Search

Background: Following the initial identification of the 2019 coronavirus disease (covid-19), the subsequent months saw substantial increases in published biomedical research. Concerns have been raised in both scientific and lay press around the quality of some of this research. We assessed clinical research from major clinical journals, comparing methodological and reporting quality of covid-19 papers published in the first wave (here defined as December 2019 to May 2020 inclusive) of the viral pandemic with non-covid papers published at the same time. Methods: We reviewed research publications (print and online) from The BMJ, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), The Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine, from first publication of a covid-19 research paper (February 2020) to May 2020 inclusive. Paired reviewers were randomly allocated to extract data on methodological quality (risk of bias) and reporting quality (adherence to reporting guidance) from each paper using validated assessment tools. A random 10% of papers were assessed by a third, independent rater. Overall methodological quality for each paper was rated high, low or unclear. Reporting quality was described as percentage of total items reported. Results: From 168 research papers, 165 were eligible, including 54 (33%) papers with a covid-19 focus. For methodological quality, 18 (33%) covid-19 papers and 83 (73%) non-covid papers were rated as low risk of bias, OR 6.32 (95%CI 2.85 to 14.00). The difference in quality was maintained after adjusting for publication date, results, funding, study design, journal and raters (OR 6.09 (95%CI 2.09 to 17.72)). For reporting quality, adherence to reporting guidelines was poorer for covid-19 papers, mean percentage of total items reported 72% (95%CI:66 to 77) for covid-19 papers and 84% (95%CI:81 to 87) for non-covid. Conclusions: Across various measures, we have demonstrated that covid-19 research from the first wave of the pandemic was potentially of lower quality than contemporaneous non-covid research. While some differences may be an inevitable consequence of conducting research during a viral pandemic, poor reporting should not be accepted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pandemics and climate change each challenge health systems through increasing numbers and new types of patients. To adapt to these challenges, leading health systems have embraced a Learning Health System (LHS) approach, aiming to increase the efficiency with which data is translated into actionable knowledge. This rapid review sought to determine how these health systems have used LHS frameworks to both address the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change, and to prepare for future disturbances, and thus transition towards the LHS2.0. Methods: Three databases (Embase, Scopus, and PubMed) were searched for peer-reviewed literature published in English in the five years to March 2023. Publications were included if they described a real-world LHS's response to one or more of the following: the COVID-19 pandemic, future pandemics, current climate events, future climate change events. Data were extracted and thematically analyzed using the five dimensions of the Institute of Medicine/Zurynski-Braithwaite's LHS framework: Science and Informatics, Patient-Clinician Partnerships, Continuous Learning Culture, Incentives, and Structure and Governance. Results: The search yielded 182 unique publications, four of which reported on LHSs and climate change. Backward citation tracking yielded 13 additional pandemic-related publications. None of the climate change-related papers met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-two publications were included after full-text review. Most were case studies (n = 12, 38%), narrative descriptions (n = 9, 28%) or empirical studies (n = 9, 28%). Science and Informatics (n = 31, 97%), Continuous Learning Culture (n = 26, 81%), Structure and Governance (n = 23, 72%) were the most frequently discussed LHS dimensions. Incentives (n = 21, 66%) and Patient-Clinician Partnerships (n = 18, 56%) received less attention. Twenty-nine papers (91%) discussed benefits or opportunities created by pandemics to furthering the development of an LHS, compared to 22 papers (69%) that discussed challenges. Conclusions: An LHS 2.0 approach appears well-suited to responding to the rapidly changing and uncertain conditions of a pandemic, and, by extension, to preparing health systems for the effects of climate change. LHSs that embrace a continuous learning culture can inform patient care, public policy, and public messaging, and those that wisely use IT systems for decision-making can more readily enact surveillance systems for future pandemics and climate change-related events. Trial registration: PROSPERO pre-registration: CRD42023408896. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Participant involvement in research studies is not a new concept, yet barriers to implementation remain and application varies. This is particularly true for pandemic response research studies, where timeframes are condensed, pressure is high and the value and inclusion of participant involvement can be overlooked. The SIREN Participant Involvement Panel (PIP) provides a case study for participant involvement in pandemic research, working in partnership with people who the research is for and about. Methods: SIREN and the British Society for Immunology (BSI) recruited and ran two phases of the PIP, involving 15 members in total over a 16-month period. Phase 1 ran between January and August 2022 and Phase 2 between October 2022 and March 2023. Activity figures including recruitment interest and PIP meeting attendance were recorded. To evaluate how the PIP has influenced SIREN, feedback was collected from (a) researchers presenting at the PIP and (b) PIP members themselves. Evaluation at the end of Phase 1 informed our approach to Phase 2. Thematic grouping was planned to identify key lessons learned. Results: Applications increased from n = 30 to n = 485 between Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the PIP, a more than 15-fold increase. The SIREN PIP positively impacted the design, implementation and evaluation phases of the study and sub-studies. Feedback from PIP members themselves was positive, with members highlighting that they found the role rewarding and felt valued. Learnings from the PIP have been condensed into five key themes for applying to future pandemic response research studies: the importance of dedicated resources; recruiting the right panel; understanding motivations for participant involvement; providing flexible options for involvement and enabling the early involvement of participants. Conclusions: The SIREN PIP has demonstrated the value of actively involving people who research is for and about. The PIP has provided an active feedback mechanism for research and demonstrated a positive influence on both SIREN study researchers and PIP members themselves. This paper makes the case for participant involvement in future pandemic research studies. Future work should include improved training for researchers and we would support the development of a national PIP forum as part of future pandemic research preparedness. Plain English summary: The SARS-Cov2 Immunity & Reinfection Evaluation (SIREN) study was set-up at speed during the early stages of the pandemic to help answer key questions about COVID-19 and inform the national pandemic response. It has provided valuable insight into COVID-19 infections, reinfections, and how well the vaccines work. SIREN helped to find these answers by regularly testing over 44,000 healthcare staff working at 135 NHS organisations. To support participant retention, SIREN established a Participant Involvement Panel (PIP) involving 15 SIREN participants to date. PIP members provide guidance and feedback to SIREN researchers on key research priorities, changes to the study and strategies for maximising participant engagement. This paper provides insight into how the PIP was set-up, run and the resources required from the perspective of the PIP and SIREN researchers. Lessons learned from establishing the PIP are summarised to help inform future pandemic response research studies. The paper adds to the evidence base, and makes the case for, the valuable role participant involvement can play in pandemic response research studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the latest evidence of an epidemic disease resulting in an extraordinary number of infections and claimed several lives, along with extensive economic and social consequences. In response to the emergency situation, countries introduced different policies to address the situation, with different levels of efficacy. This paper outlines the protocol for developing a model to analyze the burden of COVID-19 in Iran and the effect of policies on the incidence and cumulative death of the disease. The importance of the model lies in the fact that no study, according to the authors' best knowledge, tried to quantify the impact of the disease on Iran society and the impact of various implemented interventions on disease control. Based on a systematic review of COVID-19 prediction models and expert interviews, we developed a system dynamics model that not only includes an epidemic part but also considers the impact of various policies implemented by the Ministry of Health. The epidemic model estimates the incidence and mortality of COVID-19 in Iran. The model also intends to evaluate the effect of implemented policies on these outcomes. The model reflects the continuum of COVID-19 infection and care in Iran (of which some of its elements are unique) and key activities and decisions in delivering care. The model is calibrated and validated using data published by the Ministry of Health of Iran. Finally, the study aims to provide evidence of the impact of interventions intended to curb COVID-19 in Iran. Insights provided by the model will be necessary for controlling either future waves of the disease or similar future pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted the operationalisation of non-COVID-19 clinical trials globally, particularly site and participant recruitment and trial success/stoppage. Trials which anticipate recruitment challenges may embed methods such as the QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) to help identify and understand the sources of challenges. Such interventions can help shed light on pandemic-related challenges. This paper reports our experience of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on conducting clinical trials with an embedded QRI, highlighting how the QRI aided in identifying challenges and potential solutions, particularly related to the site set-up and participant recruitment. Main body: We report on 13 UK clinical trials which included a QRI. Information is from QRI data and researchers' experience and reflections. In most trials, recruitment was lower than even the lowest anticipated rates. The flexibility of the QRI facilitated rapid data collection to understand and document, and in some instances respond to, operational challenges. Challenges were mostly logistical, pandemic-related and beyond the control of the site or central trial teams. Specifically: disrupted and variable site opening timelines —often due to local research and development (R&D) delays— shortages of staff to recruit patients; fewer eligible patients or limited access to patients; and intervention-related