Purpose To investigate university students’ willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine when it becomes available to them. Method A multi-methods approach was used—online convenience sample surveys and semi-structured interviews—of young adults attending a large Canadian public university. Two survey samples were collected (June 20-July 28, 2020 and September 22-October 17, 2020). Semi-structured interviews were conducted following each survey, interviewing 20 students in each round. Results In June 77.8% of surveyed students (n = 483) were willing to get the COVID-19 vaccine; in September 79.6% were willing (n = 1269). Multinomial and binary logistic regression analyses found that increasing perception of the severity of COVID-19 predicted the likelihood that a respondent was willing to get the COVID-19 vaccine in both surveys. In the latter survey students who indicated they would be encouraged to get the COVID-19 vaccine if their doctor/pharmacist recommended it were 76 times more likely to be willing to get the vaccine than those who would not be encouraged by medical advice. Interviews revealed concerns about the speed of the vaccine roll out, safety, and efficacy. Conclusions The majority of university students intend to get the COVID-19 vaccine, but there are nuanced concerns about efficacy and safety that must be taken into account by public health authorities as the vaccine becomes available to this group. Ensuring that family doctors, pharmacists, and other front-line healthcare workers have consistent and clear information regarding the benefits of vaccination will be critical to encouraging uptake among young adults.

Intersectionality, the theory named by Kimberlé Crenshaw, outlines how multiple elements of an individual's social identity overlap to create and preserve societal inequalities and discrimination. Recently bioarchaeology's engagement with intersectionality has become increasingly explicit, as the field recognizes the lived experience of multiple axes of an individual's identity. Evidence of trauma can remain observable in an individual's skeleton for years, making it an ideal subject of study for intersectional analyses in bioarchaeology. Using contrasting case studies of two individuals who died in hospitals and were unclaimed after death, we explore the theoretical and methodological application of intersectionality to investigations of accidental and interpersonal trauma. Differences in identities and structural inequalities affect bone quality and health outcomes. As we demonstrate, a broken bone is the intersecting result of biological, histomorphological, sociocultural, and behavioral factors. This approach allows for a better acknowledgement of the inherent complexity of past lives, elevating and amplifying previously silenced voices. In this way, intersectionality in bioarchaeology demands social justice.

Additional information:Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. Abstract: This paper explores the dentition of individuals excavated from two post-medieval London cemeteries. Individuals from Chelsea Old Church, a middle-class group, and St. Bride's lower churchyard, a working-class group, were selected and studied. The relative dental status of each group was explored by determining the prevalence of individuals and teeth affected by dental caries. The overall dental status of both class groups was found to be poor; diet was the most likely causative factor. Access to cariogenic foods such as sugar and refined flour likely affected individuals' dental status regardless of their social class.

Objectives We surveyed university students to assess their demographic factors, perceived severity, personal susceptibility, and the adoption of health behaviours in relation to COVID-19. Study design Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Toronto’s Research Ethics Board (#39169). Responses were collected between March 20 and April 17, 2020, capturing the first month of government-mandated social distancing in Ontario, Canada. Methods We distributed the online survey to the University of Toronto student population, yielding a total convenience sample of 592 participants. We summarised the results and conducted Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests to explore relationships between demographic data and perceived severity of COVID-19. Pearson’s Chi-square tests were used to explore the relationship between demographic variables and perceived susceptibility, with phi being used to explore the strength of the association. A value of p ​< ​0.05 was used to determine significance. Results The majority of participants (60.1%) judged COVID-19 to be Very Severe; there was a significant relationship between being female and the adoption of new health behaviours. 57.4% indicated they felt susceptible to COVID-19, while 40.9% did not. Feeling susceptible was associated with studying a healthcare field or being personally affected by COVID-19. Individuals who stated they were not susceptible to COVID-19 declared mitigating factors such as new health behaviours to be a major driver in their perception. Conclusion University students believe COVID-19 is a severe disease and have adopted new and increased health behaviours to mitigate the spread. While this study demonstrates differing health behaviour adoption rates based upon demographic factors, overall this research finds young adults supportive and accepting of government policy as a protective and susceptibility-mitigating measure.

No abstract