Abstract
Importance US public health guidance has increasingly shifted responsibility for actions to minimize ongoing impacts of COVID-19 onto individuals. During September to October 2022, the World Health Organization continued to characterize COVID-19 as a pandemic. Yet, public perceptions of the pandemic status of COVID-19 and its associations with COVID-19-related behaviors were unknown.
Objective To assess US public opinion on the characterization of COVID-19 as a pandemic.
Design, Setting, and Participants The COVID-19 Outbreak Public Evaluation (COPE) Initiative internet-based surveys, administered to 4985 US adults during September to October 2022. Demographic quota sampling and survey weighting were employed to improve sample representativeness of the US population by age, sex, and combined race and ethnicity.
Exposures The COVID-19 pandemic.
Main Outcomes and Measures Response to the statement, “The pandemic is over.”‘ Response options included Strongly agree, Somewhat agree, Neutral, Somewhat disagree, and Strongly disagree.
Results Overall, 5015 US adults completed The COPE Initiative surveys (response rate, 56.2%), and 4985 (99.4%) provided complete information for all analyzed variables and were included in this analysis. Only 1657 (33.2%) respondents agreed with the statement “the pandemic is over,” while 2141 (43.0%) disagreed and the remaining 1187 (23.8%) were neutral about the statement. Agreement that the pandemic was over was most strongly associated with having received fewer COVID-19 vaccines, lesser concern about SARS-CoV-2 variant viruses, and less frequent engagement in COVID- 19 preventive behaviors, such as mask usage in public spaces, as well as increasingly conservative political ideology, roles as unpaid caregivers of both children and adults, younger age, male sex, and significant disabilities.
Conclusions and Relevance As of September to October 2022, US public opinion was mixed on the characterization of COVID-19 as a pandemic. Belief the pandemic was over was associated with less frequent engagement in COVID-19 preventive\behaviors, highlighting the important role of public health communication. Demographic groups to prioritize tailored public health messaging about the pandemic status were identified. Continued assessment of public perceptions about the state of the pandemic is warranted entering Year 4 of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Question As of September to October 2022, what was US public opinion as to whether COVID-19 remained a pandemic?
Findings In this demographically representative survey study of 4985 US adults, only 1 in 3 respondents agreed with the statement “the pandemic is over;” 43% of adults disagreed. Agreement that the pandemic was over was associated with less engagement in COVID-19 preventive behaviors and more political conservatism.
Meaning As of September to October 2022, US public opinion was divided regarding the status of COVID-19 as a pandemic and is associated with COVID-19-related behaviors, underscoring important public health and policy implications of this designation.
Competing Interest Statement
All authors report institutional grants from CDC Foundation and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Mark Czeisler reports institutional gifts or grants from WHOOP, Inc. and HopeLab Foundation, consulting fees from Vanda Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Nychthemeron, LLC, and equity interest in With Deep, Inc. Matthew D Weaver reports institutional grants from Brigham and Women's Hospital Physician's Organization, Brigham Research Institute, and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; and consulting fees from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, the National Sleep Foundation, and the University of Pittsburgh. Shantha MW Rajaratnam reports institutional grants from Cooperative Research Centre for Alertness, Safety and Productivity, National Health and Medical Research Council, CSIRO, the Australian Research Council, Australasian Sleep Association, Wellcome Trust, Collingwood Football Club, Vanda Pharmaceuticals, Department of Defense, WHOOP, Inc. HopeLab Foundation; institutional consultancy fees from Teva Pharma Australia, Circadian Therapeutics, BHP, Roche, Avecho, Vanda Pharmaceuticals; institutional and personal consulting fees from Cooperative Research Centre for Alertness, Safety and Productivity; payment for expert testimony from Herbert Smith Freehills and Maurice Blackburn; Patent for Systems and Methods for Monitoring and Control of Sleep Patterns; and service as chair for the Sleep Health Foundation Board of Directors. Mark E Howard reports participation on the ResApp Health Advisory Board, and honorary board membership for the Institute for Breathing and Sleep. Charles A Czeisler serves as the incumbent of an endowed professorship provided to Harvard Medical School by Cephalon, Inc. and as chair of the Sleep Timing and Variability Consensus Panel, National Sleep Foundation; and reports institutional support for the Quality Improvement Initiative from Delta Airlines and Puget Sound Pilots; education support to Harvard Medical School Division of Sleep Medicine; support to Brigham and Women's Hospital from Jazz Pharmaceuticals PLC, Inc. and Philips Respironics, Inc; support to Brigham and Women's Hospital from Axome Therapeutics, Inc., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and Sanofi SA; educational funding to the Sleep and Health Education of the Harvard Medical School Division of Sleep Medicine from ResMed, Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries, Ltd., and Vanda Pharmaceuticals; royalty payments on sales of the Actiwatch-2 and Actiwatch-Spectrum devices from Philips Respironics, Inc.; personal consulting fees from With Deep, Inc. and Vanda Pharmaceuticals; honoraria for Thomas Roth Lecture of Excellence at SLEEP 2022 annual meeting and from the Massachusetts Medical Society for writing a Perspective article in the New England Journal of Medicine; payment for expert testimony from Puget Sound Pilots, Amtrak, Enterprise Rent-A-Car, Dallas Police Association, FedEx, PAR Electrical Contractors, Inc., Schlumberger Technology Corp., Union Pacific Railroad, United Parcel Service, Vanda Pharmaceuticals, and the San Francisco Sheriff's Department; travel support from the Stanley Ho Medical Development Foundation for travel to Macao and Hong Kong; advisory board membership for the Institute of Digital Media and Child Development, Klarman Family Foundation, and the UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council; equity interest in Vanda Pharmaceuticals, With Deep, Inc., and Signos, Inc.; and institutional receipt of educational gifts to Brigham and Women's Hospital from Johnson & Johnson, Mary Ann and Stanley Snider via Combined Jewish Philanthropies, Alexandra Drane, DR Capital, Harmony Biosciences, LLC, and to Harvard University from ResMed, Inc. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.
Funding Statement
All authors report institutional grants from CDC Foundation and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee approved the study protocol; participants provided informed consent electronically.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors and institutional agreement.
