RESUMO

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic led many countries to adopt strict measures aimed at reducing circulation of the virus and mitigating the burden on health services. Among these, the lockdown (social distancing/confinement) was probably the most controversial and most widely debated, since it affected the population's daily life abruptly, with consequences for people's emotional state and the operational logic of various economic sectors. Objective: Analyze the relationship been Brazilians' opinions on lockdown during the pandemic and individual, sociodemographic, and belief characteristics. Methods: We conducted an online survey to evaluate Brazilians' opinions on the lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic. We prepared a questionnaire with questions on sociodemographic aspects and individuals' points of view toward the lockdown. We sent a link for the survey through social media and encouraged participants to also share the link in their respective social networks, as a snowball sample. Cluster analysis was performed to identify different opinion profiles. Cluster Analysis is a multivariate approach that aims to segment a set of data into distinct groups, using some classification criteria. Results: From April to May 2021, the link received 33,796 free participations via social networks from all over Brazil. We analyzed data from 33,363 participants. Pro-lockdown opinions predominated in most of the sociodemographic strata. Cluster analysis identified two groups: pro-lockdown, aligned with the scientific recommendations, and anti-lockdown, characterized by economic insecurity and denialism. Anti-lockdown participants downplayed the pandemic's seriousness and believed in unproven measures to fight SARS-CoV-2. However, these same participants were afraid of losing their jobs and of being unable to pay their bills. In general, participants did not believe in the feasibility of a lockdown in Brazil or in the efficacy of the prevailing government administration's measures. Conclusion: The study identified a lack of consensus among participants concerning lockdown as a practice. Issues such as disbelief in the pandemic's seriousness, denialism, and economic insecurity were important in the determination of the profiles identified in the study. Denialism is believed to have been a subjective defense against the economic problems resulting from social control measures and the lack of adequate social policies to deal with the pandemic. It was also highlighted that political polarization and the lack of central coordination during social distancing are crucial aspects. The variation in results in different locations highlights the diversity of the Brazilian scenario. By analyzing Brazilians' opinions about the lockdown, considering individual characteristics, the study seeks insights to face the pandemic and prepare for future crises, contributing to more effective public health strategies.

RESUMO

The objective is to unveil the reasons for vaccine hesitancy among parents and/or guardians of children and adolescents toward the prevention of COVID-19. This is a descriptive study, with a qualitative approach that seeks to analyze the answers to the open question "Why will you not vaccinate or have not vaccinated or are in doubt about vaccinating the children and adolescents under your responsibility, for the prevention of COVID-19?". The research included adult individuals, Brazilians, living in the country, responsible for children and adolescents under 18 years of age. Data collection took place electronically in November and December 2021. The answers were organized and processed with the support of the software Iramuteq. The textual corpus of this research was composed of the response of 1,896 participants, consisting of 87% who were hesitant (1,650) and 13% (246) of parents who intend to vaccinate but who outlined some doubts and considerations about the vaccination of children and adolescents. These are reasons why parents and/or guardians have not vaccinated or are in doubt about vaccinating the children and adolescents under their responsibility for the prevention of COVID-19: fears about vaccination regarding the conception that the vaccine is in the experimental phase, fear of adverse reactions and long-term effects. The reasons for the lack of intention to vaccinate stem from the understanding of the participants that COVID-19 in children is not serious, the risks of vaccination are greater than the benefits, and the right of choice not to vaccinate.

Objetiva-se desvelar os motivos para hesitação vacinal de pais e/ou responsáveis de crianças e adolescentes para prevenção da COVID-19. Trata-se de um estudo descritivo, de abordagem qualitativa, que busca analisar as respostas da pergunta aberta "por que você não vai vacinar, não vacinou ou está na dúvida em vacinar as crianças e os adolescentes sob sua responsabilidade para prevenção da COVID-19?". A pesquisa incluiu indivíduos adultos, brasileiros, residentes no país, responsáveis por crianças e adolescentes menores de 18 anos. A coleta de dados aconteceu de forma eletrônica entre os meses de novembro e dezembro de 2021. As respostas foram organizadas e processadas com suporte do software Iramuteq. O corpus textual desta pesquisa foi composto pela resposta de 1.896 participantes, constituído por 87% de hesitantes (1.650) e 13% (246) de pais que têm intenção de vacinar, mas que esboçaram algumas dúvidas e considerações a respeito da vacinação de crianças e adolescentes. São motivos pelos quais pais e/ou responsáveis não vacinaram ou estão na dúvida em vacinar as crianças e os adolescentes sob sua responsabilidade para prevenção da COVID-19: receio em razão de a vacina estar em fase experimental e medo das reações adversas e dos efeitos a longo prazo. Já os motivos para ausência de intenção de vacinar decorrem dos entendimentos dos participantes de que a COVID-19 em crianças não é grave, os riscos da vacinação são maiores do que os benefícios e o direito de escolha em não vacinar.

