Search

Multiple studies across global populations have established the primary symptoms characterising Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and long COVID. However, as symptoms may also occur in the absence of COVID-19, a lack of appropriate controls has often meant that specificity of symptoms to acute COVID-19 or long COVID, and the extent and length of time for which they are elevated after COVID-19, could not be examined. We analysed individual symptom prevalences and characterised patterns of COVID-19 and long COVID symptoms across nine UK longitudinal studies, totalling over 42,000 participants. Conducting latent class analyses separately in three groups ('no COVID-19', 'COVID-19 in last 12 weeks', 'COVID-19 > 12 weeks ago'), the data did not support the presence of more than two distinct symptom patterns, representing high and low symptom burden, in each group. Comparing the high symptom burden classes between the 'COVID-19 in last 12 weeks' and 'no COVID-19' groups we identified symptoms characteristic of acute COVID-19, including loss of taste and smell, fatigue, cough, shortness of breath and muscle pains or aches. Comparing the high symptom burden classes between the 'COVID-19 > 12 weeks ago' and 'no COVID-19' groups we identified symptoms characteristic of long COVID, including fatigue, shortness of breath, muscle pain or aches, difficulty concentrating and chest tightness. The identified symptom patterns among individuals with COVID-19 > 12 weeks ago were strongly associated with self-reported length of time unable to function as normal due to COVID-19 symptoms, suggesting that the symptom pattern identified corresponds to long COVID. Building the evidence base regarding typical long COVID symptoms will improve diagnosis of this condition and the ability to elicit underlying biological mechanisms, leading to better patient access to treatment and services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The frequency of, and risk factors for, long COVID are unclear among community-based individuals with a history of COVID-19. To elucidate the burden and possible causes of long COVID in the community, we coordinated analyses of survey data from 6907 individuals with self-reported COVID-19 from 10 UK longitudinal study (LS) samples and 1.1 million individuals with COVID-19 diagnostic codes in electronic healthcare records (EHR) collected by spring 2021. Proportions of presumed COVID-19 cases in LS reporting any symptoms for 12+ weeks ranged from 7.8% and 17% (with 1.2 to 4.8% reporting debilitating symptoms). Increasing age, female sex, white ethnicity, poor pre-pandemic general and mental health, overweight/obesity, and asthma were associated with prolonged symptoms in both LS and EHR data, but findings for other factors, such as cardio-metabolic parameters, were inconclusive. Current understanding of Long COVID is limited, in part, due to lack of evidence from population-representative studies. Here, the authors analyse data from ten UK population-based studies and electronic health records, and find wide variation in the frequency of Long COVID between studies but some consistent risk factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In England, the onset of COVID-19 and a rapidly increasing infection rate resulted in a lockdown (March-June 2020) which placed strict restrictions on movement of the public, including children. Using data collected from children living in a multi-ethnic city with high levels of deprivation, this study aimed to: (1) report children's self-reported physical activity (PA) during the first COVID-19 UK lockdown and identify associated factors; (2) examine changes of children's self-reported PA prior to and during the first UK lockdown. Methods: This study is part of the Born in Bradford (BiB) COVID-19 Research Study. PA (amended Youth Activity Profile), sleep, sedentary behaviours, daily frequency/time/destination/activity when leaving the home, were self-reported by 949 children (9–13 years). A sub-sample (n = 634) also self-reported PA (Physical Activity Questionnaire for Children) pre-pandemic (2017-February 2020). Univariate analysis assessed differences in PA between sex and ethnicity groups; multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with children's PA. Differences in children's levels of being sufficiently active prior to and during the lockdown were examined using the McNemar test; and multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors explaining change. Results: During the pandemic, White British (WB) children were more sufficiently active (34.1%) compared to Pakistani Heritage children (PH) (22.8%) or 'Other' ethnicity children (O) (22.8%). WB children reported leaving the home more frequently and for longer periods than PH and O children. Modifiable variables related to being sufficiently active were frequency, duration, type of activity, and destination away from the home environment. There was a large reduction in children being sufficiently active during the first COVID-19 lockdown (28.9%) compared to pre-pandemic (69.4%). Conclusions: Promoting safe extended periods of PA everyday outdoors is important for all children, in particular for children from ethnic minority groups. Children's PA during the first COVID-19 UK lockdown has drastically reduced from before. Policy and decision makers, and practitioners should consider the findings in order to begin to understand the impact and consequences that COVID-19 has had upon children's PA which is a key and vital behaviour for health and development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many women who experience gestational diabetes (GDM), gestational hypertension (GHT), pre-eclampsia (PE), have a spontaneous preterm birth (sPTB) or have an offspring born small/large for gestational age (SGA/LGA) do not meet the criteria for high-risk pregnancies based upon certain maternal risk factors. Tools that better predict these outcomes are needed to tailor antenatal care to risk. Recent studies have suggested that