Search

The recent COVID-19 pandemic stimulated unprecedented linkage of datasets worldwide, and while injury is endemic rather than pandemic, there is much to be learned by the injury prevention community from the data science approaches taken to respond to the pandemic to support research into the primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of injuries. The use of routinely collected data to produce real-world evidence, as an alternative to clinical trials, has been gaining in popularity as the availability and quality of digital health platforms grow and the linkage landscape, and the analytics required to make best use of linked and unstructured data, is rapidly evolving. Capitalising on existing data sources, innovative linkage and advanced analytic approaches provides the opportunity to undertake novel injury prevention research and generate new knowledge, while avoiding data waste and additional burden to participants. We provide a tangible, but not exhaustive, list of examples showing the breadth and value of data linkage, along with the emerging capabilities of natural language processing techniques to enhance injury research. To optimise data science approaches to injury prevention, injury researchers in this area need to share methods, code, models and tools to improve consistence and efficiencies in this field. Increased collaboration between injury prevention researchers and data scientists working on population data linkage systems has much to offer this field of research., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing implementation of control measures caused widespread societal disruption. These disruptions may also have affected community transmission and seasonal circulation patterns of endemic respiratory viruses., Objective: We aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19-related disruption on influenza-related emergency hospital admissions and deaths in Wales in the first 2 years of the pandemic., Methods: A descriptive analysis of influenza activity was conducted using anonymized pathology, hospitalization, and mortality data from the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank in Wales. The annual incidence of emergency hospitalizations and deaths with influenza-specific diagnosis codes between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2021, was estimated. Case definitions of emergency hospitalization and death required laboratory confirmation with a polymerase chain reaction test. Trends of admissions and deaths were analyzed monthly and yearly. We conducted 2 sensitivity analyses by extending case definitions to include acute respiratory illnesses with a positive influenza test and by limiting admissions to those with influenza as the primary diagnosis. We also examined yearly influenza testing trends to understand changes in testing behavior during the pandemic., Results: We studied a population of 3,235,883 Welsh residents in 2020 with a median age of 42.5 (IQR 22.9-61.0) years. Influenza testing in Wales increased notably in the last 2 months of 2020, and particularly in 2021 to 39,720 per 100,000 people, compared to the prepandemic levels (1343 in 2019). The percentage of influenza admissions matched to an influenza polymerase chain reaction test increased from 74.8% (1890/2526) in 2019 to 85.2% (98/115) in 2021. However, admissions with a positive test per 100,000 population decreased from 17.0 in 2019 to 2.7 and 0.6 in 2020 and 2021, respectively. Similarly, deaths due to influenza with a positive influenza test per 100,000 population decreased from 0.4 in 2019 to 0.0 in 2020 and 2021. Sensitivity analyses showed similar patterns of decreasing influenza admissions and deaths in the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic., Conclusions: Nonpharmaceutical interventions to control COVID-19 were associated with a substantial reduction in the transmission of the influenza virus, with associated substantial reductions in hospital cases and deaths observed. Beyond the pandemic context, consideration should be given to the role of nonpharmaceutical community-driven interventions to reduce the burden of influenza., (© Mohammad Alsallakh, Davies Adeloye, Eleftheria Vasileiou, Shanya Sivakumaran, Ashley Akbari, Ronan A Lyons, Chris Robertson, Igor Rudan, Gwyneth A Davies, Aziz Sheikh. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (https://publichealth.jmir.org).)

Background: The indirect impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on healthcare services was studied by assessing changes in the trend of the time to first treatment for women 18 or older who were diagnosed and treated for breast cancer between 2017 and 2021., Methods: An observational retrospective longitudinal study based on aggregated data from four European Union (EU) countries/regions investigating the time it took to receive breast cancer treatment. We compiled outputs from a federated analysis to detect structural breakpoints, confirming the empirical breakpoints by differences between the trends observed and forecasted after March 2020. Finally, we built several segmented regressions to explore the association of contextual factors with the observed changes in treatment delays., Results: We observed empirical structural breakpoints on the monthly median time to surgery trend in Aragon (ranging from 9.20 to 17.38 days), Marche (from 37.17 to 42.04 days) and Wales (from 28.67 to 35.08 days). On the contrary, no empirical structural breakpoints were observed in Belgium (ranging from 21.25 to 23.95 days) after the pandemic's beginning. Furthermore, we confirmed statistically significant differences between the observed trend and the forecasts for Aragon and Wales. Finally, we found the interaction between the region and the pandemic's start (before/after March 2020) significantly associated with the trend of delayed breast cancer treatment at the population level., Conclusions: Although they were not clinically relevant, only Aragon and Wales showed significant differences with expected delays after March 2020. However, experiences differed between countries/regions, pointing to structural factors other than the pandemic., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association.)

Background: Resilience of national health systems in Europe remains a major concern in times of multiple crises and as more evidence is emerging relating to the indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on health care utilization (HCU), resulting from de-prioritization of regular, non-pandemic healthcare services. Most extant studies focus on regional, disease specific or early pandemic HCU creating difficulties in comparing across multiple countries. We provide a comparatively broad definition of HCU across multiple countries, with potential to expand across regions and timeframes., Methods: Using a cross-country federated research infrastructure (FRI), we examined HCU for acute cardiovascular events, elective surgeries and serious trauma. Aggregated data were used in forecast modelling to identify changes from predicted European age-standardized counts via fitted regressions (2017-19), compared against post-pandemic data., Results: We found that elective surgeries were most affected, universally falling below predicted levels in 2020. For cardiovascular HCU, we found lower-than-expected cases in every region for heart attacks and displayed large sex differences. Serious trauma was the least impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic., Conclusion: The strength of this study comes from the use of the European Population Health Information Research Infrastructure's (PHIRI) FRI, allowing for rapid analysis of regional differences to assess indirect impacts of events such as pandemics. There are marked differences in the capacity of services to return to normal in terms of elective surgery; additionally, we found considerable differences between men and women which requires further research on potential sex or gender patterns of HCU during crises., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association.)

Objective: People with epilepsy (PWE) may be at an increased risk of severe COVID-19. It is important to characterize this risk to inform PWE and for future health and care planning. We assessed whether PWE were at higher risk of being hospitalized with, or dying from, COVID-19., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study using linked, population-scale, anonymized electronic health records from the SAIL (Secure Anonymised Information Linkage) databank. This includes hospital admission and demographic data for the complete Welsh population (3.1 million) and primary care records for 86% of the population. We identified 27 279 PWE living in Wales during the study period (March 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021). Controls were identified using exact 5:1 matching (sex, age, and socioeconomic status). We defined COVID-19 deaths as having International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes for COVID-19 on death certificates or occurring within 28 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. COVID-19 hospitalizations were defined as having a COVID-19 ICD-10 code for the reason for admission or occurring within 28 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. We recorded COVID-19 vaccinations and comorbidities known to increase the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and death. We used Cox proportional hazard models to calculate hazard ratios., Results: There were 158 (.58%) COVID-19 deaths and 933 (3.4%) COVID-19 hospitalizations in PWE, and 370 (.27%) deaths and 1871 (1.4%) hospitalizations in controls. Hazard ratios for COVID-19 death and hospitalization in PWE compared to controls were 2.15 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.78-2.59) and 2.15 (95% CI = 1.94-2.37), respectively. Adjusted hazard ratios (adjusted for comorbidities) for death and hospitalization were 1.32 (95% CI = 1.08-1.62) and 1.60 (95% CI = 1.44-1.78)., Significance: PWE are at increased risk of being hospitalized with, and dying from, COVID-19 when compared to age-, sex-, and deprivation-matched controls, even when adjusting for comorbidities. This may have implications for prioritizing future COVID-19 treatments and vaccinations for PWE., (© 2024 The Authors. Epilepsia published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy.)

Objective: This study was undertaken to characterize changes in health care utilization and mortality for people with epilepsy (PWE) during the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: We performed a retrospective study using linked, individual-level, population-scale anonymized health data from the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage databank. We identified PWE living in Wales during the study "pandemic period" (January 1, 2020-June 30, 2021) and during a "prepandemic" period (January 1, 2016-December 31, 2019). We compared prepandemic health care utilization, status epilepticus, and mortality rates with corresponding pandemic rates for PWE and people without epilepsy (PWOE). We performed subgroup analyses on children (<18 years old), older people (>65 years old), those with intellectual disability, and those living in the most deprived areas. We used Poisson models to calculate adjusted rate ratios (RRs)., Results: We identified 27 279 PWE who had significantly higher rates of hospital (50.3 visits/1000 patient months), emergency department (55.7), and outpatient attendance (172.4) when compared to PWOE (corresponding figures: 25.7, 25.2, and 87.0) in the prepandemic period. Hospital and epilepsy-related hospital admissions, and emergency department and outpatient attendances all reduced significantly for PWE (and all subgroups) during the pandemic period. RRs [95% confidence intervals (CIs)] for pandemic versus prepandemic periods were .70 [.69-.72], .77 [.73-.81], .78 [.77-.79], and .80 [.79-.81]. The corresponding rates also reduced for PWOE. New epilepsy diagnosis rates decreased during the pandemic compared with the prepandemic period (2.3/100 000/month cf. 3.1/100 000/month, RR = .73, 95% CI = .68-.78). Both all-cause deaths and deaths with epilepsy recorded on the death certificate increased for PWE during the pandemic (RR = 1.07, 95% CI = .997-1.145 and RR = 2.44, 95% CI = 2.12-2.81). When removing COVID deaths, RRs were .88 (95% CI = .81-.95) and 1.29 (95% CI = 1.08-1.53). Status epilepticus rates did not change significantly during the pandemic (RR = .95, 95% CI = .78-1.15)., Significance: All-cause non-COVID deaths did not increase but non-COVID deaths associated with epilepsy did increase for PWE during the COVID-19 pandemic. The longer term effects of the decrease in new epilepsy diagnoses and health care utilization and increase in deaths associated with epilepsy need further research., (© 2024 The Authors. Epilepsia published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy.)

SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and young people (CYP) can lead to life-threatening COVID-19, transmission within households and schools, and the development of long COVID. Using linked health and administrative data, we investigated vaccine uptake among 3,433,483 CYP aged 5-17 years across all UK nations between 4th August 2021 and 31st May 2022. We constructed national cohorts and undertook multi-state modelling and meta-analysis to identify associations between demographic variables and vaccine uptake. We found that uptake of the first COVID-19 vaccine among CYP was low across all four nations compared to other age groups and diminished with subsequent doses. Age and vaccination status of adults living in the same household were identified as important risk factors associated with vaccine uptake in CYP. For example, 5-11 year-olds were less likely to receive their first vaccine compared to 16-17 year-olds (adjusted Hazard Ratio [aHR]: 0.10 (95%CI: 0.06-0.19)), and CYP in unvaccinated households were less likely to receive their first vaccine compared to CYP in partially vaccinated households (aHR: 0.19, 95%CI 0.13-0.29)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Studies on COVID-19 pandemic-associated changes in mortality following self-harm remain scarce and inconclusive. Background: To compare mortality risks in individuals who had self-harmed to those for individuals who had not, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (Waves 1 and 2) in Wales, the United Kingdom, using population-based routinely collected data. Aims: To compare mortality risks in individuals who had self-harmed to those for individuals who had not, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (Waves 1 and 2) in Wales, the United Kingdom, using population-based routinely collected data. Method: We linked whole population health data to all-cause mortality following an episode of self-harm between April 2016 and March 2021. Propensity score matching, Cox regression, and difference-in-differences were applied to compute changes in excess mortality (as ratios of hazard ratios, RHRs) before and during the pandemic for individuals who self-harmed. Results: The difference in mortality for individuals who self-harmed compared to those who did not widened during Wave 1 (RHR = 2.03, 95% CI: 1.04-4.03) and Wave 2 (RHR = 2.19, 95% CI: 1.12-4.29) from before the pandemic. Stratification by sex and age group produced no significant subgroup differences although risk for younger than 65 years group were higher. Limitations: Limitations include small sample size and incomplete data on cause-specific deaths during the pandemic. Conclusion: Our results underscore continuous monitoring of mortality of individuals who self-harm and effective interventions to address any increases in mortality.

Objectives: We investigated SARS-CoV-2 infection trends, risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination uptake among school staff, students and their household members in Wales, UK., Design: Seven-day average of SARS-CoV-2 infections and polymerase chain reaction tests per 1000 people daily, cumulative incidence of COVID-19 vaccination uptake and multi-level Poisson models with time-varying covariates., Setting: National electronic cohort between September 2020 and May 2022 when several variants were predominant in the UK (Alpha, Delta and Omicron)., Participants: School students aged 4 to 10/11 years (primary school and younger middle school, n  = 238,163), and 11 to 15/16 years (secondary school and older middle school, n  = 182,775), school staff in Wales ( n  = 47,963) and the household members of students and staff ( n  = 697,659)., Main Outcome Measures: SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination uptake., Results: School students had a sustained period of high infection rates compared with household members after August 2021. Primary schedule vaccination uptake was highest among staff (96.3%) but lower for household members (72.2%), secondary and older middle school students (59.8%), and primary and younger middle school students (3.3%). Multi-level Poisson models showed that vaccination was associated with a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The Delta variant posed a greater infection risk for students than the Alpha variant. However, Omicron was a larger risk for staff and household members., Conclusions: Public health bodies should be informed of the protection COVID-19 vaccines afford, with more research being required for younger populations. Furthermore, schools require additional support in managing new, highly transmissible variants. Further research should examine the mechanisms between child deprivation and SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Vaccination has proven to be effective at preventing severe outcomes of COVID-19 infection, and uptake in the population has been high in Wales. However, there is a risk that high-level vaccination coverage statistics may mask hidden inequalities in under-served populations, many of whom may be at increased risk of severe outcomes of COVID-19 infection. The study population included 1,436,229 individuals aged 18 years and over, alive and residence in Wales as at 31st July 2022, and excluded immunosuppressed or care home residents. We compared people who had received one or more vaccinations to those with no vaccination using linked data from nine datasets within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) databank. Multivariable analysis was undertaken to determine the impact of a range of sociodemographic characteristics on vaccination uptake, including ethnicity, country of birth, severe mental illness, homelessness and substance use. We found that overall uptake of first dose of COVID-19 vaccination was high in Wales (92.1 %), with the highest among those aged 80 years and over and females. Those aged under 40 years, household composition (aOR 0.38 95 %CI 0.35-0.41 for 10+ size household compared to two adult household) and being born outside the UK (aOR 0.44 95 %CI 0.43-0.46) had the strongest negative associations with vaccination uptake. This was followed by a history of substance misuse (aOR 0.45 95 %CI 0.44-0.46). Despite high-level population coverage in Wales, significant inequalities remain across several underserved groups. Factors associated with vaccination uptake should not be considered in isolation, to avoid drawing incorrect conclusions. Ensuring equitable access to vaccination is essential to protecting under-served groups from COVID-19 and further work needs to be done to address these gaps in coverage, with focus on tailored vaccination pathways and advocacy, using trusted partners and communities., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: This work was supported by the Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre, funded by Health and Care Research Wales. This work was supported by the Con-COV team funded by the Medical Research Council (grant number: MR/V028367/1. This work was supported by Health Data Research UK, which receives its funding from HDR UK Ltd (HDR-9006) funded by the UK Medical Research Council, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council, Department of Health and Social Care (England), Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates, Health and Social Care Research and Development Division (Welsh Government), Public Health Agency (Northern Ireland), British Heart Foundation (BHF) and the Wellcome Trust. This work was supported by the ADR Wales programme of work. The ADR Wales programme of work is aligned to the priority themes as identified in the Welsh Government's national strategy: Prosperity for All. ADR Wales brings together data science experts at Swansea University Medical School, staff from the Wales Institute of Social and Economic Research, Data and Methods (WISERD) at Cardiff University and specialist teams within the Welsh Government to develop new evidence which supports Prosperity for All by using the SAIL Databank at Swansea University, to link and analyse anonymised data. ADR Wales is part of the Economic and Social Research Council (part of UK Research and Innovation) funded ADR UK (grant (ES/W012227/1). MP, AA, SC and RL sit on the Wales COVID-19 Vaccination Board (CVB) and/or subgroups of the CVB., (Crown Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The EVITE Immunity study investigated the effects of shielding Clinically Extremely Vulnerable (CEV) people during the COVID-19 pandemic on health outcomes and healthcare costs in Wales, United Kingdom, to help prepare for future pandemics. Shielding was intended to protect those at highest risk of serious harm from COVID-19. We report the cost of implementing shielding in Wales., Methods: The number of people shielding was extracted from the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank. Resources supporting shielding between March and June 2020 were mapped using published reports, web pages, freedom of information requests to Welsh Government and personal communications (e.g. with the office of the Chief Medical Officer for Wales)., Results: At the beginning of shielding, 117,415 people were on the shielding list. The total additional cost to support those advised to stay home during the initial 14 weeks of the pandemic was £13,307,654 (£113 per person shielded). This included the new resources required to compile the shielding list, inform CEV people of the shielding intervention and provide medicine and food deliveries. The list was adjusted weekly over the 3-month period (130,000 people identified by June 2020). Therefore the cost per person shielded lies between £102 and £113 per person., Conclusion: This is the first evaluation of the cost of the measures put in place to support those identified to shield in Wales. However, no data on opportunity cost was available. The true costs of shielding including its budget impact and opportunity costs need to be investigated to decide whether shielding is a worthwhile policy for future health emergencies., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Public health measures instituted at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK in 2020 had profound effects on the cancer patient pathway. We hypothesise that this may have affected analgesic prescriptions for cancer patients in primary care., Methods: A whole-nation retrospective, observational study of opioid and antineuropathic analgesics prescribed in primary care for two cohorts of cancer patients in Wales, using linked anonymised data to evaluate the impact of the pandemic and variation between different demographic backgrounds., Results: We found a significant increase in strong opioid prescriptions during the pandemic for patients within their first 12 months of diagnosis with a common cancer (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.15, 95% CI: 1.12-1.18, p < 0.001 for strong opioids) and significant increases in strong opioid and antineuropathic prescriptions for patients in the last 3 months prior to a cancer-related death (IRR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.04-1.07, p < 0.001 for strong opioids; IRR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.08-1.14, p < 0.001 for antineuropathics). A spike in opioid prescriptions for patients diagnosed in Q2 2020 and those who died in Q2 2020 was observed and interpreted as stockpiling. More analgesics were prescribed in more deprived quintiles. This differential was less pronounced in patients towards the end of life, which we attribute to closer professional supervision., Conclusions: We demonstrate significant changes to community analgesic prescriptions for cancer patients related to the UK pandemic and illustrate prescription patterns linked to patients' demographic background., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: The imposition of restrictions on social mixing early in the COVID-19 pandemic was followed by a reduction in asthma exacerbations in multiple settings internationally. Temporal trends in social mixing, incident acute respiratory infections (ARI) and asthma exacerbations following relaxation of COVID-19 restrictions have not yet been described., Methods: We conducted a population-based longitudinal study in 2312 UK adults with asthma between November 2020 and April 2022. Details of face covering use, social mixing, incident ARI and severe asthma exacerbations were collected via monthly online questionnaires. Temporal changes in these parameters were visualised using Poisson generalised additive models. Multilevel logistic regression was used to test for associations between incident ARI and risk of asthma exacerbations, adjusting for potential confounders., Results: Relaxation of COVID-19 restrictions from April 2021 coincided with reduced face covering use (p<0.001), increased frequency of indoor visits to public places and other households (p<0.001) and rising incidence of COVID-19 (p<0.001), non-COVID-19 ARI (p<0.001) and severe asthma exacerbations (p=0.007). Incident non-COVID-19 ARI associated independently with increased risk of asthma exacerbation (adjusted OR 5.75, 95% CI 4.75 to 6.97) as did incident COVID-19, both prior to emergence of the omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 (5.89, 3.45 to 10.04) and subsequently (5.69, 3.89 to 8.31)., Conclusions: Relaxation of COVID-19 restrictions coincided with decreased face covering use, increased social mixing and a rebound in ARI and asthma exacerbations. Associations between incident ARI and risk of severe asthma exacerbation were similar for non-COVID-19 ARI and COVID-19, both before and after emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant., Study Registration Number: NCT04330599., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RAL declares membership of the Welsh Government COVID19 Technical Advisory Group. AS is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group and its Standing Committee on Pandemics. He is also a member of the UK Government’s NERVTAG’s Risk Stratification Subgroup. All other authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic there was an urgent need to identify individuals at highest risk of severe outcomes, such as hospitalisation and death following infection. The QCOVID risk prediction algorithms emerged as key tools in facilitating this which were further developed during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic to identify groups of people at highest risk of severe COVID-19 related outcomes following one or two doses of vaccine., Objectives: To externally validate the QCOVID3 algorithm based on primary and secondary care records for Wales, UK., Methods: We conducted an observational, prospective cohort based on electronic health care records for 1.66m vaccinated adults living in Wales on 8th December 2020, with follow-up until 15th June 2021. Follow-up started from day 14 post vaccination to allow the full effect of the vaccine., Results: The scores produced by the QCOVID3 risk algorithm showed high levels of discrimination for both COVID-19 related deaths and hospital admissions and good calibration (Harrell C statistic: ≥ 0.828)., Conclusion: This validation of the updated QCOVID3 risk algorithms in the adult vaccinated Welsh population has shown that the algorithms are valid for use in the Welsh population, and applicable on a population independent of the original study, which has not been previously reported. This study provides further evidence that the QCOVID algorithms can help inform public health risk management on the ongoing surveillance and intervention to manage COVID-19 related risks., Competing Interests: KK is Chair of the Ethnicity Subgroup of the UK Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) and Member of SAGE. AS is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group, the Scottish Government’s Standing Committee on Pandemic Preparedness, the UK Government’s New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (NERVTAG) Risk Stratification Subgroup, the Department of Health and Social Care’s COVID-19 Therapeutics Modelling Group and was a member of Astra-Zeneca’s COVID-19 Strategic Thrombocytopenia Taskforce. All AS’ roles are unfunded. JHC is a member of SAGE subgroups and chair of the NERVTAG subgroup on risk stratification and several DHSC therapeutics modelling advisory groups. RAL is a member of the Welsh Government COVID-19 Technical Advisory Group., (Copyright: © 2023 Lyons et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Introduction: The UK shielding policy intended to protect people at the highest risk of harm from COVID-19 infection. We aimed to describe intervention effects in Wales at 1 year., Methods: Retrospective comparison of linked demographic and clinical data for cohorts comprising people identified for shielding from 23 March to 21 May 2020; and the rest of the population. Health records were extracted with event dates between 23 March 2020 and 22 March 2021 for the comparator cohort and from the date of inclusion until 1 year later for the shielded cohort., Results: The shielded cohort included 117,415 people, with 3,086,385 in the comparator cohort. The largest clinical categories in the shielded cohort were severe respiratory condition (35.5%), immunosuppressive therapy (25.9%) and cancer (18.6%). People in the shielded cohort were more likely to be female, aged ≥50 years, living in relatively deprived areas, care home residents and frail. The proportion of people tested for COVID-19 was higher in the shielded cohort (odds ratio [OR] 1.616; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.597-1.637), with lower positivity rate incident rate ratios 0.716 (95% CI 0.697-0.736). The known infection rate was higher in the shielded cohort (5.9% vs 5.7%). People in the shielded cohort were more likely to die (OR 3.683; 95% CI: 3.583-3.786), have a critical care admission (OR 3.339; 95% CI: 3.111-3.583), hospital emergency admission (OR 2.883; 95% CI: 2.837-2.930), emergency department attendance (OR 1.893; 95% CI: 1.867-1.919) and common mental disorder (OR 1.762; 95% CI: 1.735-1.789)., Conclusion: Deaths and healthcare utilisation were higher amongst shielded people than the general population, as would be expected in the sicker population. Differences in testing rates, deprivation and pre-existing health are potential confounders; however, lack of clear impact on infection rates raises questions about the success of shielding and indicates that further research is required to fully evaluate this national policy intervention., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: People with epilepsy (PWE) are at increased risk of severe COVID-19. Assessing COVID-19 vaccine uptake is therefore important. We compared COVID-19 vaccination uptake for PWE in Wales with a matched control cohort., Methods: We performed a retrospective, population, cohort study using linked, anonymised, Welsh electronic health records within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank (Welsh population=3.1 million).We identified PWE in Wales between 1st March 2020 and 31st December 2021 and created a control cohort using exact 5:1 matching (sex, age and socioeconomic status). We recorded 1st, 2nd and booster COVID-19 vaccinations., Results: There were 25,404 adults with epilepsy (127,020 controls). 23,454 (92.3%) had a first vaccination, 22,826 (89.9%) a second, and 17,797 (70.1%) a booster. Comparative figures for controls were: 112,334 (87.8%), 109,057 (85.2%) and 79,980 (62.4%).PWE had higher vaccination rates in all age, sex and socioeconomic subgroups apart from booster uptake in older subgroups. Vaccination rates were higher in older subgroups, women and less deprived areas for both cohorts. People with intellectual disability and epilepsy had higher vaccination rates when compared with controls with intellectual disability., Conclusions: COVID-19 vaccination uptake for PWE in Wales was higher than that for a matched control group., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has directly and indirectly had an impact on health service provision owing to surges and sustained pressures on the system. The effects of these pressures on the management of long-term or chronic conditions are not fully understood., Aim: To explore the effects of COVID-19 on the recorded incidence of 17 long-term conditions., Design and Setting: This was an observational retrospective population data linkage study on the population of Wales using primary and secondary care data within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank., Method: Monthly rates of new diagnosis between 2000 and 2021 are presented for each long-term condition. Incidence rates post-2020 were compared with expected rates predicted using time series modelling of pre-2020 trends. The proportion of annual incidence is presented by sociodemographic factors: age, sex, social deprivation, ethnicity, frailty, and learning disability., Results: A total of 5 476 012 diagnoses from 2 257 992 individuals are included. Incidence rates from 2020 to 2021 were lower than mean expected rates across all conditions. The largest relative deficit in incidence was in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease corresponding to 343 (95% confidence interval = 230 to 456) undiagnosed patients per 100 000 population, followed by depression, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, anxiety disorders, and asthma. A GP practice of 10 000 patients might have over 400 undiagnosed long-term conditions. No notable differences between sociodemographic profiles of post- and pre-2020 incidences were observed., Conclusion: There is a potential backlog of undiagnosed patients with multiple long-term conditions. Resources are required to tackle anticipated workload as part of COVID-19 recovery, particularly in primary care., (© The Authors.)