factors. Almost all trials were affected by pandemic-related staffing issues including redeployment, prioritisation of COVID-19 care and research, and COVID-19-related staff illness and absence. Trials of elective procedures were particularly impacted by the pandemic, which caused changes to care/recruitment pathways, deprioritisation of services, reduced clinical and surgical capacity and longer waiting lists. Attempted solutions included extra engagement with staff and R&D departments, trial protocol changes (primarily moving online) and seeking additional resourcing. Conclusion: We have highlighted wide-ranging, extensive and consistent pandemic-related challenges faced by UK clinical trials, which the QRI helped to identify and, in some cases, address. Many challenges were insurmountable at individual trials or trials unit level. This overview highlights the need to streamline trial regulatory processes, address staffing crises, improve recognition of NHS research staff and for clearer, more nuanced central guidance on the prioritisation of studies and how to deal with the backlog. Pre-emptively embedding qualitative work and stakeholder consultation into trials with anticipated difficulties, moving some processes online, and flexible trial protocols may improve the resilience of trials in the current challenging context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected how clinical trials are managed, both within existing portfolios and for the rapidly developed COVID-19 trials. Sponsors or delegated organisations responsible for monitoring trials have needed to consider and implement alternative ways of working due to the national infection risk necessitating restricted movement of staff and public, reduced clinical staff resource as research staff moved to clinical areas, and amended working arrangements for sponsor and sponsor delegates as staff moved to working from home.Organisations have often worked in isolation to fast track mitigations required for the conduct of clinical trials during the pandemic; this paper describes many of the learnings from a group of monitoring leads based in United Kingdom Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC) Clinical Trials Unit (CTUs) within the UK.The UKCRC Monitoring Task and Finish Group, comprising monitoring leads from 9 CTUs, met repeatedly to identify how COVID-19 had affected clinical trial monitoring. Informed consent is included as a specific issue within this paper, as review of completed consent documentation is often required within trial monitoring plans (TMPs). Monitoring is defined as involving on-site monitoring, central monitoring or/and remote monitoring.Monitoring, required to protect the safety of the patients and the integrity of the trial and ensure the protocol is followed, is often best done by a combination of central, remote and on-site monitoring. However, if on-site monitoring is not possible, workable solutions can be found using only central or central and remote monitoring. eConsent, consent by a third person, or via remote means is plausible. Minimising datasets to the critical data reduces workload for sites and CTU staff. Home working caused by COVID-19 has made electronic trial master files (TMFs) more inviting. Allowing sites to book and attend protocol training at a time convenient to them has been successful and worth pursuing for trials with many sites in the future.The arrival of COVID-19 in the UK has forced consideration of and changes to how clinical trials are conducted in relation to monitoring. Some developed practices will be useful in other pandemics and others should be incorporated into regular use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Epidemics or pandemics, such as the current Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis, pose unique challenges to healthcare professionals (HCPs). Caring for patients during an epidemic/pandemic may impact negatively on the mental health of HCPs. There is a lack of evidence-based advice on what would be effective in mitigating this impact.Objectives: This rapid review synthesizes the evidence on the psychological impact of pandemics/epidemics on the mental health of HCPs, what factors predict this impact, and the evidence of prevention/intervention strategies to reduce this impact.Method: According to rapid review guidelines, systematic searches were carried out in Embase.com , PubMed, APA PsycINFO-Ovid SP, and Web of Science (core collection). Searches were restricted to the years 2003 or later to ensure inclusion of the most recent epidemic/pandemics, such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). Papers written in French or English, published in peer-reviewed journals, and of quantitative design using validated measures of mental health outcomes were included. Of 1308 papers found, 50 were included. The full protocol for this rapid review was registered with Prospero (reg.no. CRD42020175985).Results: Results show that exposed HCPs working with patients during an epidemic/pandemic are at heightened risk of mental health problems in the short and longer term, particularly: psychological distress, insomnia, alcohol/drug misuse, and symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, anxiety, burnout, anger, and higher perceived stress. These mental health problems are predicted by organizational, social, personal, and psychological factors and may interfere with the quality of patient care. Few evidence-based early interventions exist so far.Discussion: HCPs need to be provided with psychosocial support to protect their mental wellbeing if they are to continue to provide high quality patient care. Several recommendations relevant during and after an epidemic/pandemic, such as COVID-19, and in preparation for a future outbreak, are proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada, the cannabis industry has adapted to public health emergency orders which had direct and indirect consequences on cannabis consumption. The objective of this scoping review was to describe the patterns of consumption and cannabis-related health and safety considerations during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada. Methods: For this scoping review, we searched four electronic databases supplemented with grey literature. Peer-reviewed or pre-print studies using any study design and grey literature reporting real-world data were included if published in English between March 2020 and September 2021 and focused on cannabis and COVID-19 in Canada. A content analysis was performed. Results: Twenty-one studies met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Study designs included cross-sectional surveys (n = 17), ecological study (n = 1), conceptual paper (n = 1), longitudinal study (n = 1), and prospective cohort study (n = 1). Most were conducted solely in Canada (n = 18), and the remaining included global data. Our content analysis suggested that cannabis consumption during the pandemic varied by reasons for use, consumers' age, gender, and method of consumption. Health and safety impacts due to the COVID-19 pandemics included increased mental illness, increased emergency visits, and psychosocial impacts. Discussion: This scoping review suggested that the impact of the pandemic on cannabis consumption in Canada is more complex than simplistic assumptions of an increase or decrease in consumption and continues to be difficult to measure. This study has explored some of those complexities in relation to reasons for use, age, gender, method of consumption, and health impacts. This scoping review is limited by focusing on the breadth compared to depth. Conclusions: Legalizing nonmedical use of cannabis in Canada in 2018 has had its challenges of implementation, one of which has been the changing context of the society. The findings of this study can help inform cannabis policy updates in Canada as the country is reaching its fifth year of legalizing nonmedical use of cannabis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pandemics as health and humanitarian crises have exerted traceable impacts on food security. Almost all past and current pandemics have created a food crisis that affects a share of the global population and threaten global food security. With the more frequent outbreaks of emerging and re-emerging diseases or pandemics, this paper looks at the various types of impacts from the current coronavirus crisis and past pandemics to identify their major impact on food security. Scope: To this effect, key strategies that could be put in place to ensure the efficient resilience of food systems before, during, and after the pandemics to mitigate the negative impact of the pandemics on global food security are recommended. The most recent effects of the current coronavirus crisis have been disruptions in the flow of farm labourers and inefficient farm operations leading to postharvest food losses. Key findings and conclusions: Modification of diets between social groups has also been observed. Future response orientations to prevent and mitigate the effects of pandemics on food security will consider pro-active and adapted policy, program, and institutional actions towards the systemic development of global food systems as an interconnected network. Highlights: • Before the 20thcentury hunger and illnesses might be traced to climatic changes. • The catastrophes in human history elicit various reactions – defence, reflection. • In the 19thcentury, lower quality of food further exacerbated the effects of famines. • Skills required for effectivemanagement of the flow of goods and services are in high demand. • Alternative food resources exist during pandemic and food shortage. • Strategizing to ensure food access and self-sufficiency during a pandemic is possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The initial policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic has differed widely across countries. Such variability in government interventions has made it difficult for policymakers and health research systems to compare what has happened and the effectiveness of interventions across nations. Timely information and analysis are crucial to addressing the lag between the pandemic and government responses to implement targeted interventions to alleviate the impact of the pandemic. Methods: To examine the effect government interventions and technological responses have on epidemiological and economic outcomes, this policy paper proposes a conceptual framework that provides a qualitative taxonomy of government policy directives implemented in the immediate aftermath of a pandemic announcement and before vaccines are implementable. This framework assigns a gradient indicating the intensity and extent of the policy measures and applies the gradient to four countries that share similar institutional features but different COVID-19 experiences: Italy, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. Results: Using the categorisation framework allows qualitative information to be presented, and more specifically the gradient can show the dynamic impact of policy interventions on specific outcomes. We have observed that the policy categorisation described here can be used by decision-makers to examine the impacts of major viral outbreaks such as SARS-CoV-2 on health and economic outcomes over time. The framework allows for a visualisation of the frequency and comparison of dominant policies and provides a conceptual tool to assess how dominant interventions (and innovations) affect different sets of health and non-health