Search

This rapid systematic review aims to examine emerging evidence on the effects of COVID-19 on educational institutions and assess the prevalence of e-learning changes in the sector. This paper reviews literature on learning, teaching, and assessment approaches adopted since the COVID-19 outbreak, and assesses the impact on the sector, staff, and students, summarizing findings from peer-reviewed articles. It categorizes these into five key themes: (1) digital learning; (2) e-learning challenges; (3) digital transition to emergency virtual assessment (EVA); (4) psychological impact of COVID-19; and (5) creating collaborative cultures. This represents the first systematic review of COVID-19's impact on education, clarifying current themes being investigated. The author suggests that the term 'emergency virtual assessment' (EVA) is now added for future research discussion. Finally, the paper identifies research gaps, including researching the impact on lesser developed countries, the psychological impact of transition, and the important role of leadership and leadership styles during the transition and handling of the pandemic.

The genesis and spread of COVID-19 around the world since 2020 have caused severe impacts in every aspect of people's lives, from work life to recreation, social activities to physical health. Higher education has not been excluded. Universities have altered curriculum, changed delivery methods, provided more counseling, purchased new technology, and altered attendance policy for classroom, athletic, social and artistic events (Hamlin, 2021). To assess the impacts of these changes on college students, the authors created a questionnaire to ask students about their perceptions of these COVID-related impacts on their own personal lives. The survey had 56 questions about how the virus affected their academic, social, financial, physical and emotional lives. Over 800 students responded with objective input and subjective comments. Due to the volume of data, the authors have split the study into two parts. The survey results for the first part, academic and social aspects of the survey, were published in "Understanding the Impact of Covid-19 on College Student Academic and Social Lives," Research in Higher Education Journal Volume 41 (see http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/213347.pdf). It will sometimes be referred to herein to provide clarity to the reader. The actual survey itself can also be found at that site. This paper focuses on the impact of the coronavirus on student financial and physical well-being, which have become major stressors to this age group and have contributed to higher levels of anxiety and depression. It also examines how the virus has affected their social and emotional well-being. Lastly, recommendations are made to help educators understand the severity of the problem, and to take action to provide assistance for those students who have been adversely affected.

Objectives: COVID-19 presents a risk of infection and transmission for operating theatre teams. Guidelines to protect patients and staff emerged and changed rapidly based on expert opinion and limited evidence. This paper presents the experiences and innovations developed by international surgical teams during the early stages of the pandemic to attempt to mitigate risk., Design: In-depth, semistructured interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically using methods of constant comparison., Participants: 43 participants, including surgeons from a range of specialties (primarily general surgery, otolaryngology, neurosurgery, cardiothoracic and ophthalmology), anaesthetists and those in nursing roles., Setting: The UK, Italy, Spain, the USA, China and New Zealand between March and May 2020., Results: Surgical teams sought to mitigate COVID-19 risks by modifying their current practice with an abundance of strategies and innovations. Communication and teamwork played an integral role in how teams adapted, although participants reflected on the challenges of having to improvise in real time. Uncertainties remained about optimal surgical practice and there were significant tensions where teams were forced to balance what was best for patients while contemplating their own safety., Conclusions: The perceptions of risks during a pandemic such as COVID-19 can be complex and context dependent. Management of these risks in surgery must be driven by evidence-based practice resulting from a pragmatic and novel approach to collation of global evidence. The context of surgery has changed dramatically, and surgical teams have developed a plethora of innovations. There is an urgent need for high-quality evidence to inform surgical practice that optimises the safety of both patients and healthcare professionals as the COVID-19 pandemic unfolds., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

This paper studies the interplay between social distancing and the spread of the COVID-19 disease-a global pandemic that has affected most of the world's population. Our goals are to (1) to observe the correlation between the strictness of social distancing policies and the spread of disease and (2) to determine the optimal adoption level of social distancing policies. The earliest instances of the virus were found in China, and the virus has reached the United States with devastating consequences. Other countries severely affected by the pandemic are Brazil, Russia, the United Kingdom, Spain, India, Italy, and France. Although it is impossible to stop it, it is possible to slow down its spread to reduce its impact on the society and economy. Governments around the world have deployed various policies to reduce the virus spread in response to the pandemic. To assess the effectiveness of these policies, the system's dynamics of the society needs to be analyzed, which is generally not possible with mathematical linear equations or Monte Carlo methods because human society is a complex adaptive system with continuous feedback loops. Because of the challenges with the other methods, we chose agent-based methods to conduct our study. Moreover, recent agent-based modeling studies for the COVID-19 pandemic show significant promise in assisting decision-makers in managing the crisis by applying policies such as social distancing, disease testing, contact tracing, home isolation, emergency hospitalization, and travel prevention to reduce infection rates. Based on modeling studies conducted in Imperial College, increasing levels of interventions could slow the spread of disease and infection. We ran the model with six different percentages of social distancing while keeping the other parameters constant. The results show that social distancing affects the spread of COVID-19 significantly, in turn decreasing the spread of disease and infection rates when implemented at higher levels. We also validated these results by using the behavior space tool with ten experiments with varying social distancing levels. We conclude that applying and increasing social distancing policy levels leads to a significant reduction in infection spread and the number of deaths. Both experiments show that infection rates are reduced drastically when social distancing intervention is implemented between 80% to 100%.