Background: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) represents the most commonly occurring cancer worldwide within the white population. Reports predict 298 308 cases of BCC in the UK by 2025, at a cost of £265-366 million to the National Health Service (NHS). Despite the morbidity, societal and healthcare pressures brought about by BCC, routinely collected healthcare data and global registration remain limited., Objectives: To calculate the incidence of BCC in Wales between 2000 and 2018 and to establish the related healthcare utilization and estimated cost of care., Methods: The Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) databank is one of the largest and most robust health and social care data repositories in the UK. Cancer registry data were linked to routinely collected healthcare databases between 2000 and 2018. Pathological data from Swansea Bay University Health Board (SBUHB) were used for internal validation., Results: A total of 61 404 histologically proven BCCs were identified within the SAIL Databank during the study period. The European age-standardized incidence for BCC in 2018 was 224.6 per 100 000 person-years. Based on validated regional data, a 45% greater incidence was noted within SBUHB pathology vs. matched regions within SAIL between 2016 and 2018. A negative association between deprivation and incidence was noted with a higher incidence in the least socially deprived and rural dwellers. Approximately 2% travelled 25-50 miles for dermatological services compared with 37% for plastic surgery. Estimated NHS costs of surgically managed lesions for 2002-2019 equated to £119.2-164.4 million., Conclusions: Robust epidemiological data that are internationally comparable and representative are scarce for nonmelanoma skin cancer. The rising global incidence coupled with struggling healthcare systems in the post-COVID-19 recovery period serve to intensify the societal and healthcare impact. This study is the first to demonstrate the incidence of BCC in Wales and is one of a small number in the UK using internally validated large cohort datasets. Furthermore, our findings demonstrate one of the highest published incidences within the UK and Europe., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.)

Background: From September 2021, Health Care Workers (HCWs) in Wales began receiving a COVID-19 booster vaccination. This is the first dose beyond the primary vaccination schedule. Given the emergence of new variants, vaccine waning vaccine, and increasing vaccination hesitancy, there is a need to understand booster vaccine uptake and subsequent breakthrough in this high-risk population., Methods: We conducted a prospective, national-scale, observational cohort study of HCWs in Wales using anonymised, linked data from the SAIL Databank. We analysed uptake of COVID-19 booster vaccinations from September 2021 to February 2022, with comparisons against uptake of the initial primary vaccination schedule. We also analysed booster breakthrough, in the form of PCR-confirmed SARS-Cov-2 infection, comparing to the second primary dose. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate associations for vaccination uptake and breakthrough regarding staff roles, socio-demographics, household composition, and other factors., Results: We derived a cohort of 73,030 HCWs living in Wales (78% female, 60% 18-49 years old). Uptake was quickest amongst HCWs aged 60 + years old (aHR 2.54, 95%CI 2.45-2.63), compared with those aged 18-29. Asian HCWs had quicker uptake (aHR 1.18, 95%CI 1.14-1.22), whilst Black HCWs had slower uptake (aHR 0.67, 95%CI 0.61-0.74), compared to white HCWs. HCWs residing in the least deprived areas were slightly quicker to have received a booster dose (aHR 1.12, 95%CI 1.09-1.16), compared with those in the most deprived areas. Strongest associations with breakthrough infections were found for those living with children (aHR 1.52, 95%CI 1.41-1.63), compared to two-adult only households. HCWs aged 60 + years old were less likely to get breakthrough infections, compared to those aged 18-29 (aHR 0.42, 95%CI 0.38-0.47)., Conclusion: Vaccination uptake was consistently lower among black HCWs, as well as those from deprived areas. Whilst breakthrough infections were highest in households with children., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Several SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been shown to provide protection against COVID-19 hospitalization and death. However, some evidence suggests that notable waning in effectiveness against these outcomes occurs within months of vaccination. We undertook a pooled analysis across the four nations of the UK to investigate waning in vaccine effectiveness (VE) and relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) against severe COVID-19 outcomes., Methods: We carried out a target trial design for first/second doses of ChAdOx1(Oxford-AstraZeneca) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) with a composite outcome of COVID-19 hospitalization or death over the period 8 December 2020 to 30 June 2021. Exposure groups were matched by age, local authority area and propensity for vaccination. We pooled event counts across the four UK nations., Results: For Doses 1 and 2 of ChAdOx1 and Dose 1 of BNT162b2, VE/rVE reached zero by approximately Days 60-80 and then went negative. By Day 70, VE/rVE was -25% (95% CI: -80 to 14) and 10% (95% CI: -32 to 39) for Doses 1 and 2 of ChAdOx1, respectively, and 42% (95% CI: 9 to 64) and 53% (95% CI: 26 to 70) for Doses 1 and 2 of BNT162b2, respectively. rVE for Dose 2 of BNT162b2 remained above zero throughout and reached 46% (95% CI: 13 to 67) after 98 days of follow-up., Conclusions: We found strong evidence of waning in VE/rVE for Doses 1 and 2 of ChAdOx1, as well as Dose 1 of BNT162b2. This evidence may be used to inform policies on timings of additional doses of vaccine., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association.)