related outcomes during the response phase to the pandemic. Conclusions: Policymakers and health researchers should converge toward an optimal set of policy interventions to minimize the costs of the pandemic (i.e., health and economic), and facilitate coordination across governance levels before effective vaccines are produced. The proposed framework provides a useful tool to direct health research system resources and build a policy benchmark for future viral outbreaks where vaccines are not readily available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) became a pandemic within a matter of months. Analysing the first year of the pandemic, data and surveillance gaps have subsequently surfaced. Yet, policy decisions and public trust in their country's strategies in combating COVID-19 rely on case numbers, death numbers and other unfamiliar metrics. There are many limitations on COVID-19 case counts internationally, which make cross-country comparisons of raw data and policy responses difficult. Purpose and conclusions: This paper presents and describes steps in the testing and reporting process, with examples from a number of countries of barriers encountered in each step, all of which create an undercount of COVID-19 cases. This work raises factors to consider in COVID-19 data and provides recommendations to inform the current situation with COVID-19 as well as issues to be aware of in future pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Following the SARS pandemic, jurisdictions around the world began developing ethical resource allocation frameworks for future pandemics-one such framework was developed by Thompson and colleagues. While this framework offers a solid backbone upon which decision-makers can rest assured that their work is driven by rigorous ethical processes and principles, it fails to take into account the nuanced experiences and interests of children and youth (i.e., young people) in a pandemic context. The current COVID-19 pandemic offers an opportunity to re-examine this framework from young people's perspectives, informed by advances in childhood ethics and children's rights.Main Body: In this paper, we revisit the Thompson et al. framework and propose adaptations to the ethical processes and values outlined therein. This work is informed by expertise in clinical ethics and literature related to impacts of COVID-19 and other pandemics on the health and well-being of children around the world, though with particular attention to Canada. During the processes of drafting this work, stakeholders were consulted-aligned with the approach used by Thompson and colleagues-to validate the interpretations provided. We also propose a new principle, namely practicability, to indicate the complex balance between what is possible and what is convenient that is required in ethically sound decisions in the context of services affecting young people. We outline and discuss the strengths and limitations of our work and indicate next steps for scholars in the areas of childhood studies and child health.Conclusion: Efforts to ensure frameworks are truly child-inclusive should be the status-quo, so pandemic impacts and policy implications can be considered in advance of emergency preparedness contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In an unparalleled global response, during the COVID-19 pandemic, 90 countries asked 3.9 billion people to stay home. Yet other countries avoided lockdowns and focused on other strategies, like contact tracing. How effective and cost-effective are these strategies? We aimed to provide a comprehensive summary of the evidence on past pandemic controls, with a focus on cost-effectiveness. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, MEDLINE (1946 to April week 2, 2020) and EMBASE (1974 to April 17, 2020) were searched using a range of terms related to pandemic control. Articles reporting on the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of at least one intervention were included. Results: We found 1653 papers; 62 were included. The effectiveness of hand-washing and face masks was supported by randomized trials. These measures were highly cost-effective. For other interventions, only observational and modelling studies were found. They suggested that (1) the most cost-effective interventions are swift contact tracing and case isolation, surveillance networks, protective equipment for healthcare workers, and early vaccination (when available); (2) home quarantines and stockpiling antivirals are less cost-effective; (3) social distancing measures like workplace and school closures are effective but costly, making them the least cost-effective options; (4) combinations are more cost-effective than single interventions; and (5) interventions are more cost-effective when adopted early. For 2009 H1N1 influenza, contact tracing was estimated to be 4363 times more cost-effective than school closure ($2260 vs. $9,860,000 per death prevented). Conclusions and contributions: For COVID-19, a cautious interpretation suggests that (1) workplace and school closures are effective but costly, especially when adopted late, and (2) scaling up as early as possible a combination of interventions that includes hand-washing, face masks, ample protective equipment for healthcare workers, and swift contact tracing and case isolation is likely to be the most cost-effective strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During global pandemics, such as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), crisis communication is indispensable in dispelling fears, uncertainty, and unifying individuals worldwide in a collective fight against health threats. Inadequate crisis communication can bring dire personal and economic consequences. Mounting research shows that seemingly endless newsfeeds related to COVID-19 infection and death rates could considerably increase the risk of mental health problems. Unfortunately, media reports that include infodemics regarding the influence of COVID-19 on mental health may be a source of the adverse psychological effects on individuals. Owing partially to insufficient crisis communication practices, media and news organizations across the globe have played minimal roles in battling COVID-19 infodemics. Common refrains include raging QAnon conspiracies, a false and misleading "Chinese virus" narrative, and the use of disinfectants to "cure" COVID-19. With the potential to deteriorate mental health, infodemics fueled by a kaleidoscopic range of misinformation can be dangerous. Unfortunately, there is a shortage of research on how to improve crisis communication across media and news organization channels. This paper identifies ways that legacy media reports on COVID-19 and how social media-based infodemics can result in mental health concerns. This paper discusses possible crisis communication solutions that media and news organizations can adopt to mitigate the negative influences of COVID-19 related news on mental health. Emphasizing the need for global media entities to forge a fact-based, person-centered, and collaborative response to COVID-19 reporting, this paper encourages media resources to focus on the core issue of how to slow or stop COVID-19 transmission effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Very little research has examined how perceptions of cannabis access among underage youth in Canada have changed since cannabis was legalized and since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. As such, this paper examines the effect of the early and ongoing stages of the COVID-19 pandemic period on youth perceptions of cannabis access over time since the onset of the Cannabis Act in 2018 in a large sample of Canadian youth. Methods: Using data from the COMPASS study (T1:2018/19, T2:2019/20, T3:2020/21), we used both repeat cross-sectional data [T1 (n = 38,890), T2 (n = 24,109), and T3 (n = 22,795)] to examine overall trends in perceptions of cannabis access, and sequential cohort longitudinal data [n = 4,677 students linked from T1 to T3] to examine the differential changes in perceptions of cannabis access among students over time. Results: In the cross-sectional sample, the frequency of students reporting that cannabis was easy to access decreased by 26.7% from T1 (51.0%) to T3 (37.4%), although respondents who have used cannabis were more likely to report access was easy. In the longitudinal sample, perceptions of cannabis access being easy increased over time, especially among cannabis users. Perceived ease of access appears to have been slightly impeded during the initial pandemic period but rebounded during the ongoing pandemic period. Conclusions: While the prevalence of youth reporting that cannabis is easy to access has declined since legalization and throughout the early and ongoing pandemic periods, a substantial number of underage youth continue to report that cannabis is easy to access. This suggest that there is an ongoing need for continued cannabis control efforts to address this issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) are among those regions most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic has strained health systems in the region. In this context of severe healthcare resource constraints, there is a need for systematic priority-setting to support decision-making which ensures the best use of resources while considering the needs of the most vulnerable groups. The aim of this paper was to provide a critical description and analysis of how health systems considered priority-setting in the COVID-19 response and preparedness plans of a sample of 14 LAC countries; and to identify the associated research gaps. Methods: A documentary analysis of COVID-19 preparedness and response plans was performed in a sample of 14 countries in the LAC region. We assessed the degree to which the documented priority-setting processes adhered to established quality indicators of effective priority-setting included in the Kapiriri and Martin framework. We conducted a descriptive analysis of the degree to which the reports addressed the quality parameters for each individual country, as well as a cross-country comparison to explore whether parameters varied according to independent variables. Results: While all plans were led and supported by the national governments, most included only a limited number of quality indicators for effective priority-setting. There was no systematic pattern between the number of quality indicators and the country's health system and political contexts; however, the countries that had the least number of quality indicators tended to be economically disadvantaged. Conclusion: This study adds to the literature by providing the first descriptive analysis of the inclusion of priority-setting during a pandemic, using the case of COVID-19 response and preparedness plans in the LAC region. The analysis found that despite the strong evidence of political will and stakeholder participation, none of the plans presented a clear priority-setting process, or used a formal priority-setting framework, to define interventions, populations, geographical regions, healthcare setting or resources prioritized. There is need for case studies that analyse how priority-setting actually occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic and the degree to which the implementation reflected the plans and the parameters of effective priority-setting, as well as the impact of the prioritization processes on population health, with a focus on the most vulnerable groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Expectant parents worldwide have experienced changes in the way they give birth as a result of COVID-19, including restrictions relating to access to birthing units and the presence of birthing partners during the birth, and changes to birth plans. This paper reports the experiences of women in England.Methods: Data were obtained from both closed- and open-ended responses collected as part of the national COVID in Context of Pregnancy, Infancy and Parenting (CoCoPIP) Study online survey (n = 477 families) between 15th July 2020 - 29th March 2021. Frequency data are presented alongside the results of a sentiment analysis; the open-ended data was analysed thematically.Results: Two-thirds of expectant women reported giving birth via spontaneous vaginal delivery (SVD) (66.1%) and a third via caesarean section (CS) (32.6%) or 'other' (1.3%). Just under half (49.7%) of the CS were reported to have been elective/planned, with 47.7% being emergencies. A third (37.4%) of participants reported having no changes to their birth (as set out in their birthing plan), with a further 25% reporting COVID-related changes, and 37.4% reporting non-COVID related changes (e.g., changes as a result of birthing complications). One quarter of the sample reported COVID-related changes to their birth plan, including limited birthing options and reduced feelings of control; difficulties accessing pain-relief and assistance, and feelings of distress and anxiety. Under half of the respondents reported not knowing whether there could be someone present at the birth (44.8%), with 2.3% of respondents reporting no birthing partner being present due to COVID-related restrictions. Parental experiences of communication and advice provided by the hospital prior to delivery were mixed, with significant stress and anxiety being reported in relation to both the fluctuating guidance and lack of certainty regarding the presence of birthing partners at the birth. The sentiment analysis revealed that participant experiences of giving birth during the pandemic were predominately negative (46.9%) particularly in relation to the first national lockdown, with a smaller proportion of positive (33.2%) and neutral responses (19.9%).Conclusion: The proportion of parents reporting birthing interventions (i.e., emergency CS) was higher than previously reported, as were uncertainties related to the birth, and poor communication, leading to increased feelings of anxiety and high levels of negative emotions. The implications of these findings are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development and deployment of medical devices, along with most areas of healthcare, has been significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. This has had variable ethical implications, two of which we will focus on here. First, medical device regulations have been rapidly amended to expedite approvals of devices ranging from face masks to ventilators. Although some regulators have issued cessation dates, there is inadequate discussion of triggers for exiting these crisis standards, and evidence that this may not be feasible. Given the relatively low evidence standards currently required for regulatory approval of devices, this further indefinite reduction in standards raises serious ethical issues. Second, the pandemic has disrupted the usual operations of device representatives in hospitals, providing an opportunity to examine and refine this potentially ethically problematic practice. In this paper we explain and critically analyse the ethical implications of these two pandemic-related impacts on medical devices and propose suggestions for their management. These include an endpoint for pandemic-related adjustments to device regulation or a mechanism for continued refinement over time, together with a review of device research conducted under crisis conditions, support for the removal and replacement of emergency approved devices, and a review of device representative credentialling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The 2020-2021 coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic is just the latest epidemic event that requires us to rethink and change our understanding of health. Health should no longer be conceived only in relation to human beings, but in unitary terms, as a dimension that connects humans, animals, plants, and the environment (holistic view, One Health). In general, alterations occurring in this articulated chain of life trigger a domino effect.Methodology: In this paper, we review the One Health paradigm in the light of the Covid-19 pandemic and distinguish two approaches within it that might be dubbed the Prudent one and the Radical one. Each approach is structured in three levels - epistemological, medical, and ethical.Results: In this way, we show how we humans can better address the pandemic today and how, in the future, we can treat the whole living system better, by renouncing our anthropocentric perspective on health.Conclusion: We hold that the Prudent approach can be very helpful, and we discuss the medical and ethical issues related to it. We also consider the Radical view and the epistemological turn it requires compared to the Prudent one. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to a massive global socio-economic tragedy that has impacted the ecosystem. This paper aims to contextualize urban and rural environmental situations during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region.Results: An online survey was conducted, 6770 participants were included in the final analysis, and 64% were females. The majority of the participants were urban citizens (74%). Over 50% of the urban residents significantly (p < 0.001) reported a reduction in noise, gathering in tourist areas, and gathering in malls and restaurants. Concerning the pollutants, most urban and rural areas have reported an increase in masks thrown in streets (69.49% vs. 73.22%, resp.; p = 0.003). Plastic bags and hospital waste also increased significantly with the same p-value of < 0.001 in urban areas compared with rural ones. The multifactorial logistic model for urban resident predictors achieved acceptable discrimination (AUROC = 0.633) according to age, crowdedness, noise and few pollutants.Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic had a beneficial impact on the environment and at the same time, various challenges regarding plastic and medical wastes are rising which requires environmental interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: National responses to the COVID-19 pandemic depend on national preparedness systems that must be understood as components of global public health emergency preparedness systems, governed and coordinated through the World Health Organization's 2005 International Health Regulations. The pandemic has raised the question of why countries belonging to similar public health regimes, coordinated through the same global system, responded differently to the same threat. Comparing the responses of Denmark, Sweden and Norway, countries with similar public health regimes, the paper investigates to what degree national differences in COVID-19 policy response reflect significant differences in the policy preferences of national expert groups.Results: We employ a structured case comparison of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden to analyze their' politico-administrative pandemic preparedness systems and policy responses during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We use the results of an interdisciplinary expert survey completed in 2020 to analyze expert perceptions in two ways. First, we analyze expert perceptions of COVID-19 responses while controlling for national COVID-19 trajectories and experts' characteristics. Second, we analyze the distribution and effect of dominant global expert-held ideas across countries, showing the importance of dominant ideas for experts' perceptions and preferences for COVID-19 response.Conclusion: The study finds no evidence indicating that COVID-19 policy variation between the most similar cases of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden are the result of differences in the policy preferences of national expert groups. Instead, our study highlights the importance of other factors than cross-national expert dissensus for explaining variation in pandemic response such as the politico-administrative organization of pandemic preparedness systems. Further, we find that expert support for dominant ideas such as a 'focused protection strategy' is associated with consistent policy preferences across locational, disciplinary, and geographic affiliations. Recognition of the latter should be a part of future discussions about how global ideas of pandemic preparedness are diffused transnationally and embedded in national politico-administrative systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There have been several destructive pandemic diseases in the human history. Since these pandemic diseases spread through human-to-human infection, a number of non-pharmacological policies has been enforced until an effective vaccine has been developed. In addition, even though a vaccine has been developed, due to the challenges in the production and distribution of the vaccine, the authorities have to optimize the vaccination policies based on the priorities. Considering all these facts, a comprehensive but simple parametric model enriched with the pharmacological and non-pharmacological policies has been proposed in this study to analyse and predict the future pandemic casualties.Method: This paper develops a priority and age specific vaccination policy and modifies the non-pharmacological policies including the curfews, lockdowns, and restrictions. These policies are incorporated with the susceptible, suspicious, infected, hospitalized, intensive care, intubated, recovered, and death sub-models. The resulting model is parameterizable by the available data where a recursive least squares algorithm with the inequality constraints optimizes the unknown parameters. The inequality constraints ensure that the structural requirements are satisfied and the parameter weights are distributed proportionally.Results: The results exhibit a distinctive third peak in the casualties occurring in 40 days and confirm that the intensive care, intubated, and death casualties converge to zero faster than the susceptible, suspicious, and infected casualties with the priority and age specific vaccination policy. The model also estimates that removing the curfews on the weekends and holidays cause more casualties than lifting the restrictions on the people with the chronic diseases and age over 65.Conclusion: Sophisticated parametric models equipped with the pharmacological and non-pharmacological policies can predict the future pandemic casualties for various cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has initiated several initiatives to better understand its behavior, and some projects are monitoring its evolution across countries, which naturally leads to comparisons made by those using the data. However, most "at a glance" comparisons may be misleading because the curve that should explain the evolution of COVID-19 is different across countries, as a result of the underlying geopolitical or socio-economic characteristics. Therefore, this paper contributes to the scientific endeavour by creating a new evaluation framework to help stakeholders adequately monitor and assess the evolution of COVID-19 in