Search

The study aims to evaluate global research output (103054 records) on coronavirus disease (COVID-19) based on quantitative and qualitative indicators. It presents a bibliometric profile of most influential countries, organizations, authors and journals and their collaborative linkages, besides identifying broad subject areas of research, most significant keywords and highly-cited papers related to COVID-19. During 2020-21, more than 150 countries participated in COVID-19 research, of which top 10 countries accounted for a 82.93% global share. The USA, China and U.K. produced the most articles (25.86%, 10.77% and 10.7% respectively). The top three organizations, namely Harvard Medical School, USA, Huazhong University of S&T, China and Tongji Medical College, China contributed 1755, 1344 and 1267 papers, respectively. The most cited organizations in COVID-19 research are: Peking Union Medical College, China (97.41 CPP), University of Hong Kong (82.17 CPP) and Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, China (59.88 CPP). The top three most productive authors are: V. Wanitlit, E. Mahase and G. Lacobucci (with 152, 135 and 108 papers). The top three most cited authors in terms of citations per paper (CPP) are: Y. Hu (319.82), L. Liu (303.91) and J.F.W. Chan (169.55). The most productive organizations originate from most productive countries and they contribute the most collaborative papers. The top three journals, namely International Journal of Environmental Research, BMJ and PLOS One contributed 961, 854 and 781 papers, respectively. The top three journals in terms of citations per paper (CPP) are New England Journal of Medicine (122.78), The Lancet (106.3) and JAMA (75.17). The most ubiquitous topic was COVID-19 clinical studies, with maximum focus on virological aspects (9.58%), respiratory aspects (6.97%), molecular aspects (3.11%), genetic aspects (3.09%) and immunological aspects (1.3%). The results of this study should be of interest to working scientists, clinicians and policy-makers in improving their understanding of COVID-19 disease and in its management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

SARS-CoV-2, commonly referred as COVID-19, has emerged as the most severe public health concern of the twenty - first century. Coronavirus usually is not very lethal to the persons who do not have any medical conditions, but it is fatal to people who have had past medical conditions that have often resulted in death. The objectives of this paper is to look at the effects of coronavirus on older diabetes patients, who are thought to be the ones who were affected the most by COVID-19. This research used a qualitative approach and was descriptive in nature. The researcher has purposefully chosen three areas in Dhaka city as the studies fixate: Shahbag, Khilgaon, and Rampura. Data was gathered using qualitative methods such as focus group discussion and key informant interviews. According to the study's findings, COVID-19 had a serious effect on older adults with diabetes. The number of patients at the hospital had significantly decreased. Despite the fact that hospitals were equipped to provide treatment and care, patients' mobility was limited. Many people preferred virtual consultation or telemedicine to face-to-face consultation and care. Doctors encouraged individuals to connect digitally, which is both safe and feasible in the face of the global pandemic. The expense of a diabetic patient rose, according to the majority of respondents. According to the findings, the pandemic is spurring new diabetes-care delivery methods. Many structural flaws were exposed as a result of Covid-19, paving the door for additional improvements in healthcare delivery in the study area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mucormycosis is an invasive fungal infection that has shown a surge during the COVID-19 pandemic. A comprehensive assessment of COVID-19 associated mucormycosis (CAM) research is lacking. Methods: We searched Elsevier's Scopus database for publications on CAM using a pre-defined search strategy. Data on publications numbers, citation metrics, contributing countries, institutions, authors, journals, and the most cited articles were analyzed using select bibliometric tools. Results: Published CAM research included 253 publications. These were cited 1560 times, averaging 6.1 citations per paper. Only 33 (13%) were funded. Original articles (55.7%) and reviews (17.7%) constituted the major share of global output. The studied age groups included adults (22.5%), middle-aged (19.3%), elderly (10.6%), and adolescents (0.8%). Studies on treatment accounted for the largest share (58.5%), followed by clinical studies (28.0%), complications (17.3%), risk factors (11.7%), epidemiology (7.9%), and pathophysiology (3.1%). The participating countries were 64; India, the USA, and Egypt led in productivity, whereas France, the USA, and Iran were more impactful. Of the 84 organizations, the leading organizations were PGIMER-Chandigarh, AIIMS-New Delhi and Cairo University, Egypt. A. Chakrabarti, V. Muthu, and S.M. Rudramurthy were the most productive of 160 participating authors. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, and Journal of Fungi were the most active journals that published CAM research. Conclusion: Research on CAM has primarily been conducted in middleincome countries and is low on quality. High-income countries need to collaborate with lowand middle-income countries for a sustainable and universal CAM research impact. There is also a need to focus on research gaps such as pathophysiology and epidemiology in future CAM research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This paper aims at investigating the sub-health status (SHS) of different social roles during the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and analyzing its influencing factors. Design: A cross-sectional, convenience sampling including 1062 Chinese was conducted in March 2020. Statistical analysis was then performed for the data using SPSS 22.0. Results: The total SHS score for people with different social roles during the COVID-19 pandemic was 72.808±12.034; with the physical, psychological and social adaptive score were 80.252±12.336, 68.753±13.281 and 66.632±18.604 respectively. Univariate analysis showed that SHS scores for social adaptability were different in different places of residence, as well as physical, psychological and total SHS scores for different social roles (P< 0.05). The multivariate analysis showed that the social roles were a factor influencing the physical SHS score (P < 0.05), while gender was the factor influencing the psychological SHS score (P< 0.05). Conclusion: Human resource management needs improvement; meanwhile health consultation, enough time to rest and health care service are essential for medical staff, Centers for Disease Control (CDC) personnel, as well as couriers. Support to maintain work-family balance is seriously expected for female employees. Overall, the top priority in controlling COVID-19 is to protect their health both mentally and physically. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]