How the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected prevention and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is not fully understood. In this study, we used medication data as a proxy for CVD management using routinely collected, de-identified, individual-level data comprising 1.32 billion records of community-dispensed CVD medications from England, Scotland and Wales between April 2018 and July 2021. Here we describe monthly counts of prevalent and incident medications dispensed, as well as percentage changes compared to the previous year, for several CVD-related indications, focusing on hypertension, hypercholesterolemia and diabetes. We observed a decline in the dispensing of antihypertensive medications between March 2020 and July 2021, with 491,306 fewer individuals initiating treatment than expected. This decline was predicted to result in 13,662 additional CVD events, including 2,281 cases of myocardial infarction and 3,474 cases of stroke, should individuals remain untreated over their lifecourse. Incident use of lipid-lowering medications decreased by 16,744 patients per month during the first half of 2021 as compared to 2019. By contrast, incident use of medications to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus, other than insulin, increased by approximately 623 patients per month for the same time period. In light of these results, methods to identify and treat individuals who have missed treatment for CVD risk factors and remain undiagnosed are urgently required to avoid large numbers of excess future CVD events, an indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.)

Vaccination programs against COVID-19 vary globally with estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) affected by vaccine type, schedule, strain, outcome, and recipient characteristics. This study assessed VE of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 vaccines against PCR positive SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospital admission, and death among adults aged 50 years and older in Wales, UK during the period 7 December 2020 to 18 July 2021, when Alpha, followed by Delta, were the predominant variants. We used individual-level linked routinely collected data within the Secure Anonymized Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. Data were available for 1,262,689 adults aged 50 years and over; coverage of one dose of any COVID-19 vaccine in this population was 92.6%, with coverage of two doses 90.4%. VE against PCR positive infection at 28-days or more post first dose of any COVID-19 vaccine was 16.0% (95%CI 9.6-22.0), and 42.0% (95%CI 36.5-47.1) seven or more days after a second dose. VE against hospital admission was higher at 72.9% (95%CI 63.6-79.8) 28 days or more post vaccination with one dose of any vaccine type, and 84.9% (95%CI 78.2-89.5) at 7 or more days post two doses. VE for one dose against death was estimated to be 80.9% (95%CI 72.1-86.9). VE against PCR positive infection and hospital admission was higher for BNT162b2 compared to ChAdOx1. In conclusion, vaccine uptake has been high among adults in Wales and VE estimates are encouraging, with two doses providing considerable protection against severe outcomes. Continued roll-out of the vaccination programme within Wales, and globally, is crucial in our fight against COVID-19.

Background: dementia may increase care home residents' risk of COVID-19, but there is a lack of evidence on this effect and on interactions with individual and care home-level factors., Methods: we created a national cross-sectional retrospective cohort of care home residents in Wales for 1 September to 31 December 2020. Risk factors were analysed using multi-level logistic regression to model the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality., Results: the cohort included 9,571 individuals in 673 homes. Dementia was diagnosed in 5,647 individuals (59%); 1,488 (15.5%) individuals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. We estimated the effects of age, dementia, frailty, care home size, proportion of residents with dementia, nursing and dementia services, communal space and region. The final model included the proportion of residents with dementia (OR for positive test 4.54 (95% CIs 1.55-13.27) where 75% of residents had dementia compared to no residents with dementia) and frailty (OR 1.29 (95% CIs 1.05-1.59) for severe frailty compared with no frailty). Analysis suggested 76% of the variation was due to setting rather than individual factors. Additional analysis suggested severe frailty and proportion of residents with dementia was associated with all-cause mortality, as was dementia diagnosis. Mortality analyses were challenging to interpret., Discussion: whilst individual frailty increased the risk of COVID-19 infection, dementia was a risk factor at care home but not individual level. These findings suggest whole-setting interventions, particularly in homes with high proportions of residents with dementia and including those with low/no individual risk factors may reduce the impact of COVID-19., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: To better understand the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare workers, leading to recommendations for the prioritisation of personal protective equipment, testing, training and vaccination., Design: Observational, longitudinal, national cohort study., Setting: Our cohort were secondary care (hospital-based) healthcare workers employed by NHS Wales (United Kingdom) organisations from 1 April 2020 to 30 November 2020., Participants: We included 577,756 monthly observations among 77,587 healthcare workers. Using linked anonymised datasets, participants were grouped into 20 staff roles. Additionally, each role was deemed either patient-facing, non-patient-facing or undetermined. This was linked to individual demographic details and dates of positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests., Main Outcome Measures: We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression models to determine odds ratios (ORs) for the risk of a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test., Results: Patient-facing healthcare workers were at the highest risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection with an adjusted OR (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 2.28 (95% CI 2.10-2.47). We found that after adjustment, foundation year doctors (OR 1.83 [95% CI 1.47-2.27]), healthcare support workers [OR 1.36 [95% CI 1.20-1.54]) and hospital nurses (OR 1.27 [95% CI 1.12-1.44]) were at the highest risk of infection among all staff groups. Younger healthcare workers and those living in more deprived areas were at a higher risk of infection. We also observed that infection rates varied over time and by organisation., Conclusions: These findings have important policy implications for the prioritisation of vaccination, testing, training and personal protective equipment provision for patient-facing roles and the higher risk staff groups.

To inform the public and policy makers, we investigated and compared the risk of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) after SARS-Cov-2 vaccination or infection using a national cohort of 2,643,699 individuals aged 17 y and above, alive, and resident in Wales on 1 January 2020 followed up through multiple linked data sources until 28 March 2021. Exposures were first dose of Oxford-ChAdOx1 or Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine or polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed SARS-Cov-2 infection. The outcome was an incident record of CVST. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using multivariable Cox regression, adjusted for confounders. HR from SARS-Cov-2 infection was compared with that for SARS-Cov-2 vaccination. We identified 910,556 (34.4%) records of first SARS-Cov-2 vaccination and 165,862 (6.3%) of SARS-Cov-2 infection. A total of 1,372 CVST events were recorded during the study period, of which 52 (3.8%) and 48 (3.5%) occurred within 28 d after vaccination and infection, respectively. We observed slight non-significant risk of CVST within 28 d of vaccination [aHR: 1.34, 95% CI: 0.95-1.90], which remained after stratifying by vaccine [BNT162b2, aHR: 1.18 (95% CI: 0.63-2.21); ChAdOx1, aHR: 1.40 (95% CI: 0.95-2.05)]. Three times the number of CVST events is observed within 28 d of a positive SARS-Cov-2 test [aHR: 3.02 (95% CI: 2.17-4.21)]. The risk of CVST following SARS-Cov-2 infection is 2.3 times that following SARS-Cov-2 vaccine. This is important information both for those designing COVID-19 vaccination programs and for individuals making their own informed decisions on the risk-benefit of vaccination. This record-linkage approach will be useful in monitoring the safety of future vaccine programs.