countries, considering the occurrence of spikes, "secondary waves" and structural breaks in the time series.Methods: Generalized Additive Models were used to model cumulative and daily curves for confirmed cases and deaths. The Root Relative Squared Error and the Percentage Deviance Explained measured how well the models fit the data. A local min-max function was used to identify all local maxima in the fitted values. The pure Markov-Switching and the family of Markov-Switching GARCH models were used to identify structural breaks in the COVID-19 time series. Finally, a quadrants system to identify countries that are more/less efficient in the short/long term in controlling the spread of the virus and the number of deaths was developed. Such methods were applied in the time series of 189 countries, collected from the Centre for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University.Results: Our methodology proves more effective in explaining the evolution of COVID-19 than growth functions worldwide, in addition to standardizing the entire estimation process in a single type of function. Besides, it highlights several inflection points and regime-switching moments, as a consequence of people's diminished commitment to fighting the pandemic. Although Europe is the most developed continent in the world, it is home to most countries with an upward trend and considered inefficient, for confirmed cases and deaths.Conclusions: The new outcomes presented in this research will allow key stakeholders to check whether or not public policies and interventions in the fight against COVID-19 are having an effect, easily identifying examples of best practices and promote such policies more widely around the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ever since the emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), global public health infrastructures and systems, along with community-wide collaboration and service, have risen to an unprecedented challenge. Vaccine development was immediately propelled to the centre of all our scientific, public health and community efforts. Despite the development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines arguably being the greatest and most palpable achievements of the past 12 months, they have also been one of the most contentious and debated issues during the pandemic. However, what uniquely differentiates vaccine development is its intimate relationship with the community it seeks to serve; both in its clinical trial testing as an efficacious and safe prophylactic, and its post-developmental 'roll-out' success, as an effective public health tool. These relationships have birthed a myriad of complexities, from community-based mistrust, to academically contended ethical dilemmas. Indeed, the accelerated advances in the COVID-19 vaccine race have further exacerbated this phenomenon, bringing with it new ethical dilemmas that need to be examined to ensure the continued clinical success of these therapeutics and a renewed societal trust in clinical medicine.In this paper, we discuss two major ethical dilemmas: (1) the equipoise of continuing new vaccine trials in the advent of successful candidates and (2) the maleficence of blinded placebo arms. Accordingly, we discuss six different potential approaches to these ethical dilemmas: (1) continuing with placebo-controlled trials, (2) transitioning from placebo-controlled to open-label, (3) unblinding at-risk priority groups only, (4) transitioning to a blinded stepped-wedge cross-over design, (5) progressing to a blinded active-controlled stepped-wedge cross-over trial, and (6) conducting randomised stepped-wedge community trials. We also propose a decision-making algorithm for relevant stakeholders in advanced stages of vaccine trials.It is important to remember that the emergent nature of the COVID-19 situation does not justify a compromise on core ethical values. In fact, the discourse surrounding this topic and the decisions made will remain a potent case study and a continuously referenced example for all such future scenarios. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Older adults at a higher risk of adverse outcomes and mortality if they get infected with Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS- CoV-2). These undesired outcomes are because ageing is associated with other conditions like multimorbidity, frailty and disability. This paper describes the impact of frailty on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) management and outcomes. We also try to point out the role of inflamm-ageing, immunosenescence and reduced microbiota diversity in developing a severe form of COVID-19 and a different response to COVID-19 vaccination among older frail adults. Additionally, we attempt to highlight the impact of frailty on intensive care unit (ICU) outcomes, and hence, the rationale behind using frailty as an exclusion criterion for critical care admission. Similarly, the importance of using a time-saving, validated, sensitive, and user-friendly tool for frailty screening in an acute setting as COVID-19 triage. We performed a narrative review. Publications from 1990 to March 2021 were identified by searching the electronic databases MEDLINE, CINAHL and SCOPUS. Based on this search, we have found that in older frail adults, many mechanisms contribute to the severity of COVID-19, particularly cytokine storm; those mechanisms include lower immunological capacity and status of ongoing chronic inflammation and reduced gut microbiota diversity. Higher degrees of frailty were associated with poor outcomes and higher mortality rates during and after ICU admission. Also, the response to COVID-19 vaccination among frail older adults might differ from the general population regarding effectiveness and side effects. Researches also had shown that there are many tools for identifying frailty in an acute setting that could be used in COVID-19 triage, and before ICU admission, the clinical frailty scale (CFS) was the most recommended tool.Conclusion: Older frail adults have a pre-existing immunopathological base that puts them at a higher risk of undesired outcomes and mortality due to COVID-19 and poor response to COVID-19 vaccination. Also, their admission in ICU should depend on their degree of frailty rather than their chronological age, which is better to be screened using the CFS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The early identification of asymptomatic yet infectious cases is vital to curb the 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and to control the disease in the post-pandemic era. In this paper, we propose a fast, inexpensive and high-throughput approach using painless nasal-swab self-collection followed by direct RT-qPCR for the sensitive PCR detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This approach was validated in a large prospective cohort study of 1038 subjects, analysed simultaneously using (1) nasopharyngeal swabs obtained with the assistance of healthcare personnel and analysed by classic two-step RT-qPCR on RNA isolates and (2) nasal swabs obtained by self-collection and analysed with direct RT-qPCR. Of these subjects, 28.6% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 using nasopharyngeal swab sampling. Our direct RT-qPCR approach for self-collected nasal swabs performed well with results similar to those of the two-step RT-qPCR on RNA isolates, achieving 0.99 positive and 0.98 negative predictive values (cycle threshold [Ct] < 37). Our research also reports on grey-zone viraemia, including samples with near-cut-off Ct values (Ct ≥ 37). In all investigated subjects (n = 20) with grey-zone viraemia, the ultra-small viral load disappeared within hours or days with no symptoms. Overall, this study underscores the importance of painless nasal-swab self-collection and direct RT-qPCR for mass testing during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and in the post-pandemic era. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Survey data were needed to assess the mental and social health, health related behaviors and compliance with preventive measures of the population during the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, the pandemic challenged classical survey methods. Time and budgetary constraints at the beginning of the pandemic led to ad hoc recruitment of participants and easily manageable data collection modes. This paper describes the methodological choices and results in terms of participation for the COVID-19 health surveys conducted in Belgium. Methods: The COVID-19 health surveys refer to a series of ten non-probability web surveys organized between April 2020 and March 2022. The applied recruitment strategies were diverse including, amongst others, a launch through the website and the social media of the organizing research institute. In addition, the survey links were shared in articles published in the national press and participants were requested to share the surveys in their network. Furthermore, participants were asked consent to be re-contacted for next survey editions using e-mail invitations. Results: These mixed approaches allowed to reach a substantial number of participants per edition ranging from 49339 in survey 1 to 13882 in survey 10. In addition, a longitudinal component was created; a large share of the same individuals were followed up over time; 12599 participants completed at least 5 surveys. There were, however, sex, age, educational level and regional differences in participation. Post-stratification weighting on socio-demographic factors was applied to at least partly take this into account. Conclusion: The COVID-19 health surveys allowed rapid data collection after the onset of the pandemic. Data from these non-probability web surveys had their limitations in terms of representativeness due to self-selection but were an important information source as there were few alternatives. Moreover, by following-up the same individuals over time it was possible to study the effect of the different crisis phases on, amongst others, the mental health. It is important to draw lessons from these experiences: initiatives in order to create a survey infrastructure better equipped for future crises are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Currently, there is an urgent need for efficient tools to assess the diagnosis of COVID-19 patients. In this paper, we present feasible solutions for detecting and labeling infected tissues on CT lung images of such patients. Two structurally-different deep learning techniques, SegNet and U-NET, are investigated for semantically segmenting infected tissue regions in CT lung images. Methods: We propose to use two known deep learning networks, SegNet and U-NET, for image tissue classification. SegNet is characterized as a scene segmentation network and U-NET as a medical segmentation tool. Both networks were exploited as binary segmentors to discriminate between infected and healthy lung tissue, also as multi-class segmentors to learn the infection type on the lung. Each network is trained using seventy-two data images, validated on ten images, and tested against the left eighteen images. Several statistical scores are calculated for the results and tabulated accordingly. Results: The results show the superior ability of SegNet in classifying infected/non-infected tissues compared to the other methods (with 0.95 mean accuracy), while the U-NET shows better results as a multi-class segmentor (with 0.91 mean accuracy). Conclusion: Semantically segmenting CT