BackgroundIndia is home to the largest child population in the world. India also has faced a devastating burden of COVID-19 infections. During the first wave of COVID-19, the Indian government’s lockdown measures brought loss of livelihoods for millions. We aimed to explore the social, psychological and health impacts of the government’s pandemic measures on children and young people (CYP), and their families.MethodsBal Umang Drishya Sanstha (BUDS) is a non-profit organisation providing child health and welfare services to marginalised urban slum communities in New Delhi, India. As part of formative evaluation of BUDS’s COVID-19 pandemic relief efforts, the team conducted a rapid survey of 60 children (10–17 years) and 62 young adults (18–25 years) who were beneficiaries of the relief programme. The team also undertook semi-structured interviews with nine young women attending BUDS’s second-chance education programme.ResultsAlmost all respondents had some understanding of COVID-19 (54 children (90%) and 53 young adults (85%)) and the reasons for public health measures (59 children (98%) and 56 young adults (90%)). Over 80% of girls and 60% of boys experienced financial strains and food shortages. Gender discrepancies were particularly evident in areas of family stress, with girls and young women disproportionately experiencing distress and family violence. Girls were more likely to be fearful of contracting the disease, while boys were more concerned about getting back to school. In-depth interviews with young women revealed that government ration schemes were insufficient to support vulnerable families; there were interesting cultural understandings of and responses to the pandemic. Young women reported high rates of anxiety and distress.ConclusionsThe lockdown had a multitude of adverse social, health and psychosocial effects on marginalised CYP, disproportionately affecting girls and young women. A tailored response based on equity and child rights is urgently required to address concerns voiced by CYP.

Background In India and other low- and middle-income countries, multiple family and community members are influential in caregivers’ perceptions of vaccination. Existing literature indicates the primary caregiver, typically the mother, is instrumental in vaccine decision-making, but this may vary in contexts. We investigated the role of stakeholders in India who influence caregivers’ vaccination perceptions, as this is essential to developing strategies to promote vaccine acceptance and improve uptake. Methods This research was conducted in 2019 in Mewat District in Haryana, an area in India with extremely low vaccination coverage. We conducted six focus group discussions with 60 participants in the following categories: fathers of children under-5 years old, expectant mothers, mothers-in-law, community health workers, and community influencers such as locally elected officials and religious leaders. Results Our results highlighted four themes that influence vaccine uptake. First, while caregivers associated vaccination with reductions in specific diseases, they also noted that vaccination services brought broad health gains, including improved nutrition, antenatal guidance, and social support. Second, community health workers critically influenced, positively or negatively, caregivers’ vaccination perceptions. Third, community health workers faced gaps in their education such as limited training on vaccine side-effects, placing them at a disadvantage when dealing with families. Finally, we found that mothers-in-law, fathers, and religious leaders influence caregivers’ perceptions of vaccination. Conclusions Communication of broader benefits of vaccines and vaccination services by community health workers could be impactful in increasing vaccine acceptance. Vaccine uptake could potentially be improved by facilitating community health workers’ ownership over vaccine acceptance and uptake by involving them in the design and implementation of interventions to target mothers and mothers-in-law. A ‘bottom-up’ approach, leveraging community health workers’ knowledge to design interventions, and giving a voice to key members of the household and society beyond mothers alone, may sustain health improvement in low vaccine coverage areas.

Background: In India and other low- and middle-income countries, multiple family and community members are influential in caregivers’ perceptions of vaccination. Existing literature indicates the primary caregiver, typically the mother, is instrumental in vaccine decision-making, but this may vary in contexts. We investigated the role of stakeholders in India who influence caregivers’ vaccination perceptions, as this is essential to developing strategies to promote vaccine acceptance and improve uptake.Methods: This research was conducted in 2019 in Mewat District in Haryana, an area in India with extremely low vaccination coverage. We conducted six focus group discussions with 60 participants in the following categories: fathers of children under-5 years old, expectant mothers, mothers-in-law, community health workers, and community influencers such as locally elected officials and religious leaders. Results: Our results highlighted four themes that influence vaccine uptake. First, while caregivers associated vaccination with reductions in specific diseases, they also noted that vaccination services brought broad health gains, including improved nutrition, antenatal guidance, and social support. Second, community health workers critically influenced, positively or negatively, caregivers’ vaccination perceptions. Third, community health workers faced gaps in their education such as limited training on vaccine side-effects, placing them at a disadvantage when dealing with families. Finally, we found that mothers-in-law, fathers, and religious leaders influence caregivers’ perceptions of vaccination. Conclusions: Communication of broader benefits of vaccines and vaccination services by community health workers could be impactful in increasing vaccine acceptance. Vaccine uptake could potentially be improved by facilitating community health workers’ ownership over vaccine acceptance and uptake by involving them in the design and implementation of interventions to target mothers and mothers-in-law. A ‘bottom-up’ approach, leveraging community health workers’ knowledge to design interventions, and giving a voice to key members of the household and society beyond mothers alone, may sustain health improvement in low vaccine coverage areas.

This study describes evidence for multiple attachments by orphaned and separated children (OSC) to caregivers and explores predictive relationships between attachment and family social relationships. A sample of forty-three longitudinal children residing in residential care between 15 and 144 months at the time of assessment and forty-two newer-to-care children (entering one to thirteen months before testing) was interviewed in summer 2019. Caregiver attachment was measured using the IPPA Guardian scale, and family social relations were measured using the PROMIS Pediatric Family Relationships scale. Longitudinal children displayed similar attachment scores across a one-year time span regardless of whether they nominated the same or different favourite caretaker. Results are discussed in the context of evidence for multiple attachments and the way attachment can predict social relations for new but not longitudinal children. This paper supports that OSCs form multiple attachments to caregivers over time, with attachment starting and remaining relatively strong in the long-term.

No abstract