There is a need for better understanding of the risk of thrombocytopenic, haemorrhagic, thromboembolic disorders following first, second and booster vaccination doses and testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Self-controlled cases series analysis of 2.1 million linked patient records in Wales between 7th December 2020 and 31st December 2021. Outcomes were the first diagnosis of thrombocytopenic, haemorrhagic and thromboembolic events in primary or secondary care datasets, exposure was defined as 0-28 days post-vaccination or a positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2. 36,136 individuals experienced either a thrombocytopenic, haemorrhagic or thromboembolic event during the study period. Relative to baseline, our observations show greater risk of outcomes in the periods post-first dose of BNT162b2 for haemorrhagic (IRR 1.47, 95%CI: 1.04-2.08) and idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (IRR 2.80, 95%CI: 1.21-6.49) events; post-second dose of ChAdOx1 for arterial thrombosis (IRR 1.14, 95%CI: 1.01-1.29); post-booster greater risk of venous thromboembolic (VTE) (IRR-Moderna 3.62, 95%CI: 0.99-13.17) (IRR-BNT162b2 1.39, 95%CI: 1.04-1.87) and arterial thrombosis (IRR-Moderna 3.14, 95%CI: 1.14-8.64) (IRR-BNT162b2 1.34, 95%CI: 1.15-1.58). Similarly, post SARS-CoV-2 infection the risk was increased for haemorrhagic (IRR 1.49, 95%CI: 1.15-1.92), VTE (IRR 5.63, 95%CI: 4.91, 6.4), arterial thrombosis (IRR 2.46, 95%CI: 2.22-2.71). We found that there was a measurable risk of thrombocytopenic, haemorrhagic, thromboembolic events after COVID-19 vaccination and infection., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objective: To determine the effect of population level implementation of a test-and-treat approach to correction of suboptimal vitamin D status (25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) <75 nmol/L) on risk of all cause acute respiratory tract infection and covid 19., Design: Phase 3 open label randomised controlled trial., Setting: United Kingdom., Participants: 6200 people aged ≥16 years who were not taking vitamin D supplements at baseline., Interventions: Offer of a postal finger prick test of blood 25(OH)D concentration with provision of a six month supply of lower dose vitamin D (800 IU/day, n=1550) or higher dose vitamin D (3200 IU/day, n=1550) to those with blood 25(OH)D concentration <75 nmol/L, compared with no offer of testing or supplementation (n=3100). Follow-up was for six months., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with at least one swab test or doctor confirmed acute respiratory tract infection of any cause. A secondary outcome was the proportion of participants with swab test confirmed covid-19. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios and associated 95% confidence intervals. The primary analysis was conducted by intention to treat., Results: Of 3100 participants offered a vitamin D test, 2958 (95.4%) accepted and 2674 (86.3%) had 25(OH)D concentrations <75 nmol/L and received vitamin D supplements (n=1328 lower dose, n=1346 higher dose). Compared with 136/2949 (4.6%) participants in the no offer group, at least one acute respiratory tract infection of any cause occurred in 87/1515 (5.7%) in the lower dose group (odds ratio 1.26, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.66) and 76/1515 (5.0%) in the higher dose group (1.09, 0.82 to 1.46). Compared with 78/2949 (2.6%) participants in the no offer group, 55/1515 (3.6%) developed covid-19 in the lower dose group (1.39, 0.98 to 1.97) and 45/1515 (3.0%) in the higher dose group (1.13, 0.78 to 1.63)., Conclusions: Among people aged 16 years and older with a high baseline prevalence of suboptimal vitamin D status, implementation of a population level test-and-treat approach to vitamin D supplementation was not associated with a reduction in risk of all cause acute respiratory tract infection or covid-19., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04579640., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: funding from Barts Charity, Pharma Nord, Fischer Family Foundation, DSM Nutritional Products, Exilarch’s Foundation, Karl R Pfleger Foundation, AIM Foundation, Synergy Biologics, Cytoplan, UK National Institute for Health and Care Research Clinical Research Network, the HDR UK BREATHE Hub, the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, Thornton & Ross, Warburtons, Matthew Isaacs (a philanthropist without financial interests constituting a potential conflict), and Hyphens Pharma. JS receives payments from Reach for news stories written about recruitment to, and findings of, the COVIDENCE UK study. RAL is a member of the Welsh government COVID-19 Technical Advisory Group. AS and JN declare research infrastructure support to the University of Edinburgh from the Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund (ISCF) and Health Data Research United Kingdom (HDR UK). AS is a member of the Scottish government chief medical officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group and its Standing Committee on Pandemics. He is also a member of the UK Government’s NERVTAG’s Risk Stratification Subgroup. ARM declares receiving funding in the past three years to support vitamin D research from several companies that manufacture or sell vitamin D supplements: Pharma Nord, DSM Nutritional Products, Thornton & Ross, and Hyphens Pharma. ARM also declares support for attending meetings from companies that manufacture or sell vitamin D supplements (Pharma Nord and Abiogen Pharma); receipt of a consultancy fee from DSM Nutritional Products; receipt of a speaker fee from the Linus Pauling Institute; participation on data and safety monitoring boards for the VITALITY trial (Vitamin D for Adolescents with HIV to reduce musculoskeletal morbidity and immunopathology, Pan African Clinical Trials Registry ref PACTR20200989766029) and the Trial of Vitamin D and Zinc Supplementation for Improving Treatment Outcomes Among COVID-19 Patients in India (ClinicalTrials.gov ref NCT04641195); unpaid work as a programme committee member for the Vitamin D Workshop; and receipt of vitamin D capsules for clinical trial use from Pharma Nord, Synergy Biologics, and Cytoplan., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Risk factors for severe COVID-19 include older age, male sex, obesity, black or Asian ethnicity and underlying medical conditions. Whether these factors also influence susceptibility to developing COVID-19 is uncertain., Methods: We undertook a prospective, population-based cohort study (COVIDENCE UK) from 1 May 2020 to 5 February 2021. Baseline information on potential risk factors was captured by an online questionnaire. Monthly follow-up questionnaires captured incident COVID-19. We used logistic regression models to estimate multivariable-adjusted ORs (aORs) for associations between potential risk factors and odds of COVID-19., Results: We recorded 446 incident cases of COVID-19 in 15 227 participants (2.9%). Increased odds of developing COVID-19 were independently associated with Asian/Asian British versus white ethnicity (aOR 2.28, 95% CI 1.33 to 3.91), household overcrowding (aOR per additional 0.5 people/bedroom 1.26, 1.11 to 1.43), any versus no visits to/from other households in previous week (aOR 1.31, 1.06 to 1.62), number of visits to indoor public places (aOR per extra visit per week 1.05, 1.02 to 1.09), frontline occupation excluding health/social care versus no frontline occupation (aOR 1.49, 1.12 to 1.98) and raised body mass index (BMI) (aOR 1.50 (1.19 to 1.89) for BMI 25.0-30.0 kg/m 2 and 1.39 (1.06 to 1.84) for BMI >30.0 kg/m 2 versus BMI <25.0 kg/m 2 ). Atopic disease was independently associated with decreased odds (aOR 0.75, 0.59 to 0.97). No independent associations were seen for age, sex, other medical conditions, diet or micronutrient supplement use., Conclusions: After rigorous adjustment for factors influencing exposure to SARS-CoV-2, Asian/Asian British ethnicity and raised BMI were associated with increased odds of developing COVID-19, while atopic disease was associated with decreased odds., Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04330599)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

We investigated thrombocytopenic, thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events following a second dose of ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 using a self-controlled case series analysis. We used a national prospective cohort with 2.0 million(m) adults vaccinated with two doses of ChAdOx or 1.6 m with BNT162b2. The incidence rate ratio (IRR) for idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) 14-20 days post-ChAdOx1 second dose was 2.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-5.08. The incidence of ITP post-second dose ChAdOx1 was 0.59 (0.37-0.89) per 100,000 doses. No evidence of an increased risk of CVST was found for the 0-27 day risk period (IRR 0.83, 95% CI 0.16 to 4.26). However, few (≤5) events arose within this risk period. It is perhaps noteworthy that these events all clustered in the 7-13 day period (IRR 4.06, 95% CI 0.94 to 17.51). No other associations were found for second dose ChAdOx1, or any association for second dose BNT162b2 vaccination. Second dose ChAdOx1 vaccination was associated with increased borderline risks of ITP and CVST events. However, these events were rare thus providing reassurance about the safety of these vaccines. Further analyses including more cases are required to determine more precisely the risk profile for ITP and CVST after a second dose of ChAdOx1 vaccine., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: COVID-19 pandemic responses impacted behaviour and health services. We estimated the impact on incidence, stage and healthcare pathway to diagnosis for female breast, colorectal and non-small cell lung cancers at population level in Wales., Methods: Cancer e-record and hospital admission data linkage identified adult cases, stage and healthcare pathway to diagnosis (population ~2.5 million). Using multivariate Poisson regressions, we compared 2019 and 2020 counts and estimated incidence rate ratios (IRR)., Results: Cases decreased 15.2% (n = -1011) overall. Female breast annual IRR was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.76-0.86, p < 0.001), colorectal 0.80 (95% CI: 0.79-0.81, p < 0.001) and non-small cell lung 0.91 (95% CI: 0.90-0.92, p < 0.001). Decreases were largest in 50-69 year olds for female breast and 80+ year olds for all cancers. Stage I female breast cancer declined 41.6%, but unknown stage increased 55.8%. Colorectal stages I-IV declined (range 26.6-29.9%), while unknown stage increased 803.6%. Colorectal Q2-2020 GP-urgent suspected cancer diagnoses decreased 50.0%, and 53.9% for non-small cell lung cancer. Annual screen-detected female breast and colorectal cancers fell 47.8% and 13.3%, respectively. Non-smal -cell lung cancer emergency presentation diagnoses increased 9.5% (Q2-2020) and 16.3% (Q3-2020)., Conclusion: Significantly fewer cases of three common cancers were diagnosed in 2020. Detrimental impacts on outcomes varied between cancers. Ongoing surveillance with health service optimisation will be needed to mitigate impacts., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Introduction: The QCOVID algorithm is a risk prediction tool for infection and subsequent hospitalisation/death due to SARS-CoV-2. At the time of writing, it is being used in important policy-making decisions by the UK and devolved governments for combatting the COVID-19 pandemic, including deliberations on shielding and vaccine prioritisation. There are four statistical validations exercises currently planned for the QCOVID algorithm, using data pertaining to England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, respectively. This paper presents a common procedure for conducting and reporting on validation exercises for the QCOVID algorithm., Methods and Analysis: We will use open, retrospective cohort studies to assess the performance of the QCOVID risk prediction tool in each of the four UK nations. Linked datasets comprising of primary and secondary care records, virological testing data and death registrations will be assembled in trusted research environments in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. We will seek to have population level coverage as far as possible within each nation. The following performance metrics will be calculated by strata: Harrell's C, Brier Score, R 2 and Royston's D., Ethics and Dissemination: Approvals have been obtained from relevant ethics bodies in each UK nation. Findings will be made available to national policy-makers, presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journal., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AS reports grants from NIHR, grants from MRC, and grants from HRR UK, during the conduct of the study. JL and RL report grants from UKRI Medical Research Council, during the conduct of the study. JH-C reports grants from John Fell Oxford University Press Research Fund, grants from Cancer Research UK (CR-UK) grant number C5255/A18085, through the Cancer Research UK Oxford Centre, grants from the Oxford Wellcome Institutional Strategic Support Fund (204826/Z/16/Z), grants from NIHR, during the conduct of the study; personal fees and other from ClinRisk, outside the submitted work; and JH-C is an unpaid director of QResearch, a not-for-profit organisation which is a partnership between the University of Oxford and EMIS Health who supply the QResearch database used for this work. Carol Coupland reports personal fees from ClinRisk, outside the submitted work. JH-C, AS and CC were members of the research team involved in the development of the QCOVID risk prediction algorithm. All other authors report no conflict of interest, (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: COVID-19 vaccinations have been prioritised for high risk individuals., Aim: Determine individual-level risk factors for care home residents testing positive for SARS-CoV-2., Study Design: Longitudinal observational cohort study using individual-level linked data from the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) databank., Setting: Fourteen thousand seven hundred and eighty-six older care home residents (aged 65+) living in Wales between 1 September 2020 and 1 May 2021. Our dataset consisted of 2,613,341 individual-level daily observations within 697 care homes., Methods: We estimated odds ratios (ORs [95% confidence interval]) using multilevel logistic regression models. Our outcome of interest was a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. We included time-dependent covariates for the estimated community positive test rate of COVID-19, hospital inpatient status, vaccination status and frailty. Additional covariates were included for age, sex and specialist care home services., Results: The multivariable regression model indicated an increase in age (OR 1.01 [1.00,1.01] per year), community positive test rate (OR 1.13 [1.12,1.13] per percent increase), hospital inpatients (OR 7.40 [6.54,8.36]), and residents in care homes with non-specialist dementia care (OR 1.42 [1.01,1.99]) had an increased odds of a positive test. Having a positive test prior to the observation period (OR 0.58 [0.49,0.68]) and either one or two doses of a vaccine (0.21 [0.17,0.25] and 0.05 [0.02,0.09], respectively) were associated with a decreased odds., Conclusions: Care providers need to remain vigilant despite the vaccination rollout, and extra precautions should be taken when caring for the most vulnerable. Minimising potential COVID-19 infection for care home residents when admitted to hospital should be prioritised., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.)