Background: Since the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, a large number of COVID-19-related papers have been published. However, concerns about the risk of expedited science have been raised. We aimed at reviewing and categorizing COVID-19-related medical research and to critically appraise peer-reviewed original articles., Methods: The data sources were Pubmed, Cochrane COVID-19 register study, arXiv, medRxiv and bioRxiv, from 01/11/2019 to 01/05/2020. Peer-reviewed and preprints publications related to COVID-19 were included, written in English or Chinese. No limitations were placed on study design. Reviewers screened and categorized studies according to i) publication type, ii) country of publication, and iii) topics covered. Original articles were critically appraised using validated quality assessment tools., Results: Among the 11,452 publications identified, 10,516 met the inclusion criteria, among which 7468 (71.0%) were peer-reviewed articles. Among these, 4190 publications (56.1%) did not include any data or analytics (comprising expert opinion pieces). Overall, the most represented topics were infectious disease (n = 2326, 22.1%), epidemiology (n = 1802, 17.1%), and global health (n = 1602, 15.2%). The top five publishing countries were China (25.8%), United States (22.3%), United Kingdom (8.8%), Italy (8.1%) and India (3.4%). The dynamic of publication showed that the exponential growth of COVID-19 peer-reviewed articles was mainly driven by publications without original data (mean 261.5 articles ± 51.1 per week) as compared with original articles (mean of 69.3 ± 22.3 articles per week). Original articles including patient data accounted for 713 (9.5%) of peer-reviewed studies. A total of 576 original articles (80.8%) showed intermediate to high risk of bias. Last, except for simulation studies that mainly used large-scale open data, the median number of patients enrolled was of 102 (IQR = 37-337)., Conclusions: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority of research is composed by publications without original data. Peer-reviewed original articles with data showed a high risk of bias and included a limited number of patients. Together, these findings underscore the urgent need to strike a balance between the velocity and quality of research, and to cautiously consider medical information and clinical applicability in a pressing, pandemic context. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/5zjyx/.

This paper considers the pattens of international collaboration by analysing publications on COVID‐19 published in the first 6 months of the pandemic. The data set comprised articles on COVID‐19 indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoS CC) downloaded four times between 1 April 2020 and 1 June 2020. The analysis of 5,827 documents revealed that 128 countries, 23,127 authors, and 6,349 institutes published on the pandemic. The data reveal that the three main publishing countries were the USA, China, and England with Italy closely following. Although publication was widely spread, most of the institutions with the highest volume of output were in China. Network analysis showed growth in international cooperation with an average degree of country/region cooperation rising to 23.06 by 1 June. There was also a clear core‐periphery structure to international collaboration. Institutional collaboration was shown to be highly regionalized. The data reveal a high and growing incidence of international collaboration on the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has instigated immediate and massive worldwide research efforts. Rapid publication of research data may be desirable but also carries the risk of quality loss.Objective: This analysis aimed to correlate the severity of the COVID-19 outbreak with its related scientific output per country.Methods: All articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic were retrieved from Web of Science and analyzed using the web application SciPE (science performance evaluation), allowing for large data scientometric analyses of the global geographical distribution of scientific output.Results: A total of 7185 publications, including 2592 articles, 2091 editorial materials, 2528 early access papers, 1479 letters, 633 reviews, and other contributions were extracted. The top 3 countries involved in COVID-19 research were the United States, China, and Italy. The confirmed COVID-19 cases or deaths per region correlated with scientific research output. The United States was most active in terms of collaborative efforts, sharing a significant amount of manuscript authorships with the United Kingdom, China, and Italy. The United States was China's most frequent collaborative partner, followed by the United Kingdom.Conclusions: The COVID-19 research landscape is rapidly developing and is driven by countries with a generally strong prepandemic research output but is also significantly affected by countries with a high prevalence of COVID-19 cases. Our findings indicate that the United States is leading international collaborative efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]