El objetivo es revelar los motivos de la indecisión a las vacunas de padres y/o responsables de niños y adolescentes para la prevención de COVID-19. Se trata de un estudio descriptivo con enfoque cualitativo, que busca analizar las respuestas a la pregunta abierta "¿Por qué no va a vacunar o no vacunó o tiene dudas en vacunar a los niños y los adolescentes bajo su responsabilidad para la prevención del COVID-19?". La investigación incluyó individuos adultos, brasileños, residentes en el país, responsables de niños y adolescentes menores de 18 años. La recolección de datos se realizó de forma electrónica entre los meses de noviembre y diciembre de 2021. Las respuestas se organizaron y procesaron con ayuda del software Iramuteq. El corpus textual de esta investigación fue compuesto por la respuesta de 1.896 participantes, siendo constituido por el 87% de indecisos (1.650) y el 13% (246) de padres que tienen la intención de vacunar, pero que esbozaron algunas dudas y consideraciones respecto a la vacunación de niños y adolescentes. Son motivos por los cuales los padres y/o responsables no vacunaron o están en duda en vacunar a los niños y adolescentes bajo su responsabilidad para prevención del COVID-19: temores con la vacunación en cuanto a la concepción de que la vacuna está en fase experimental, miedo a las reacciones adversas y los efectos a largo plazo. Los motivos de la ausencia de intención en vacunar se deben a que los participantes entienden que el COVID-19 en niños no es grave, que los riesgos de la vacunación son mayores que los beneficios y que tienen derecho a decidir no vacunarse.

Assuntos

RESUMO

The mental health of health professionals who worked directly in services during the COVID-19 pandemic to care for patients affected by the disease became a fundamental issue to be considered, given the several consequences of this activity for these professionals. This article aimed to understand the challenges and demands of health professionals concerning support to address the emotional and physical exhaustion of working on the so-called frontline during the COVID-19 pandemic. The qualitative methodological approach was based on semi-structured interviews conducted online with these professionals after the first months of the pandemic. The hero's place in which they were set, even if only in media discourses, soon gave way to their weaknesses and fragile work relationships to emerge: stress, fear, and the listening and reception desire. Marcel Mauss' gift theory was brought up considering that new ways of reading and interpreting health work relationships contribute to necessary and urgent reformulations of their current context, targeting mental health and, more broadly, the comprehensive health of healthcare professionals.

Durante a pandemia de COVID-19, a saúde mental dos profissionais de saúde, que trabalharam diretamente nos serviços voltados para o cuidado dos pacientes afetados pela doença, tornou-se questão fundamental a ser considerada, dado os diversos desdobramentos que essa atuação gerou para esses profissionais. O objetivo deste artigo foi compreender desafios e demandas dos profissionais de saúde em termos de suporte para lidar com o desgaste emocional e físico com a atuação na chamada linha de frente durante a pandemia de COVID-19. A abordagem metodológica qualitativa se deu a partir de entrevistas semiestruturadas realizadas em ambiente online com esses profissionais, passados os primeiros meses de pandemia. O lugar de herói em que eles foram colocados, ainda que apenas nos discursos midiáticos, logo deu espaço para que as fragilidades destes e das relações de trabalho aparecessem: estresse, medo e o desejo de escuta e acolhimento. A teoria da dádiva de Marcel Mauss foi trazida considerando que novas formas de leitura e interpretação das relações de trabalho em saúde contribuem para reformulações necessárias e urgentes do contexto em que se encontram hoje, visando a saúde mental e, mais amplamente, a saúde integral dos profissionais da área de saúde.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Resumo Durante a pandemia de COVID-19, a saúde mental dos profissionais de saúde, que trabalharam diretamente nos serviços voltados para o cuidado dos pacientes afetados pela doença, tornou-se questão fundamental a ser considerada, dado os diversos desdobramentos que essa atuação gerou para esses profissionais. O objetivo deste artigo foi compreender desafios e demandas dos profissionais de saúde em termos de suporte para lidar com o desgaste emocional e físico com a atuação na chamada linha de frente durante a pandemia de COVID-19. A abordagem metodológica qualitativa se deu a partir de entrevistas semiestruturadas realizadas em ambiente online com esses profissionais, passados os primeiros meses de pandemia. O lugar de herói em que eles foram colocados, ainda que apenas nos discursos midiáticos, logo deu espaço para que as fragilidades destes e das relações de trabalho aparecessem: estresse, medo e o desejo de escuta e acolhimento. A teoria da dádiva de Marcel Mauss foi trazida considerando que novas formas de leitura e interpretação das relações de trabalho em saúde contribuem para reformulações necessárias e urgentes do contexto em que se encontram hoje, visando a saúde mental e, mais amplamente, a saúde integral dos profissionais da área de saúde.