Background: defining features of the COVID-19 pandemic in many countries were the tragic extent to which care home residents were affected and the difficulty in preventing the introduction and subsequent spread of infection. Management of risk in care homes requires good evidence on the most important transmission pathways. One hypothesised route at the start of the pandemic, prior to widespread testing, was the transfer of patients from hospitals that were experiencing high levels of nosocomial events., Methods: we tested the hypothesis that hospital discharge events increased the intensity of care home cases using a national individually linked health record cohort in Wales, UK. We monitored 186,772 hospital discharge events over the period from March to July 2020, tracking individuals to 923 care homes and recording the daily case rate in the homes populated by 15,772 residents. We estimated the risk of an increase in case rates following exposure to a hospital discharge using multi-level hierarchical logistic regression and a novel stochastic Hawkes process outbreak model., Findings: in regression analysis, after adjusting for care home size, we found no significant association between hospital discharge and subsequent increases in care home case numbers (odds ratio: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.82, 1.90). Risk factors for increased cases included care home size, care home resident density and provision of nursing care. Using our outbreak model, we found a significant effect of hospital discharge on the subsequent intensity of cases. However, the effect was small and considerably less than the effect of care home size, suggesting the highest risk of introduction came from interaction with the community. We estimated that approximately 1.8% of hospital discharged patients may have been infected., Interpretation: there is growing evidence in the UK that the risk of transfer of COVID-19 from the high-risk hospital setting to the high-risk care home setting during the early stages of the pandemic was relatively small. Although access to testing was limited to initial symptomatic cases in each care home at this time, our results suggest that reduced numbers of discharges, selection of patients and action taken within care homes following transfer all may have contributed to the mitigation. The precise key transmission routes from the community remain to be quantified., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.)

Introduction: Reduced rates of help seeking by those who self-harmed during the COVID-19 pandemic have been reported., Objectives: To understand changes in healthcare service contacts for self-harm during the COVID-19 pandemic across primary, emergency and secondary care., Methods: This retrospective cohort study used routine electronic healthcare data for Wales, United Kingdom, from 2016 to March 14, 2021. Population-based data from primary care, emergency departments and hospital admissions were linked at individual-level. All Welsh residents aged ≥10 years over the study period were included in the study. Primary, emergency and secondary care contacts with self-harm at any time between 2016 and March 14, 2021 were identified. Outcomes were counts, incidence, prevalence and proportion of self-harm contacts relative to all contacts in each and all settings, as well as the proportion of people contacting one or more settings with self-harm. Weekly trends were modelled using generalised estimated equations, with differences between 2020 (to March 2021) and comparison years 2016-2018 (to March 2017-2019) quantified using difference in differences, from which mean rate of odds ratios (μROR) across years was reported., Results: The study included 3,552,210 individuals over the study period. Self-harm contacts reduced across services in March and December 2020 compared to previous years. Primary care contacts with self-harm reduced disproportionately compared to non-self-harm contacts (μROR = 0.7, p<0.05), while their proportion increased in emergency departments during April 2020 (μROR = 1.3, p<0.05 in 2/3 comparison years) and hospital admissions during April-May 2020 (μROR = 1.2, p<0.05 in 2/3 comparison years). Despite this, those who self-harmed in April 2020 were more likely to be seen in primary care than other settings compared to previous years (μROR = 1.2, p<0.05). A lower proportion of those with self-harm contacts in emergency departments were subsequently admitted to hospital in December 2020 compared to previous years (μROR = 0.5, p<0.05)., Conclusions: These findings suggest that those who self-harmed during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been less likely to seek help, and those who did so faced more stringent criteria for admission. Communications encouraging those who self-harm to seek help during pandemics may be beneficial. However, this needs to be supported by maintained provision of mental health services., Competing Interests: AJ chairs the National Advisory Group on Suicide prevention to Welsh Government. The remaining authors declare no conflicts of interests.

Introduction: School-based COVID-19 mitigation strategies have greatly impacted the primary school day (children aged 3-11) including: wearing face coverings, two metre distancing, no mixing of children, and no breakfast clubs or extra-curricular activities. This study examines these mitigation measures and association with COVID-19 infection, respiratory infection, and school staff wellbeing between October to December 2020 in Wales, UK., Methods: A school staff survey captured self-reported COVID-19 mitigation measures in the school, participant anxiety and depression, and open-text responses regarding experiences of teaching and implementing measures. These survey responses were linked to national-scale COVID-19 test results data to examine association of measures in the school and the likelihood of a positive (staff or pupil) COVID-19 case in the school (clustered by school, adjusted for school size and free school meals using logistic regression). Linkage was conducted through the SAIL (Secure Anonymised Information Linkage) Databank., Results: Responses were obtained from 353 participants from 59 primary schools within 15 of 22 local authorities. Having more direct non-household contacts was associated with a higher likelihood of COVID-19 positive case in the school (1-5 contacts compared to none, OR 2.89 (1.01, 8.31)) and a trend to more self-reported cold symptoms. Staff face covering was not associated with a lower odds of school COVID-19 cases (mask vs. no covering OR 2.82 (1.11, 7.14)) and was associated with higher self-reported cold symptoms. School staff reported the impacts of wearing face coverings on teaching, including having to stand closer to pupils and raise their voices to be heard. 67.1% were not able to implement two metre social distancing from pupils. We did not find evidence that maintaining a two metre distance was associated with lower rates of COVID-19 in the school., Conclusions: Implementing, adhering to and evaluating COVID-19 mitigation guidelines is challenging in primary school settings. Our findings suggest that reducing non-household direct contacts lowers infection rates. There was no evidence that face coverings, two metre social distancing or stopping children mixing was associated with lower odds of COVID-19 or cold infection rates in the school. Primary school staff found teaching challenging during COVID-19 restrictions, especially for younger learners and those with additional learning needs., Competing Interests: The authors declare there are no competing interests.

Background: Prospective population-based studies investigating multiple determinants of pre-vaccination antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 are lacking., Methods: We did a prospective population-based study in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-naive UK adults recruited between May 1 and November 2, 2020, without a positive swab test result for SARS-CoV-2 prior to enrolment. Information on 88 potential sociodemographic, behavioural, nutritional, clinical and pharmacological risk factors was obtained through online questionnaires, and combined IgG/IgA/IgM responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein were determined in dried blood spots obtained between November 6, 2020, and April 18, 2021. We used logistic and linear regression to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and adjusted geometric mean ratios (aGMRs) for potential determinants of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity (all participants) and antibody titres (seropositive participants only), respectively., Results: Of 11,130 participants, 1696 (15.2%) were seropositive. Factors independently associated with  higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity included frontline health/care occupation (aOR 1.86, 95% CI 1.48-2.33), international travel (1.20, 1.07-1.35), number of visits to shops and other indoor public places (≥ 5 vs. 0/week: 1.29, 1.06-1.57, P-trend = 0.01), body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 vs. < 25 kg/m 2 (1.24, 1.11-1.39), South Asian vs. White ethnicity (1.65, 1.10-2.49) and alcohol consumption ≥15 vs. 0 units/week (1.23, 1.04-1.46). Light physical exercise associated with  lower risk (0.80, 0.70-0.93, for ≥ 10 vs. 0-4 h/week). Among seropositive participants, higher titres of anti-Spike antibodies associated with factors including BMI ≥ 30 vs. < 25 kg/m 2 (aGMR 1.10, 1.02-1.19), South Asian vs. White ethnicity (1.22, 1.04-1.44), frontline health/care occupation (1.24, 95% CI 1.11-1.39), international travel (1.11, 1.05-1.16) and number of visits to shops and other indoor public places (≥ 5 vs. 0/week: 1.12, 1.02-1.23, P-trend = 0.01); these associations were not substantially attenuated by adjustment for COVID-19 disease severity., Conclusions: Higher alcohol consumption and lower light physical exercise represent new modifiable risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Recognised associations between South Asian ethnic origin and obesity and higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity were independent of other sociodemographic, behavioural, nutritional, clinical, and pharmacological factors investigated. Among seropositive participants, higher titres of anti-Spike antibodies in people of South Asian ancestry and in obese people were not explained by greater COVID-19 disease severity in these groups., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: While population estimates suggest high vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection, the protection for health care workers, who are at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure, is less understood., Methods: We conducted a national cohort study of health care workers in Wales (UK) from 7 December 2020 to 30 September 2021. We examined uptake of any COVID-19 vaccine, and the effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA (Pfizer-BioNTech) against polymerase chain reaction (PCR) confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We used linked and routinely collected national-scale data within the SAIL Databank. Data were available on 82,959 health care workers in Wales, with exposure extending to 26 weeks after second doses., Results: Overall vaccine uptake was high (90%), with most health care workers receiving theBNT162b2 vaccine (79%). Vaccine uptake differed by age, staff role, socioeconomic status; those aged 50-59 and 60+ years old were 1.6 times more likely to get vaccinated than those aged 16-29. Medical and dental staff, and Allied Health Practitioners were 1.5 and 1.1 times more likely to get vaccinated, compared to nursing and midwifery staff. The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine was found to be strong and consistent across the characteristics considered; 52% three to six weeks after first dose, 86% from two weeks after second dose, though this declined to 53% from 22 weeks after the second dose., Conclusions: With some variation in rate of uptake, those who were vaccinated had a reduced risk of PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared to those unvaccinated. Second dose has provided stronger protection for longer than first dose but our study is consistent with waning from seven weeks onwards., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: AS is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group,the New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats (NERVTAG) Risk Stratification Subgroupand amember of AstraZeneca’s Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Task Force; all roles are unremunerated.CR is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group, the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling and the Medicines & Healthcare products RegulatoryAgency’s Vaccine Benefit and Risk Working Group.DTB is employed by the Public Health Agency, Northern Ireland, and the Department of Health, Northern Ireland.MP is employed by the Vaccine Preventable Disease Programme at Public Health Wales and is involved in the COVID-19 vaccine roll out for Wales.SVK is co-chair of the Scottish Government’s Expert Reference Group on COVID-19 andethnicity, is a member of the Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies (SAGE) subgroup on ethnicity and acknowledges funding from a NRS Senior Clinical Fellowship, MRC and CSO.RF is a member of is a member of the Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies (SAGE) Social Care Working Group (SCWG).RO is a member of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Technology Appraisal Committee (TAC) and has provided methodological advice outside of the submitted work toCogentiaHealthcare Consulting Ltd, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd,the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Decision Support Unit, the University of Bristol, and the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI).RAL is a member of the Welsh Government COVID19 Technical Advisory Group.All other authors have declared no competinginterests., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Introduction: The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, which emerged in December 2019, has caused millions of deaths and severe illness worldwide. Numerous vaccines are currently under development of which a few have now been authorised for population-level administration by several countries. As of 20 September 2021, over 48 million people have received their first vaccine dose and over 44 million people have received their second vaccine dose across the UK. We aim to assess the uptake rates, effectiveness, and safety of all currently approved COVID-19 vaccines in the UK., Methods and Analysis: We will use prospective cohort study designs to assess vaccine uptake, effectiveness and safety against clinical outcomes and deaths. Test-negative case-control study design will be used to assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Self-controlled case series and retrospective cohort study designs will be carried out to assess vaccine safety against mild-to-moderate and severe adverse events, respectively. Individual-level pseudonymised data from primary care, secondary care, laboratory test and death records will be linked and analysed in secure research environments in each UK nation. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models will be carried out to estimate vaccine uptake levels in relation to various population characteristics. VE estimates against laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection will be generated using a generalised additive logistic model. Time-dependent Cox models will be used to estimate the VE against clinical outcomes and deaths. The safety of the vaccines will be assessed using logistic regression models with an offset for the length of the risk period. Where possible, data will be meta-analysed across the UK nations., Ethics and Dissemination: We obtained approvals from the National Research Ethics Service Committee, Southeast Scotland 02 (12/SS/0201), the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage independent Information Governance Review Panel project number 0911. Concerning English data, University of Oxford is compliant with the General Data Protection Regulation and the National Health Service (NHS) Digital Data Security and Protection Policy. This is an approved study (Integrated Research Application ID 301740, Health Research Authority (HRA) Research Ethics Committee 21/HRA/2786). The Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Clinical Informatics Digital Hub meets NHS Digital's Data Security and Protection Toolkit requirements. In Northern Ireland, the project was approved by the Honest Broker Governance Board, project number 0064. Findings will be made available to national policy-makers, presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AS is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s COVID-19 Advisory Group. RAL reports grants from MRC during the conduct of the study. SJS reports grants from Wellcome Trust, during the conduct of the study; grants from National Institute of Healthcare Research HTA, grants from Tommy's Charity and grants from Chief Scientist for Scotland, outside the submitted work. SdeL is Director of the Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre. He has received grant funding through his University from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, GSK MSD, Seqirus and Takeda. He has been members of advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Sanofi, and Seqirus. DB is jointly employed by Queen’s University Belfast, the Public Health Agency and the Department of Health (Northern Ireland), and he is currently or has been a member of COVID-19 government advisory groups, including the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE), its subgroups, and the UK Vaccine Effectiveness Expert Panel. All other authors report no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: vaccinations for COVID-19 have been prioritised for older people living in care homes. However, vaccination trials included limited numbers of older people., Aim: we aimed to study infection rates of SARS-CoV-2 for older care home residents following vaccination and identify factors associated with increased risk of infection., Study Design and Setting: we conducted an observational data-linkage study including 14,104 vaccinated older care home residents in Wales (UK) using anonymised electronic health records and administrative data., Methods: we used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for the risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection following vaccination, after landmark times of either 7 or 21 days post-vaccination. We adjusted HRs for age, sex, frailty, prior SARS-CoV-2 infections and vaccination type., Results: we observed a small proportion of care home residents with positive polymerase chain reaction (tests following vaccination 1.05% (N = 148), with 90% of infections occurring within 28 days. For the 7-day landmark analysis we found a reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection for vaccinated individuals who had a previous infection; HR (95% confidence interval) 0.54 (0.30, 0.95). For the 21-day landmark analysis, we observed high HRs for individuals with low and intermediate frailty compared with those without; 4.59 (1.23, 17.12) and 4.85 (1.68, 14.04), respectively., Conclusions: increased risk of infection after 21 days was associated with frailty. We found most infections occurred within 28 days of vaccination, suggesting extra precautions to reduce transmission risk should be taken in this time frame., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.)