scan images of COVID-19 patients is a crucial goal because it would not only assist in disease diagnosis, also help in quantifying the severity of the illness, and hence, prioritize the population treatment accordingly. We propose computer-based techniques that prove to be reliable as detectors for infected tissue in lung CT scans. The availability of such a method in today's pandemic would help automate, prioritize, fasten, and broaden the treatment of COVID-19 patients globally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is estimated that the COVID-19 pandemic will drastically increase all forms of malnutrition. Of particular concern, yet understated, is the potential to increase the double burden of malnutrition (DBM) epidemic. This coexistence of undernutrition together with overweight and obesity, or diet-related non-communicable disease (NCD), within low- to middle-income countries (LMICs) is increasing rapidly. Although multiple factors contribute to the DBM, food insecurity (FI) and gut microbiota dysbiosis play a crucial role. Both under- and overnutrition have been shown to be a consequence of food insecurity. The gut microbiota has also been recently implicated in playing a role in under- and overnutrition, with altered community structure and function common to both. The pandemic has already caused significant shifts in food availability which has immediate effects on the gut microbiome. In this opinion paper, we discuss how COVID-19 may indirectly exacerbate the DBM through food insecurity and the gut microbiome.Main Text: The World Food Programme (WFP) estimates that 265 million people in LMICs will experience acute hunger in 2020 due to the pandemic, nearly doubling the original projection of 135 million. Global border closures to food trade, loss of food production, and stark decline in household income will exacerbate starvation while simultaneously necessitating that families resort to calorie-dense, nutrient-poor foods, thereby increasing obesity. While food insecurity, which is the persistent lack of consistent access to adequate and nutrient-rich foods, will primarily drive nutrition behavior, the gut microbiome is perhaps a key biological mechanism. Numerous human and animal studies describe low diversity and an increase in inflammatory species as characteristic features of the undernourished and overnourished gut microbiota. Indeed, fecal transplant studies show that microbiota transfer from undernourished and overnourished humans to germ-free mice lacking a microbiome transfers the physical and metabolic phenotype, suggesting a causal role for the microbiota in under- and overnutrition. The observed microbiome dysbiosis within severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) coupled with the DBM presents a viscous cycle.Conclusion: Low- to mid-income countries will likely see an increase in the DBM epidemic. Providing access to nutritious foods and protecting individuals' gut microbiome to "flatten the curve" of the DBM trajectory should be prioritized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Critical public health measures implemented to mitigate the spread of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic have disrupted health research worldwide, including HIV prevention research. While general guidance has been issued for the responsible conduct of research in these challenging circumstances, the contours of the dueling COVID-19 and HIV/AIDS pandemics raise some critical ethical issues for HIV prevention research. In this paper, we use the recently updated HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) Ethics Guidance Document (EGD) to situate and analyze key ethical challenges related to the conduct of HIV prevention research during the COVID-19 pandemic as well as identify potential areas for refinement of the guidance document based on this unprecedented state of affairs.Main Body: Necessary actions taken for HIV prevention research studies due to the COVID-19 pandemic involve an array of ethical issues including those related to: (1) risk mitigation; (2) behavior change; (3) compounding vulnerability; (4) community engagement; (5) trial reopening; and 6) shifting research priorities.Conclusions: In the context of the dueling HIV and COVID-19 global pandemics, research teams and sponsors must be nimble in responding to the rapidly changing environment by being sensitive to the associated ethical issues. The HTPN EGD provides a rich set of tools to help identify, analyze and address many of these issues. At the same time, future refinements of the HPTN EGD and other research ethics guidance could be strengthened by providing explicit advice regarding the ethical issues associated with disrupted research and the reopening of studies. In addition, additional consideration should be given to appropriately balancing domains of risk (e.g., physical versus social), addressing the vulnerability of research staff and community partners, and responding to un-anticipatable ancillary care needs of participants and communities. Appropriately addressing these issues will necessitate conceptual work, which would benefit from the careful documentation of the actual ethical issues encountered in research, the strategies implemented to overcome them, and their success in doing so. Throughout all of these efforts, it is critical to remember that the HIV pandemic not be forgotten in the rush to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pandemics, even more than other medical problems, require swift integration of knowledge. When caused by a new virus, understanding the underlying biology may help finding solutions. In a setting where there are a large number of loosely related projects and initiatives, we need common ground, also known as a "commons." Wikidata, a public knowledge graph aligned with Wikipedia, is such a commons and uses unique identifiers to link knowledge in other knowledge bases. However, Wikidata may not always have the right schema for the urgent questions. In this paper, we address this problem by showing how a data schema required for the integration can be modeled with entity schemas represented by Shape Expressions. Results: As a telling example, we describe the process of aligning resources on the genomes and proteomes of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and related viruses as well as how Shape Expressions can be defined for Wikidata to model the knowledge, helping others studying the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. How this model can be used to make data between various resources interoperable is demonstrated by integrating data from NCBI (National Center for Biotechnology Information) Taxonomy, NCBI Genes, UniProt, and WikiPathways. Based on that model, a set of automated applications or bots were written for regular updates of these sources in Wikidata and added to a platform for automatically running these updates. Conclusions: Although this workflow is developed and applied in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, to demonstrate its broader applicability it was also applied to other human coronaviruses (MERS, SARS, human coronavirus NL63, human coronavirus 229E, human coronavirus HKU1, human coronavirus OC4). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Single-cell (sc) sequencing performs unbiased profiling of individual cells and enables evaluation of less prevalent cellular populations, often missed using bulk sequencing. However, the scale and the complexity of the sc datasets poses a great challenge in its utility and this problem is further exacerbated when working with larger datasets typically generated by consortium efforts. As the scale of single cell datasets continues to increase exponentially, there is an unmet technological need to develop database platforms that can evaluate key biological hypotheses by querying extensive single-cell datasets. Large single-cell datasets like Human Cell Atlas and COVID-19 cell atlas (collection of annotated sc datasets from various human organs) are excellent resources for profiling target genes involved in human diseases and disorders ranging from oncology, auto-immunity, as well as infectious diseases like COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus. SARS-CoV-2 infections have led to a worldwide pandemic with massive loss of lives, infections exceeding 7 million cases. The virus uses ACE2 and TMPRSS2 as key viral entry associated proteins expressed in human cells for infections. Evaluating the expression profile of key genes in large single-cell datasets can facilitate testing for diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccine targets, as the world struggles to cope with the on-going spread of COVID-19 infections. Main body: In this manuscript we describe REVEAL: SingleCell, which enables storage, retrieval, and rapid query of single-cell datasets inclusive of millions of cells. The array native database described here enables selecting and analyzing cells across multiple studies. Cells can be selected using individual metadata tags, more complex hierarchical ontology filtering, and gene expression threshold ranges, including co-expression of multiple genes. The tags on selected cells can be further evaluated for testing biological hypotheses. One such example includes identifying the most prevalent cell type annotation tag on returned cells. We used REVEAL: SingleCell to evaluate the expression of key SARS-CoV-2 entry associated genes, and queried the current database (2.2 Million cells, 32 projects) to obtain the results in < 60 s. We highlighted cells expressing COVID-19 associated genes are expressed on multiple tissue types, thus in part explains the multi-organ involvement in infected patients observed worldwide during the on-going COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion: In this paper, we introduce the REVEAL: SingleCell database that addresses immediate needs for SARS-CoV-2 research and has the potential to be used more broadly for many precision medicine applications. We used the REVEAL: SingleCell database as a reference to ask questions relevant to drug development and precision medicine regarding cell type and co-expression for genes that encode proteins necessary for SARS-CoV-2 to enter and reproduce in cells. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) have been identified as being increasingly susceptible to Coronavirus disease (COVID-19), with policies enacted to test, isolate, increase hygiene practices and prioritise vaccines among this population. Here, we conduct a scoping review of the current evidence-base pertaining to the prevalence and presentation of COVID-19 in PEH, COVID-vaccine hesitancy rates and government interventions enacted within the first year of the pandemic for PEH. Materials and methods: A systematic search was conducted on Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase and MedRxiv databases for studies reporting primary data on COVID-19 prevalence and clinical characteristics in PEH, vaccine uptake for PEH and policies enacted targeting PEH. Study qualities were assessed with The National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute's set of Study Quality. Results: Eighty-three studies were included in our final analysis. The overall prevalence of symptomatic COVID-19 infection in PEH is estimated at 35%. The most common symptoms found were cough and shortness of breath, followed by fever. Concerns regarding vaccine hesitancy amongst PEH related to thoroughness of COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, side effects and mistrust of the government. The main strategies implemented by governments were mass testing, adaption of healthcare service provision, provision of alternative housing, encouraging personal hygiene (hand sanitation and mask wearing), and inter-organisational communication. Discussion: In our meta-analysis, 35% of PEH with a COVID-19 infection presented symptomatically; the low prevalence of symptomatic COVID-19 infection suggests widespread testing following outbreaks would be beneficial for this group of individuals. Temporary recuperation units and measures for housing stability in the pandemic, namely provision of alternative housing and stopping evictions, were found to be highly effective. High rates of vaccine hesitancy means that education and encouragement towards vaccination would be beneficial for this vulnerable population, where comorbidities are common. Finally increased focus in research should be placed on the mental health burden of COVID-19 and the pandemic on PEH moving forwards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, data projections indicated an increase in cancer mortality for the following years due to the overload of health services and the replacement of health priorities. The first studies published with data from mortality records have not confirmed these projections. However, cancer mortality is not an outcome that occurs immediately, and analyses with more extended follow-up periods are necessary. This study aims to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mortality from all types and the five most common types of cancer in Brazil and investigate the relationship between the density of hospital beds and mortality from COVID-19 in cancer patients in Brazil's Intermediate Geographic Regions (RGIs). Methods: The Brazilian Mortality Information System provided data on the deaths from trachea, bronchus, and lung, colorectal, stomach, female breast, and prostate cancer and all types of cancer, and from COVID-19 in individuals who had cancer as a contributing cause of death. Predicted rates for 2020–2022 were compared with the observed ones, through a rate ratio (RR). An association analysis, through multivariate linear regression, was carried out between mortality from COVID-19 in cancer patients, the rate of hospital beds per 100,000 inhabitants, and the Human Development Index of the 133 RGIs of Brazil. Results: In 2020, 2021, and 2022, mortality from all cancers in Brazil was lower than expected, with an RR of 0.95, 0.94, and 0.95, respectively, between the observed and predicted rates. Stomach cancer showed the largest difference between observed and expected rates: RR = 0.89 in 2020 and 2021; RR = 0.88 in 2022. Mortality from COVID-19 in cancer patients, which reached its peak in 2021 (6.0/100,000), was negatively associated with the density of hospital beds in the public health system. Conclusions: The lower-than-expected cancer mortality during 2020–2022 seems to be partly explained by mortality from COVID-19 in cancer patients, which was probably underestimated in Brazil. The findings suggested a protective role of the availability of hospital care concerning deaths due to COVID-19 in this population. More extensive follow-up is needed to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: New York City (NYC) was the first COVID-19 epicenter in the United States and home to one of the country's largest contact tracing programs, NYC Test & Trace (T2). Understanding points of attrition along the stages of program implementation and follow-up can inform contact tracing efforts for future epidemics or pandemics. The objective of this study was to evaluate the completeness and timeliness of T2 case and contact notification and monitoring using a "cascade of care" approach. Methods: This cross-sectional study included all SARS-CoV-2 cases and contacts reported to T2 from May 31, 2020 to January 1, 2022. Attrition along the "cascade of care" was defined as: (1) attempted, (2) reached, (3) completed intake (main outcome), (4) eligible for monitoring, and (5) successfully monitored. Timeliness was assessed: (1) by median days from a case's date of testing until their positive result was reported to T2, (2) from result until the case was notified by T2, and (3) from a case report of a contact until notification of the contact. Results: A total of 1.45 million cases and 1.38 million contacts were reported to T2 during this period. For cases, attrition occurred evenly across the first three cascade steps (~-12%) and did not change substantially until the Omicron wave in December 2021. During the Omicron wave, the proportion of cases attempted dropped precipitously. For contacts, the largest attrition occurred between attempting and reaching (-27%), and attrition rose with each COVID-19 wave as contact volumes increased. Attempts to reach contacts discontinued entirely during the Omicron wave. Overall, 67% of cases and 49% of contacts completed intake interviews (79% and 57% prior to Omicron). T2 was timely, with a median of 1 day to receive lab results, 2 days to notify cases, and < 1 day to notify contacts. Conclusions: T2 provided a large volume of NYC residents with timely notification and monitoring. Engagement in the program was lower for contacts than cases, with the largest gap coming from inability to reach individuals during call attempts. To strengthen future test-and-trace efforts, strategies are needed to encourage acceptance of local contact tracer outreach attempts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Due to the high transmission rate and mortality index of the current coronavirus pandemic, many settings in Africa instituted lockdowns to reduce its rate of spread and avert exponential growth rate. At the early stage, this measure seemed to heighten awareness of the virus and subsequently minimized exponential growth of cases. However, these lockdowns have had great consequences on the weak health systems and frail economy in place in many African countries. In this paper, we examine the impact of lockdown measures in these countries and provides key recommendations in dealing with present and future pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the COVID-19 pandemic, intellectual property licensing through bilateral agreements and the Medicines Patent Pool were used to facilitate access to new COVID-19 therapeutics in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The lessons learnt from the application of the model to COVID-19 could be relevant for preparedness and response to future pandemics and other health emergencies. The speed at which affordable versions of a new product are available in LMICs is key to the realization of the potential global impact of the product. When initiated early in the research and development life cycle, licensing could facilitate rapid development of generic versions of innovative products in LMICs during a pandemic. The pre-selection of qualified manufacturers, for instance building on the existing network of generic manufacturers engaged during the COVID-19 pandemic, the sharing of know-how and the quick provision of critical inputs such as reference listed drugs (RLDs) could also result in significant time saved. It is important to find a good balance between speed and quality. Necessary quality assurance terms need to be included in licensing agreements, and the potentials of the new World Health Organization Listed Authority mechanism could be explored to promote expedited regulatory reviews and timely access to safe and quality-assured products. The number, capacity, and geographical distribution of licensed companies and the transparency of licensing agreements have implications for the sufficiency of supply, affordability, and supply security. To foster competition and support supply security, licenses should be non-exclusive. There is also a need to put modalities in place to de-risk the development of critical pandemic therapeutics, particularly where generic product development is initiated before the innovator product is proven to be effective and approved. IP licensing and technology transfer can be effective tools to improve the diversification of manufacturing and need to be explored for regional manufacturing for accelerated access at scale in in LMICs and supply security in future pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Our previous work synthesized published studies on well-being interventions during COVID-19. As we move into a post-COVID-19 pandemic period there is a need to comprehensively review published strategies, approaches, and interventions to improve child and youth well-being beyond deleterious impacts experienced during COVID-19. Methods: Seven databases were searched from inception to January 2023. Studies were included if they: (1) presented original data on an approach (i.e., approach applied) or (2) provided recommendations to inform development of a future approach (i.e., approach suggested), (3) targeted to mitigate negative impacts of COVID-19 on child and youth (≤18 year) well-being, and (4) published on or after December 2019. Results: 39 studies (n = 4/39, 10.3% randomized controlled trials) from 2021 to 2023 were included. Twenty-two studies applied an approach (n = 22/39, 56.4%) whereas seventeen studies (n = 17/39, 43.6%) suggested an approach; youth aged 13–18 year (n = 27/39, 69.2%) were most frequently studied. Approach applied records most frequently adopted an experimental design (n = 11/22, 50.0%), whereas approach suggested records most frequently adopted a cross-sectional design (n = 13/22, 59.1%). The most frequently reported outcomes related to good health and optimum nutrition (n = 28/39, 71.8%), followed by connectedness (n = 22/39, 56.4%), learning, competence, education, skills, and employability (n = 18/39, 46.1%), and agency and resilience (n = 16/39, 41.0%). Conclusions: The rapid onset and unpredictability of COVID-19 precluded meaningful engagement of children and youth in strategy development despite widespread recognition that early engagement can enhance usefulness and acceptability of interventions. Published or recommended strategies were most frequently targeted to improve connectedness, belonging, and socialization among children and youth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The disproportionate effect of COVID-19 on long term care facility (LTCF) residents has highlighted the need for clear, consistent guidance on the management of pandemics in such settings. As research exploring the experiences of LTCFs during the pandemic and the implications of mass hospital discharge, restricting staff movement, and limiting visitation from relatives are emerging, an in-depth review of policies, guidance and recommendations issued during this time could facilitate wider understanding in this area. Aims: To identify policies, guidance, and recommendations related to LTCF staff and residents, in England issued by the government during the COVID-19 pandemic, developing a timeline of key events and synthesizing the policy aims, recommendations, implementation and intended outcomes. Method: A scoping review of publicly available policy documents, guidance, and recommendations related to COVID-19 in LTCFs in England, identified using systematic searches of UK government websites. The main aims, recommendations, implementation and intended outcomes reported in included documents were extracted. Data was analysed using thematic synthesis following a three-stage approach: coding the text, grouping codes into