Abstract The mental health of health professionals who worked directly in services during the COVID-19 pandemic to care for patients affected by the disease became a fundamental issue to be considered, given the several consequences of this activity for these professionals. This article aimed to understand the challenges and demands of health professionals concerning support to address the emotional and physical exhaustion of working on the so-called frontline during the COVID-19 pandemic. The qualitative methodological approach was based on semi-structured interviews conducted online with these professionals after the first months of the pandemic. The hero's place in which they were set, even if only in media discourses, soon gave way to their weaknesses and fragile work relationships to emerge: stress, fear, and the listening and reception desire. Marcel Mauss' gift theory was brought up considering that new ways of reading and interpreting health work relationships contribute to necessary and urgent reformulations of their current context, targeting mental health and, more broadly, the comprehensive health of healthcare professionals.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The control of the COVID-19 pandemic has been a great challenge. Understanding the thoughts and beliefs underlying vaccine hesitancy can help in the formulation of public policies. The present study aimed to analyze the social representations of hesitant Brazilians about vaccination against COVID-19. METHODS: Qualitative research guided by the Theory of Social Representations, carried out through an online survey among Brazilian adults living in Brazil. The data were analyzed using the IRaMuTeQ software. RESULTS: Of the 173,178 respondents, 10,928 were hesitant and declared reasons for vaccination hesitation. The analysis generated three classes: mistrust of the vaccine and underestimation of the severity of the pandemic; (dis)information and distrust of political involvement; and fear of adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: Social knowledge, presented by the representations apprehended in this study, demonstrates difficulty in discerning the reliability of information and a social imagination full of doubts and uncertainties. Understanding the internal dynamics of these groups, with their representations of the world, is important to propose policies and actions that echo and cause changes in the understanding of the role of immunization. It is essential to shed light on the sociological imagination so that gaps filled with false information can be dismantled and confronted with scientific knowledge accessible to the population.

Assuntos

RESUMO

The brain is a complex system whose understanding enables potentially deeper approaches to mental phenomena. Dynamics of wide classes of complex systems have been satisfactorily described within q-statistics, a current generalization of Boltzmann-Gibbs (BG) statistics. Here, we study human electroencephalograms of typical human adults (EEG), very specifically their inter-occurrence times across an arbitrarily chosen threshold of the signal (observed, for instance, at the midparietal location in scalp). The distributions of these inter-occurrence times differ from those usually emerging within BG statistical mechanics. They are instead well approached within the q-statistical theory, based on non-additive entropies characterized by the index q. The present method points towards a suitable tool for quantitatively accessing brain complexity, thus potentially opening useful studies of the properties of both typical and altered brain physiology.

Assuntos

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the trustworthiness of information sources, perception of clear information about the vaccine, and strategies to increase adherence to vaccination to provide managers with information that helps establish effective communication with the population about vaccination. METHOD: This is an online survey conducted between January 22 and 29, 2021, preceded by an Informed Consent, that aims to assess vaccine hesitancy, which corresponded to the first week of vaccination initiation to prevent COVID-19 in Brazil. Data were obtained from a questionnaire made available through a free platform and stored in Google Forms and later exported to the SPSS statistical package for analysis. The sample consisted of all questionnaires from participants who self-declared as age 18 or older, Brazilian, and residing in Brazil at the time of the survey. Incomplete records with more than 50% of blank items and duplicates were excluded. All categorical variables were analyzed from their absolute and relative frequencies. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to verify the relationship between dependent variables and independent variables. RESULTS: The results show that trust in information sources diverges between hesitant and non-hesitant. They also showed that some participants show an overall distrust that seems to have deeper foundations than issues related only to the source of information. The high rejection of television and the WHO as sources of information among hesitant suggests that integrated actions with research institutes, public figures vaccinating, and religious leaders can help to combat vaccine hesitation. Two actors become particularly important in this dynamic, both for good and bad, and their anti-vaxxer behavior must be observed: the doctor and the Ministry of Health. CONCLUSION: This study contributes to gathering valuable information to help understand the behavior and thinking relevant to the adherence to vaccination recommendations.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Resumo: Objetiva-se desvelar os motivos para hesitação vacinal de pais e/ou responsáveis de crianças e adolescentes para prevenção da COVID-19. Trata-se de um estudo descritivo, de abordagem qualitativa, que busca analisar as respostas da pergunta aberta "por que você não vai vacinar, não vacinou ou está na dúvida em vacinar as crianças e os adolescentes sob sua responsabilidade para prevenção da COVID-19?". A pesquisa incluiu indivíduos adultos, brasileiros, residentes no país, responsáveis por crianças e adolescentes menores de 18 anos. A coleta de dados aconteceu de forma eletrônica entre os meses de novembro e dezembro de 2021. As respostas foram organizadas e processadas com suporte do software Iramuteq. O corpus textual desta pesquisa foi composto pela resposta de 1.896 participantes, constituído por 87% de hesitantes (1.650) e 13% (246) de pais que têm intenção de vacinar, mas que esboçaram algumas dúvidas e considerações a respeito da vacinação de crianças e adolescentes. São motivos pelos quais pais e/ou responsáveis não vacinaram ou estão na dúvida em vacinar as crianças e os adolescentes sob sua responsabilidade para prevenção da COVID-19: receio em razão de a vacina estar em fase experimental e medo das reações adversas e dos efeitos a longo prazo. Já os motivos para ausência de intenção de vacinar decorrem dos entendimentos dos participantes de que a COVID-19 em crianças não é grave, os riscos da vacinação são maiores do que os benefícios e o direito de escolha em não vacinar.