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic has increased mortality worldwide and those with chronic conditions may have been disproportionally affected. However, it is unknown whether the pandemic has changed mortality rates for people with epilepsy. We aimed to compare mortality rates in people with epilepsy in Wales during the pandemic with pre-pandemic rates., Methods: We performed a retrospective study using individual-level linked population-scale anonymised electronic health records. We identified deaths in people with epilepsy (DPWE), i.e. those with a diagnosis of epilepsy, and deaths associated with epilepsy (DAE), where epilepsy was recorded as a cause of death on death certificates. We compared death rates in 2020 with average rates in 2015-2019 using Poisson models to calculate death rate ratios., Results: There were 188 DAE and 628 DPWE in Wales in 2020 (death rates: 7.7/100,000/year and 25.7/100,000/year). The average rates for DAE and DPWE from 2015 to 2019 were 5.8/100,000/year and 23.8/100,000/year, respectively. Death rate ratios (2020 compared to 2015-2019) for DAE were 1.34 (95%CI 1.14-1.57, p<0.001) and for DPWE were 1.08 (0.99-1.17, p = 0.09). The death rate ratios for non-COVID deaths (deaths without COVID mentioned on death certificates) for DAE were 1.17 (0.99-1.39, p = 0.06) and for DPWE were 0.96 (0.87-1.05, p = 0.37)., Conclusions: The significant increase in DAE in Wales during 2020 could be explained by the direct effect of COVID-19 infection. Non-COVID-19 deaths have not increased significantly but further work is needed to assess the longer-term impact., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted existing health inequalities for ethnic minority groups and those living in more socioeconomically deprived areas in the UK. With higher levels of severe outcomes in these groups, equitable vaccination coverage should be prioritised. The aim of this study was to identify inequalities in coverage of COVID-19 vaccination in Wales, UK and to highlight areas which may benefit from routine enhanced surveillance and targeted interventions. Records within the Wales Immunisation System (WIS) population register were linked to the Welsh Demographic Service Dataset (WDSD) and central list of shielding patients, held within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. Ethnic group was derived from the 2011 census and over 20 administrative electronic health record (EHR) data sources. Uptake of first dose of any COVID-19 vaccine was analysed over time, with the odds of being vaccinated as at 25th April 2021 by sex, health board of residence, rural/urban classification, deprivation quintile and ethnic group presented. Using logistic regression models, analyses were adjusted for age group, care home resident status, health and social care worker status and shielding status. This study included 1,256,412 individuals aged 50 years and over. Vaccine coverage increased steadily from 8th December 2020 until mid-April 2021. Overall uptake of first dose of COVID-19 vaccine in this group was 92.1%. After adjustment the odds of being vaccinated were lower for individuals who were male, resident in the most deprived areas, resident in an urban area and an ethnic group other than White. The largest inequality was seen between ethnic groups, with the odds of being vaccinated 0.22 (95 %CI 0.21-0.24) if in any Black ethnic group compared to any White ethnic group. Ongoing monitoring of inequity in uptake of vaccinations is required, with better targeted interventions and engagement with deprived and ethnic communities to improve vaccination uptake., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: MP, AA, SC, RR, RL and LG sit on the Wales COVID-19 Vaccination Board (CVB) and/or subgroups of the CVB., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To derive and validate risk prediction algorithms to estimate the risk of covid-19 related mortality and hospital admission in UK adults after one or two doses of covid-19 vaccination., Design: Prospective, population based cohort study using the QResearch database linked to data on covid-19 vaccination, SARS-CoV-2 results, hospital admissions, systemic anticancer treatment, radiotherapy, and the national death and cancer registries., Settings: Adults aged 19-100 years with one or two doses of covid-19 vaccination between 8 December 2020 and 15 June 2021., Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome was covid-19 related death. Secondary outcome was covid-19 related hospital admission. Outcomes were assessed from 14 days after each vaccination dose. Models were fitted in the derivation cohort to derive risk equations using a range of predictor variables. Performance was evaluated in a separate validation cohort of general practices., Results: Of 6 952 440 vaccinated patients in the derivation cohort, 5 150 310 (74.1%) had two vaccine doses. Of 2031 covid-19 deaths and 1929 covid-19 hospital admissions, 81 deaths (4.0%) and 71 admissions (3.7%) occurred 14 days or more after the second vaccine dose. The risk algorithms included age, sex, ethnic origin, deprivation, body mass index, a range of comorbidities, and SARS-CoV-2 infection rate. Incidence of covid-19 mortality increased with age and deprivation, male sex, and Indian and Pakistani ethnic origin. Cause specific hazard ratios were highest for patients with Down's syndrome (12.7-fold increase), kidney transplantation (8.1-fold), sickle cell disease (7.7-fold), care home residency (4.1-fold), chemotherapy (4.3-fold), HIV/AIDS (3.3-fold), liver cirrhosis (3.0-fold), neurological conditions (2.6-fold), recent bone marrow transplantation or a solid organ transplantation ever (2.5-fold), dementia (2.2-fold), and Parkinson's disease (2.2-fold). Other conditions with increased risk (ranging from 1.2-fold to 2.0-fold increases) included chronic kidney disease, blood cancer, epilepsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary heart disease, stroke, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, thromboembolism, peripheral vascular disease, and type 2 diabetes. A similar pattern of associations was seen for covid-19 related hospital admissions. No evidence indicated that associations differed after the second dose, although absolute risks were reduced. The risk algorithm explained 74.1% (95% confidence interval 71.1% to 77.0%) of the variation in time to covid-19 death in the validation cohort. Discrimination was high, with a D statistic of 3.46 (95% confidence interval 3.19 to 3.73) and C statistic of 92.5. Performance was similar after each vaccine dose. In the top 5% of patients with the highest predicted covid-19 mortality risk, sensitivity for identifying covid-19 deaths within 70 days was 78.7%., Conclusion: This population based risk algorithm performed well showing high levels of discrimination for identifying those patients at highest risk of covid-19 related death and hospital admission after vaccination., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: support from the NIHR for the submitted work; JH-C reports grants from NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, grants from John Fell Oxford University Press Research Fund, grants from Cancer Research UK, through the Cancer Research UK Oxford Centre, grants from the Oxford Wellcome Institutional Strategic Support Fund and other research councils, during the conduct of the study; JH-C is an unpaid director of QResearch, a not-for-profit organisation that is a partnership between the University of Oxford and EMIS Health, which supplied the QResearch database used for this work; JH-C is a founder and shareholder of ClinRisk and was its medical director until 31 May 2019 (ClinRisk produces open and closed source software to implement clinical risk algorithms (outside this work) into clinical computer systems); JH-C is chair of the NERVTAG risk stratification subgroup and a member of SAGE covid-19 groups and the NHS group advising on prioritisation of use of monoclonal antibodies in covid-19 infection; CACC reports receiving personal fees from ClinRisk outside this work, and is a member of the NERVTAG risk stratification subgroup; KK is supported by the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration-East Midlands and the Leicester BRC and is a member of SAGE; RHK was supported by a UKRI Future Leaders Fellowship (MR/S017968/1); KD-O was supported by a grant from the Alan Turing Institute Health Programme (EP/T001569/1); AS is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s covid-19 advisory group and a member of AstraZeneca’s thrombotic thrombocytopenic advisory group (both roles are unremunerated); RAL is a member of the Welsh government covid-19 technical advisory group (unrenumerated); MGS reports grants from Department of Health and Social Care NIHR UK, grants from the UK Medical Research Council, grants from Health Protection Research Unit in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections, University of Liverpool, during the conduct of the study, and other funds from Integrum Scientific, Greensboro, NC, USA, outside the submitted work; MGS is a member of NERVTAG and attends SAGE covid-19; AH is a member of NERVTAG and the NHS group advising on prioritisation of use of monoclonal antibodies in covid-19 infection; JV is national clinical director for diabetes and obesity at NHS England and Improvement; FK is a member of the Northern Ireland Chief Medical Officer’s pandemic modelling group and strategic intelligence group; JSN-V-T is seconded to the Department of Health and Social Care, England. The views expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors and not necessarily those of Department of Health and Social Care or the UK government., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic's impact on people with asthma is poorly understood. We hypothesised that lockdown restrictions were associated with reductions in severe asthma exacerbations requiring emergency asthma admissions and/or leading to death., Methods: Using data from Public Health Scotland and the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank in Wales, we compared weekly counts of emergency admissions and deaths due to asthma over the first 18 weeks in 2020 with the national averages over 2015-2019. We modelled the impact of instigating lockdown on these outcomes using interrupted time-series analysis. Using fixed-effect meta-analysis, we derived pooled estimates of the overall changes in trends across the two nations. We also investigated trends in asthma-related primary care prescribing and emergency department (ED) attendances in Wales., Results: Lockdown was associated with a 36% pooled reduction in emergency admissions for asthma (incidence rate ratio, IRR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.83, p value 0.001) across both countries. There was no significant change in asthma deaths (pooled IRR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.17 to 1.94, p value 0.37). ED asthma attendances in Wales declined during lockdown (IRR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.73 to 0.99, p value 0.03). A large spike of 121% more inhaled corticosteroids and 133% more oral corticosteroid prescriptions was seen in Wales in the week before lockdown., Conclusions: National lockdowns were associated with substantial reductions in severe asthma exacerbations leading to hospital admission across both Scotland and Wales, with no corresponding increase in asthma deaths., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AS reports grants from UKRI during the conduct of the study. RAL reports grants from Health Data Research UK during the conduct of the study. CR reports grants from Medical Research Council and Public Health Scotland during the conduct of the study., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: A significant proportion of healthcare resource has been diverted to the care of those with COVID-19. This study reports the volume of surgical activity and the number of cancelled surgical procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: We used hospital episode statistics for all adult patients undergoing surgery between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020 in England and Wales. We identified surgical procedures using a previously published list of procedure codes. Procedures were stratified by urgency of surgery as defined by NHS England. We calculated the deficit of surgical activity by comparing the expected number of procedures from 2016 to 2019 with the actual number of procedures in 2020. Using a linear regression model, we calculated the expected cumulative number of cancelled procedures by December 31, 2021., Results: The total number of surgical procedures carried out in England and Wales in 2020 was 3 102 674 compared with the predicted number of 4 671 338 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4 218 740-5 123 932). This represents a 33.6% reduction in the national volume of surgical activity. There were 763 730 emergency surgical procedures (13.4% reduction) compared with 2 338 944 elective surgical procedures (38.6% reduction). The cumulative number of cancelled or postponed procedures was 1 568 664 (95% CI: 1 116 066-2 021 258). We estimate that this will increase to 2 358 420 (95% CI: 1 667 587-3 100 808) up to December 31, 2021., Conclusions: The volume of surgical activity in England and Wales was reduced by 33.6% in 2020, resulting in more than 1.5 million cancelled operations. This deficit will continue to grow in 2021., (Copyright © 2021 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Reports of ChAdOx1 vaccine-associated thrombocytopenia and vascular adverse events have led to some countries restricting its use. Using a national prospective cohort, we estimated associations between exposure to first-dose ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2 vaccination and hematological and vascular adverse events using a nested incident-matched case-control study and a confirmatory self-controlled case series (SCCS) analysis. An association was found between ChAdOx1 vaccination and idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) (0-27 d after vaccination; adjusted rate ratio (aRR) = 5.77, 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.41-13.83), with an estimated incidence of 1.13 (0.62-1.63) cases per 100,000 doses. An SCCS analysis confirmed that this was unlikely due to bias (RR = 1.98 (1.29-3.02)). There was also an increased risk for arterial thromboembolic events (aRR = 1.22, 1.12-1.34) 0-27 d after vaccination, with an SCCS RR of 0.97 (0.93-1.02). For hemorrhagic events 0-27 d after vaccination, the aRR was 1.48 (1.12-1.96), with an SCCS RR of 0.95 (0.82-1.11). A first dose of ChAdOx1 was found to be associated with small increased risks of ITP, with suggestive evidence of an increased risk of arterial thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events. The attenuation of effect found in the SCCS analysis means that there is the potential for overestimation of the reported results, which might indicate the presence of some residual confounding or confounding by indication. Public health authorities should inform their jurisdictions of these relatively small increased risks associated with ChAdOx1. No positive associations were seen between BNT162b2 and thrombocytopenic, thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing national lockdowns have dramatically changed the healthcare landscape. The pandemic's impact on people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains poorly understood. We hypothesised that the UK-wide lockdown restrictions were associated with reductions in severe COPD exacerbations. We provide the first national level analyses of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and first lockdown on severe COPD exacerbations resulting in emergency hospital admissions and/or leading to death as well as those recorded in primary care or emergency departments., Methods: Using data from Public Health Scotland and the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank in Wales, we accessed weekly counts of emergency hospital admissions and deaths due to COPD over the first 30 weeks of 2020 and compared these to the national averages over the preceding 5 years. For both Scotland and Wales, we undertook interrupted time-series analyses to model the impact of instigating lockdown on these outcomes. Using fixed-effect meta-analysis, we derived pooled estimates of the overall changes in trends across the two nations., Results: Lockdown was associated with 48% pooled reduction in emergency admissions for COPD in both countries (incidence rate ratio, IRR 0.52, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.58), relative to the 5-year averages. There was no statistically significant change in deaths due to COPD (pooled IRR 1.08, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.33). In Wales, lockdown was associated with 39% reduction in primary care consultations for acute exacerbation of COPD (IRR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.71) and 46% reduction in COPD-related emergency department attendances (IRR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.81)., Conclusions: The UK-wide lockdown was associated with the most substantial reductions in COPD exacerbations ever seen across Scotland and Wales, with no corresponding increase in COPD deaths. This may have resulted from reduced transmission of respiratory infections, reduced exposure to outdoor air pollution and/or improved COPD self-management.

