Background: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth has rapidly been adopted to deliver health care services around the world. To date, studies have not compared people’s experiences with telehealth services during the pandemic in Australia to their experiences with traditional in-person visits. Objective: This study aimed to compare participants’ perceptions of telehealth consults to their perceptions of traditional in-person visits and investigate whether people believe that telehealth services would be useful after the pandemic. Methods: A national, cross-sectional, community survey was conducted between June 5 and June 12, 2020 in Australia. In total, 1369 participants who were aged ≥18 years and lived in Australia were recruited via targeted advertisements on social media (ie, Facebook and Instagram). Participants responded to survey questions about their telehealth experience, which included a free-text response option. A generalized linear model was used to estimate the adjusted relative risks of having a poorer telehealth experience than a traditional in-person visit experience. Content analysis was performed to determine the reasons why telehealth experiences were worse than traditional in-person visit experiences. Results: Of the 596 telehealth users, the majority of respondents (n=369, 61.9%) stated that their telehealth experience was “just as good as” or “better than” their traditional in-person medical appointment experience. On average, respondents perceived that telehealth would be moderately useful to very useful for medical appointments after the COVID-19 pandemic ends (mean 3.67, SD 1.1). Being male (P=.007), having a history of both depression and anxiety (P=.016), and lower patient activation scores (ie, individuals’ willingness to take on the role of managing their health/health care) (P=.036) were significantly associated with a poor telehealth experience. In total, 6 overarching themes were identified from free-text responses for why participants’ telehealth experiences were poorer than their traditional in-person medical appointment experiences, as follows: communication is not as effective, limitations with technology, issues with obtaining prescriptions and pathology results, reduced confidence in their doctor, additional burden for complex care, and inability to be physically examined. Conclusions: Based on our sample’s responses, telehealth appointment experiences were comparable to traditional in-person medical appointment experiences. Telehealth may be worthwhile as a mode of health care delivery while the pandemic continues, and it may continue to be worthwhile after the pandemic.

Background: Misinformation about COVID-19 is common and has been spreading rapidly across the globe through social media platforms and other information systems. Understanding what the public knows about COVID-19 and identifying beliefs based on misinformation can help shape effective public health communications to ensure efforts to reduce viral transmission are not undermined. Objective: This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and factors associated with COVID-19 misinformation in Australia and their changes over time. Methods: This prospective, longitudinal national survey was completed by adults (18 years and above) across April (n=4362), May (n=1882), and June (n=1369) 2020. Results: Stronger agreement with misinformation was associated with younger age, male gender, lower education level, and language other than English spoken at home (P<.01 for all). After controlling for these variables, misinformation beliefs were significantly associated (P<.001) with lower levels of digital health literacy, perceived threat of COVID-19, confidence in government, and trust in scientific institutions. Analyses of specific government-identified misinformation revealed 3 clusters: prevention (associated with male gender and younger age), causation (associated with lower education level and greater social disadvantage), and cure (associated with younger age). Lower institutional trust and greater rejection of official government accounts were associated with stronger agreement with COVID-19 misinformation. Conclusions: The findings of this study highlight important gaps in communication effectiveness, which must be addressed to ensure effective COVID-19 prevention.

