs are the result of multiple levels of influence, we examined factors related to parents' support for in-school COVID-19 mitigation strategies. Using data from a survey of 567 parents/caregivers of public elementary and middle school students in eight Maryland counties, we employed regression models to examine relationships between parent-, child-, family-, school-, and community-level factors and acceptability of mitigation strategies. Acceptance of COVID-19 mitigation strategies was positively correlated with child- and family-level factors, including child racial identity (parents of Black children were more accepting than those of White children, odds ratio [OR]: 2.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.5, 4.1]), parent receipt of the COVID-19 vaccine (OR: 2.4, 95% CI = [1.5, 3.7]), and parent Democrat or Independent political affiliation (compared with Republican affiliation, OR: 4.2, 95% CI = [2.6, 6.7]; OR: 2.2, 95%CI = [1.3, 3.8], respectively). Acceptance was also positively associated with parents' perceptions of their school's mitigation approach, including higher school mitigation score, indicating more intensive mitigation policies (OR: 1.1, 95% CI = [1.0, 1.1]), better school communication about COVID-19 (OR: 1.7, 95% CI = [1.4, 1.9]) and better school capacity to address COVID-19 (OR: 1.9, 95% CI = [1.5, 2.4]). Community-level factors were not associated with acceptance. Child- and parent-level factors identified suggest potential groups for messaging regarding mitigation strategies. School-level factors may play an important role in parents' acceptance of in-school mitigation strategies. Schools' capacity to address public health threats may offer an underappreciated and modifiable setting for disseminating and reinforcing public health guidance.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
家长和照顾者对校内 COVID-19 缓解策略的支持:社会生态学视角。
社会生态模型认为,健康行为和信念是多层次影响的结果,在此基础上,我们研究了与家长支持校内 COVID-19 缓解策略相关的因素。通过对马里兰州 8 个县 567 名公立中小学学生家长/监护人的调查数据,我们采用回归模型研究了家长、儿童、家庭、学校和社区层面的因素与缓解策略可接受性之间的关系。COVID-19缓解策略的接受度与儿童和家庭层面的因素呈正相关,包括儿童的种族身份(黑人儿童的父母比白人儿童的父母更容易接受,几率比 [OR]: 2.5, 95% 置信区间 [CI] = [1.5, 4.1])、父母是否接种过COVID-19疫苗(OR: 2.4, 95% CI = [1.5, 3.7])、父母的民主党或独立党政治倾向(与共和党政治倾向相比,OR:4.2,95% CI = [2.6,6.7];OR:2.2,95%CI = [1.3,3.8])。接受度还与家长对学校减灾方法的看法呈正相关,包括学校减灾得分越高,表明减灾政策越密集(OR:1.1,95% CI = [1.0,1.1])、学校对 COVID-19 的沟通越好(OR:1.7,95% CI = [1.4,1.9])以及学校应对 COVID-19 的能力越强(OR:1.9,95% CI = [1.5,2.4])。社区层面的因素与接受度无关。所发现的儿童和家长层面的因素表明,缓解策略的潜在信息传递群体。学校层面的因素可能对家长接受校内减灾策略起到重要作用。学校应对公共卫生威胁的能力可能为传播和加强公共卫生指导提供了一个未被充分重视且可调整的环境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Promotion Practice
Health Promotion Practice PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
126
期刊介绍: Health Promotion Practice (HPP) publishes authoritative articles devoted to the practical application of health promotion and education. It publishes information of strategic importance to a broad base of professionals engaged in the practice of developing, implementing, and evaluating health promotion and disease prevention programs. The journal"s editorial board is committed to focusing on the applications of health promotion and public health education interventions, programs and best practice strategies in various settings, including but not limited to, community, health care, worksite, educational, and international settings. Additionally, the journal focuses on the development and application of public policy conducive to the promotion of health and prevention of disease.
期刊最新文献
Assessment of Public Health Agency and Utility Training Needs for CDC National Wastewater Surveillance System Jurisdictions in the United States. Formative Research to Design and Evaluate Caring Text Messages for American Indian and Alaska Native Youth, College Students, and Veterans. Group-Based Medical Mistrust in Adolescents With Poorly Controlled Asthma Living in Rural Areas. "Did You Wash Your Hands?" The Socioeconomic Inequalities Preventing Youth From Adopting Protective Behaviors During COVID-19 in South Africa. Using Community-Based Participatory Research to Conduct a Collaborative Needs Assessment of Mental Health Service Users: Identifying Research Questions and Building Academic-Community Trust.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1