descriptive themes, and development of analytical themes. Results: Thirty-three key policy documents were included in the review. Six areas of recommendations were identified: infection prevention and control, hospital discharge, testing and vaccination, staffing, visitation and continuing routine care. Seven areas of implementation were identified: funding, collaborative working, monitoring and data collection, reducing workload, decision making and leadership, training and technology, and communication. Discussion: LTCFs remain complex settings, and it is imperative that lessons are learned from the experiences during COVID-19 to ensure that future pandemics are managed appropriately. This review has synthesized the policies issued during this time, however, the extent to which such guidance was communicated to LTCFs, and subsequently implemented, in addition to being effective, requires further research. In particular, understanding the secondary effects of such policies and how they can be introduced within the existing challenges inherent to adult social care, need addressing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rapid data sharing can maximize the utility of data. In epidemics and pandemics like Zika, Ebola, and COVID-19, the case for such practices seems especially urgent and warranted. Yet rapidly sharing data widely has previously generated significant concerns related to equity. The continued lack of understanding and guidance on equitable data sharing raises the following questions: Should data sharing in epidemics and pandemics primarily advance utility, or should it advance equity as well? If so, what norms comprise equitable data sharing in epidemics and pandemics? Do these norms address the equity-related concerns raised by researchers, data providers, and other stakeholders? What tensions must be balanced between equity and other values?Methods: To explore these questions, we undertook a systematic scoping review of the literature on data sharing in epidemics and pandemics and thematically analyzed identified literature for its discussion of ethical values, norms, concerns, and tensions, with a particular (but not exclusive) emphasis on equity. We wanted to both understand how equity in data sharing is being conceptualized and draw out other important values and norms for data sharing in epidemics and pandemics.Results: We found that values of utility, equity, solidarity, and reciprocity were described, and we report their associated norms, including researcher recognition; rapid, real-time sharing; capacity development; and fair benefits to data generators, data providers, and source countries. The value of utility and its associated norms were discussed substantially more than others. Tensions between utility norms (e.g., rapid, real-time sharing) and equity norms (e.g., researcher recognition, equitable access) were raised.Conclusions: This study found support for equity being advanced by data sharing in epidemics and pandemics. However, norms for equitable data sharing in epidemics and pandemics require further development, particularly in relation to power sharing and participatory approaches prioritizing inclusion. Addressing structural inequities in the wider global health landscape is also needed to achieve equitable data sharing in epidemics and pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Food security is a major element for the sustainability, stability and development of a country. However, despite fundamental efforts in fighting poverty, Afghanistan continues to struggle with food insecurity with a large proportion of its population living below the poverty line. With extreme climates, protracted conflict, and now COVID-19, food insecurity has become rampant and is on the rise in the country. Efforts have been reinforced to mitigate this issue, but a spate of obstacles which seems not to come to an end, has contributed to the deterioration of the situation. With the collaboration and efforts of international organizations, there remains a glimmer of hope to potentially reduce the gravity of the food insecurity in the country. This paper aims to highlight the efforts of Afghanistan in alleviating food insecurity with a focus on the impact of COVID-19 on this issue. It also presents recommendations that may help ameliorate the country's food security status during and after the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Unequal and inequitable access to Covid-19 vaccines in low- and middle-income countries (L&MICs) was a major political, ethical and public health failure in the pandemic. However, vaccine developers' practices were not monolithic, but rather, took diverse approaches to supplying different countries, with important implications for global access. Results: Using data on R&D investments, regulatory approvals, manufacturing and purchase agreements, and vaccine deliveries, we identified six distinct innovation models that apply across the 14 COVID-19 vaccines with more international presence from 2020–2022. "Western Early Arrivers" Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna supplied the largest volumes quickly and prioritized high-income countries (HICs) from registration to vaccine delivery. "Western Latecomers" Janssen and Novavax supplied intermediate volumes later, also prioritizing HICs but with a greater proportion to L&MICs. "Major Chinese Developers" Sinopharm and Sinovac supplied intermediate volumes early, primarily to middle-income countries (MICs). "Russian Developer" Gamaleya completed development early but ultimately supplied small volumes, primarily to middle-income countries (MICs). "Cosmopolitan Developer" Oxford/AstraZeneca supplied large volumes early to HICs and MICs at the lowest prices. Finally, "Small MIC Developers" CanSino, Bharat Biotech, Medigen, Finlay Institute and the Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (CGEB), exported relatively small volumes to a few MICs. Low-income countries (LICs) were not targeted by any developer, and received far fewer doses, later, than any other income group. Almost all developers received public funding and other forms of support, but we found little evidence that such support was leveraged to expand global access. Conclusions: Each of the six innovation models has different implications for which countries get access to which vaccines, how quickly, and at which prices. Each offers different strengths and weaknesses for achieving equitable access. Our findings also suggest that Western firms had the greatest capacity to develop and deliver vaccines quickly during the pandemic, but such capacity is rapidly becoming more globally distributed with MICs playing a significant role, especially in supplying other MICs. Given the critical role of public support in enabling pandemic vaccine development and supply, governments have both the capacity and responsibility to craft international rules that will make responses to future pandemics more equitable and effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Being exposed to crises during pregnancy can affect maternal health through stress exposure, which can in return impact neonatal health. We investigated temporal trends in neonatal outcomes in Switzerland between 2007 and 2022 and their variations depending on exposure to the economic crisis of 2008, the flu pandemic of 2009, heatwaves (2015 and 2018) and the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Using individual cross-sectional data encompassing all births occurring in Switzerland at the monthly level (2007-2022), we analysed changes in birth weight and in the rates of preterm birth (PTB) and stillbirth through time with generalized additive models. We assessed whether the intensity or length of crisis exposure was associated with variations in these outcomes. Furthermore, we explored effects of exposure depending on trimesters of pregnancy. Results: Over 1.2 million singleton births were included in our analyses. While birth weight and the rate of stillbirth have remained stable since 2007, the rate of PTB has declined by one percentage point. Exposure to the crises led to different results, but effect sizes were overall small. Exposure to COVID-19, irrespective of the pregnancy trimester, was associated with a higher birth weight (+12 grams [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.5 to 17.9 grams]). Being exposed to COVID-19 during the last trimester was associated with an increased risk of stillbirth (odds ratio 1.24 [95%CI 1.02 to 1.50]). Exposure to the 2008 economic crisis during pregnancy was not associated with any changes in neonatal health outcomes, while heatwave effect was difficult to interpret. Conclusion: Overall, maternal and neonatal health demonstrated resilience to the economic crisis and to the COVID-19 pandemic in a high-income country like Switzerland. However, the effect of exposure to the COVID-19 pandemic is dual, and the negative impact of maternal infection on pregnancy is well-documented. Stress exposure and economic constraint may also have had adverse effects among the most vulnerable subgroups of Switzerland. To investigate better the impact of heatwave exposure on neonatal health, weekly or daily-level data is needed, instead of monthly-level data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a considerable threat to the economics of patients, health systems, and society. Objectives: This meta-analysis aims to quantitatively assess the global economic burden of COVID-19. Methods: A comprehensive search was performed in the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify studies examining the economic impact of COVID-19. The selected studies were classified into two categories based on the cost-of-illness (COI) study approach: top-down and bottom-up studies. The results of top-down COI studies were presented by calculating the average costs as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) and health expenditures. Conversely, the findings of bottom-up studies were analyzed through meta-analysis using the standardized mean difference. Results: The implemented search strategy yielded 3271 records, of which 27 studies met the inclusion criteria, consisting of 7 top-down and 20 bottom-up studies. The included studies were conducted in various countries, including the USA (5), China (5), Spain (2), Brazil (2), South Korea (2), India (2), and one study each in Italy, South Africa, the Philippines, Greece, Iran, Kenya, Nigeria, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The results of the top-down studies indicated that indirect costs represent 10.53% of GDP, while the total estimated cost accounts for 85.91% of healthcare expenditures and 9.13% of GDP. In contrast, the bottom-up studies revealed that the average direct medical costs ranged from US $1264 to US $79,315. The meta-analysis demonstrated that the medical costs for COVID-19 patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) were approximately twice as high as those for patients in general wards, with a range from 0.05 to 3.48 times higher. Conclusions: Our study indicates that the COVID-19 pandemic has imposed a significant economic burden worldwide, with varying degrees of impact across countries. The findings of our study, along with those of other research, underscore the vital role of economic consequences in the post-COVID-19 era for communities and families. Therefore, policymakers and health administrators should prioritize economic programs and accord them heightened attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]