Issue addressed: To investigate whether Australians have experienced any positive effects during the COVID‐19 pandemic.Methods: National online longitudinal survey. As part of a June 2020 survey, participants (n = 1370) were asked ‘In your life, have you experienced any positive effects from the COVID‐19 pandemic’ (yes/no) and also completed the World Health Organisation‐Five well‐being index. Differences were explored by demographic variables. Free‐text responses were thematically coded.Results: Nine hundred sixty participants (70%) reported experiencing at least one positive effect during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Living with others (P = .045) and employment situation (P < .001) at baseline (April) were associated with experiencing positive effects. Individuals working for pay from home were more likely to experience positive effects compared to those who were not working for pay (aOR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.32, 0.63, P < .001) or who were working for pay outside the home (aOR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.28, 0.58, P < .001). 54.2% of participants reported a sufficient level of well‐being, 23.2% low well‐being and a further 22.6% very low well‐being. Of those experiencing positive effects, 945/960 (98%) provided an explanation. The three most common themes were ‘Family time’ (33%), ‘Work flexibility’ (29%) and ‘Calmer life’ (19%).Conclusions: A large proportion of participants reported positive effects resulting from changes to daily life due to the COVID‐19 pandemic in Australia.So what: The needs of people living alone, and of those having to work outside the home or who are unemployed, should be considered by health policymakers and employers in future pandemic preparedness efforts.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the benefits and harms of receiving a polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) diagnosis in a community sample of women, including impact on psychosocial wellbeing, lifestyle choices and behaviour? SUMMARY ANSWER: Although some women benefit considerably from the diagnosis, such as through increased awareness and reassurance, women with minimal symptoms may experience more harm than benefit, including long-lasting anxiety and altered life plans. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Disease labels can validate symptoms and play a vital role in understanding and coping with illness; however, they can also cause harm by evoking illness schemas about severity and permanence. Regarding PCOS, the diagnostic criteria have expanded over time to include women with milder phenotypes (such as those without signs of androgen excess). This has occurred despite limited investigation of the benefits and harms of the diagnosis and has increased the number of women diagnosed. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Semi-structured interviews were conducted face-to-face or by telephone with 26 participants from April–July 2018 to explore women’s experiences with the diagnosis, including the benefits and harms of receiving the diagnosis and the impact on their life. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: In total, 26 women in the community self-reporting a diagnosis of PCOS (reporting mild to severe symptoms) made by a medical doctor, aged 18–45 years and living in Australia were recruited through social media. Data were analysed thematically using Framework analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The study identified a range of both positive and negative effects of a PCOS diagnosis in the immediate, short and long-term, which were influenced by symptom severity, expectations and experience. For women with previously unexplained and bothersome symptoms, it was a relief to receive a diagnosis, and this resulted in an increased understanding about the importance of a healthy lifestyle. By contrast, women with milder symptoms often reported feeling shocked and overwhelmed by the diagnosis, consequently experiencing anxiety about the associated long-term risks. The majority of women, regardless of symptom severity, experienced prolonged worry and anxiety about infertility, resulting for some in risk taking with contraception, unintended pregnancies, pressure to conceive early or altered life plans. With time, many women developed positive coping strategies and perceived the diagnosis to be valuable, including those who felt they had experienced minimal benefit or even harm. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: PCOS diagnosis was self-reported and the sample was highly educated. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Fear of infertility was salient for many women, underscoring the need for accurate information, counselling and reassurance of fertility potential. Given the risk of significant consequences, health professionals should use a tailored approach to PCOS diagnosis to increase the benefits of appropriate and timely diagnosis for women affected by significant symptoms, while reducing the harms of unnecessarily labelling healthy women for whom the benefits of a diagnosis are small. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was funded by the University of Sydney Lifespan Research Network and an NHMRC Program Grant (APP1113532). B.W.M. reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck, Merck KGaA and Guerbet. No further competing interests exist. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A

STUDY QUESTION: What are the factors that contribute to the decision to continue or stop IVF treatment after multiple unsuccessful cycles? SUMMARY ANSWER: Factors contributing to the decision included external factors, such as their doctor’s guidance, success rates, the outcomes of previous cycles and anecdotal stories of success, as well as emotional and cognitive drivers, including perception of success, hope and fear of regret. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Infertility affects about one in six Australian couples of reproductive age. Regarding IVF, some couples with a good prognosis drop out of treatment prematurely, whilst others continue for multiple cycles, despite limited chances of success. Little is known about what factors contribute to the decision to continue IVF after multiple failed cycles. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Semi-structured face-to-face and telephone interviews were conducted with 22 participants. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically using Framework analysis. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Doctors and nurses at an Australian private fertility clinic recruited individuals and/or couples who had undergone three or more complete unsuccessful cycles of IVF. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The majority of participants had decided to or were leaning towards continuing treatment. Participants expressed a range of common factors important in their decision-making, which were evident both within and across couples. For most, their doctor’s advice and hope were key factors influencing their decision. Most participants expressed they would continue as long as there was a chance of success and until their doctor advised otherwise. Other factors included participants’ perception of their likelihood of success, hearing anecdotal stories of success after multiple cycles, positive outcomes of previous cycles and fear of regret. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The sample was highly educated and recruited from one private Australian fertility clinic only. Many participants were also couples, which may have resulted in more homogenous data as they shared the same diagnosis for infertility and outcomes of previous cycles. Factors influencing the decision to continue or stop may differ in different sociodemographic populations and in other healthcare systems. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Given the important role of the doctor’s guidance and patients’ own perceptions of their likelihood of success, which they tended to overestimate, it is vital that fertility specialists give accurate and transparent information regarding their likelihood of success and continue to regularly communicate this throughout the IVF journey. Anecdotal stories of success against the odds appeared to be influential in the decision to continue and underpinned unrealistic perceptions of possible success. More personalized, cumulative estimates of likelihood of success may help couples with their decision-making as well as with discussions about ending treatment or setting a limit before commencing IVF. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Program Grant (APP1113532). No further competing interests exist.