Background: Better understanding of the role that children and school staff play in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is essential to guide policy development on controlling infection while minimising disruption to children's education and well-being., Methods: Our national e-cohort (n=464531) study used anonymised linked data for pupils, staff and associated households linked via educational settings in Wales. We estimated the odds of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection for staff and pupils over the period August- December 2020, dependent on measures of recent exposure to known cases linked to their educational settings., Results: The total number of cases in a school was not associated with a subsequent increase in the odds of testing positive (staff OR per case: 0.92, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00; pupil OR per case: 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.02). Among pupils, the number of recent cases within the same year group was significantly associated with subsequent increased odds of testing positive (OR per case: 1.12, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.15). These effects were adjusted for a range of demographic covariates, and in particular any known cases within the same household, which had the strongest association with testing positive (staff OR: 39.86, 95% CI 35.01 to 45.38; pupil OR: 9.39, 95% CI 8.94 to 9.88)., Conclusions: In a national school cohort, the odds of staff testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection were not significantly increased in the 14-day period after case detection in the school. However, pupils were found to be at increased odds, following cases appearing within their own year group, where most of their contacts occur. Strong mitigation measures over the whole of the study period may have reduced wider spread within the school environment., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for robust data linkage systems and methods for identifying outbreaks of disease in near real-time. Objectives The primary objective of this study was to develop a real-time geospatial surveillance system to monitor the spread of COVID-19 across the UK. Methods Using self-reported app data and the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank, we demonstrate the use of sophisticated spatial modelling for near-real-time prediction of COVID-19 prevalence at small-area resolution to inform strategic government policy areas. Results We demonstrate that using a combination of crowd-sourced app data and sophisticated geo-statistical techniques it is possible to predict hot spots of COVID-19 at fine geographic scales, nationally. We are also able to produce estimates of their precision, which is an important pre-requisite to an effective control strategy to guard against over-reaction to potentially spurious features of 'best guess' predictions. Conclusion In the UK, important emerging risk-factors such as social deprivation or ethnicity vary over small distances, hence risk needs to be modelled at fine spatial resolution to avoid aggregation bias. We demonstrate that existing geospatial statistical methods originally developed for global health applications are well-suited to this task and can be used in an anonymised databank environment, thus preserving the privacy of the individuals who contribute their data., (Crown Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: mortality in care homes has had a prominent focus during the COVID-19 outbreak. Care homes are particularly vulnerable to the spread of infectious diseases, which may lead to increased mortality risk. Multiple and interconnected challenges face the care home sector in the prevention and management of outbreaks of COVID-19, including adequate supply of personal protective equipment, staff shortages and insufficient or lack of timely COVID-19 testing., Aim: to analyse the mortality of older care home residents in Wales during COVID-19 lockdown and compare this across the population of Wales and the previous 4 years., Study Design and Setting: we used anonymised electronic health records and administrative data from the secure anonymised information linkage databank to create a cross-sectional cohort study. We anonymously linked data for Welsh residents to mortality data up to the 14th June 2020., Methods: we calculated survival curves and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for the risk of mortality. We adjusted HRs for age, gender, social economic status and prior health conditions., Results: survival curves show an increased proportion of deaths between 23rd March and 14th June 2020 in care homes for older people, with an adjusted HR of 1.72 (1.55, 1.90) compared with 2016. Compared with the general population in 2016-2019, adjusted care home mortality HRs for older adults rose from 2.15 (2.11, 2.20) in 2016-2019 to 2.94 (2.81, 3.08) in 2020., Conclusions: the survival curves and increased HRs show a significantly increased risk of death in the 2020 study periods., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.)