Abstract: The objective is to unveil the reasons for vaccine hesitancy among parents and/or guardians of children and adolescents toward the prevention of COVID-19. This is a descriptive study, with a qualitative approach that seeks to analyze the answers to the open question "Why will you not vaccinate or have not vaccinated or are in doubt about vaccinating the children and adolescents under your responsibility, for the prevention of COVID-19?". The research included adult individuals, Brazilians, living in the country, responsible for children and adolescents under 18 years of age. Data collection took place electronically in November and December 2021. The answers were organized and processed with the support of the software Iramuteq. The textual corpus of this research was composed of the response of 1,896 participants, consisting of 87% who were hesitant (1,650) and 13% (246) of parents who intend to vaccinate but who outlined some doubts and considerations about the vaccination of children and adolescents. These are reasons why parents and/or guardians have not vaccinated or are in doubt about vaccinating the children and adolescents under their responsibility for the prevention of COVID-19: fears about vaccination regarding the conception that the vaccine is in the experimental phase, fear of adverse reactions and long-term effects. The reasons for the lack of intention to vaccinate stem from the understanding of the participants that COVID-19 in children is not serious, the risks of vaccination are greater than the benefits, and the right of choice not to vaccinate.

Resumen: El objetivo es revelar los motivos de la indecisión a las vacunas de padres y/o responsables de niños y adolescentes para la prevención de COVID-19. Se trata de un estudio descriptivo con enfoque cualitativo, que busca analizar las respuestas a la pregunta abierta "¿Por qué no va a vacunar o no vacunó o tiene dudas en vacunar a los niños y los adolescentes bajo su responsabilidad para la prevención del COVID-19?". La investigación incluyó individuos adultos, brasileños, residentes en el país, responsables de niños y adolescentes menores de 18 años. La recolección de datos se realizó de forma electrónica entre los meses de noviembre y diciembre de 2021. Las respuestas se organizaron y procesaron con ayuda del software Iramuteq. El corpus textual de esta investigación fue compuesto por la respuesta de 1.896 participantes, siendo constituido por el 87% de indecisos (1.650) y el 13% (246) de padres que tienen la intención de vacunar, pero que esbozaron algunas dudas y consideraciones respecto a la vacunación de niños y adolescentes. Son motivos por los cuales los padres y/o responsables no vacunaron o están en duda en vacunar a los niños y adolescentes bajo su responsabilidad para prevención del COVID-19: temores con la vacunación en cuanto a la concepción de que la vacuna está en fase experimental, miedo a las reacciones adversas y los efectos a largo plazo. Los motivos de la ausencia de intención en vacunar se deben a que los participantes entienden que el COVID-19 en niños no es grave, que los riesgos de la vacunación son mayores que los beneficios y que tienen derecho a decidir no vacunarse.

RESUMO

Some children with severe microcephaly related to Zika virus infection show affective social-like behavior, such as smiling and rejection to a stranger's lap. Our objective was to check the association between this behavior and the occurrence of Mismatch Response (MMR) in event-related potentials. Twenty eight microcephalic children, aged 1-3 years, were divided in Affect(+) and Affect(-) groups, according to either the presence or absence of affective social-like behavior, respectively, and underwent the OddBall paradigm with vowels as auditory stimuli. MMR was statistically estimated comparing MMR sample means between both groups. The Affect(+) group significantly differed from the Affect(-) group and, as opposed to the latter, showed MMR as Mismatch Negativity (MMN) in the left occipital, left and right posterior temporal, and (especially) the right and median parietal leads. The relationship observed between MMN and affective social-like behavior suggests that these children may have cognitive mechanisms capable of providing some social interaction, despite their profound neurological dysfunction. MMN diagnostic techniques seem to be promising for the triage of microcephalic subjects regarding cognitive functions and for choosing a strategy for some social adaptation.

Assuntos