metabolomics may improve the prediction of these pregnancy-related disorders. These have largely been based on targeted platforms or focused on a single pregnancy outcome. The aim of this study was to assess the predictive ability of an untargeted platform of over 700 metabolites to predict the above pregnancy-related disorders in two cohorts. We used data collected from women in the Born in Bradford study (BiB; two sub-samples, n = 2000 and n = 1000) and the Pregnancy Outcome Prediction study (POPs; n = 827) to train, test and validate prediction models for GDM, PE, GHT, SGA, LGA and sPTB. We compared the predictive performance of three models: (1) risk factors (maternal age, pregnancy smoking, BMI, ethnicity and parity) (2) mass spectrometry (MS)-derived metabolites (n = 718 quantified metabolites, collected at 26–28 weeks' gestation) and (3) combined risk factors and metabolites. We used BiB for the training and testing of the models and POPs for independent validation. In both cohorts, discrimination for GDM, PE, LGA and SGA improved with the addition of metabolites to the risk factor model. The models' area under the curve (AUC) were similar for both cohorts, with good discrimination for GDM (AUC (95% CI) BiB 0.76 (0.71, 0.81) and POPs 0.76 (0.72, 0.81)) and LGA (BiB 0.86 (0.80, 0.91) and POPs 0.76 (0.60, 0.92)). Discrimination was improved for the combined models (compared to the risk factors models) for PE and SGA, with modest discrimination in both studies (PE-BiB 0.68 (0.58, 0.78) and POPs 0.66 (0.60, 0.71); SGA-BiB 0.68 (0.63, 0.74) and POPs 0.64 (0.59, 0.69)). Prediction for sPTB was poor in BiB and POPs for all models. In BiB, calibration for the combined models was good for GDM, LGA and SGA. Retained predictors include 4-hydroxyglutamate for GDM, LGA and PE and glycerol for GDM and PE. MS-derived metabolomics combined with maternal risk factors improves the prediction of GDM, PE, LGA and SGA, with good discrimination for GDM and LGA. Validation across two very different cohorts supports further investigation on whether the metabolites reflect novel causal paths to GDM and LGA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To describe the prevalence of factors related to well-being among primary school children in a deprived multiethnic community in the UK., Design and Participants: Cross-sectional survey of 15 641 children aged 7-10 years in Born in Bradford's Primary School Years study: whole-classroom samples in 89 Bradford primary schools between 2016 and 2019., Main Outcome Measures: Prevalence estimates by ethnicity (%, 95% CI) of single and multiple vulnerabilities in child well-being within and across four domains (Home, Family, Relationships; Material Resources; Friends and School; Subjective Well-being)., Results: Only 10% of children had no vulnerabilities in any domain of well-being; 10% had one or more vulnerabilities in all four domains. The highest prevalence estimates were for being bullied some or all of the time (52.7%, 95% CI: 51.9% to 53.4%), keeping worries to oneself (31.2%, 95% CI: 30.5% to 31.9%), having no park near home (30.8%, 95% CI: 30.1% to 31.5%) and worrying all the time about how much money their family has (26.3%, 95% CI: 25.6% to 27%). Boys were consistently significantly more likely than girls to report all of the vulnerabilities in the Home, Family and Family Relationships domain, and the majority of indicators in the other domains, and in all domains except Friends and School, boys were significantly more likely to have at least one vulnerability. Girls were significantly more likely to report not having many friends (16.7%, 95% CI: 15.9% to 17.6% vs 12.5%, 95% CI: 11.8% to 13.2%), being bullied some or all of the time (55.8%, 95% CI: 54.7% to 56.9% vs 49.7%, 95% CI: 48.6% to 50.8%) and feeling left out all the time (12.1%, 95% CI: 11.4% to 12.8%) versus (10.3%, 95% CI: 9.7% to 11.0%). Variations in vulnerabilities by ethnicity were complex, with children in black, Asian and minority ethnic groups sometimes reporting more vulnerabilities and sometimes fewer than white British children. For example, compared with children of Pakistani heritage, white British children were more likely to say that their family never gets along well (6.3%, 95% CI: 5.6% to 7.1% vs 4.1%, 95% CI: 3.6% to 4.6%) and to have no access to the internet at home (22.3%, 95% CI: 21% to 23.6% vs 18%, 95% CI: 17% to 18.9%). Children with Pakistani heritage were more likely than white British children to say they had no park near their home where they can play with friends (32.7%, 95% CI: 31.6% to 33.9% vs 29.9%, 95% CI: 28.6% to 31.3%), to report not having three meals a day (17.9%, 95% CI: 16.9% to 18.8% vs 11.9%, 95% CI: 10.9% to 12.9%) and to worry all the time about how much money their families have (29.3%, 95% CI: 28.2% to 30.3%) vs (21.6%, 95% CI: 20.4% to 22.9%). Gypsy/Irish Traveller children were less likely than white British children to say they were bullied some or all of the time (42.2%, 95% CI: 35.4% to 49.4% vs 53.8%, 95% CI: 52.3% to 55.3%), but more likely to say they were mean to others all the time (9.9%, 95% CI: 6.3% to 15.2% vs 4%, 95% CI: 3.5% to 4.7%) and can never work out what to do when things are hard (15.2%, 95% CI: 10.6% to 21.2% vs 9%, 95% CI: 8.2% to 9.9%). We considered six vulnerabilities to be of particular concern during the COVID-19 pandemic and associated national and local lockdowns: family never gets along well together; no garden where child can play; no nearby park where they can play; not having three meals a day; no internet at home; worried about money all the time. Pre-pandemic, 37.4% (95% CI: 36.6% to 38.3%) of Bradford children had one of these vulnerabilities and a further 29.6% (95% CI: 28.9% to 30.4%) had more than one., Conclusions: Although most primary school children aged 7-10 in our study had good levels of well-being on most indicators across multiple domains, fewer than 10% had no vulnerabilities at all, a worrying 10% had at least one vulnerability in all the four domains we studied and two-thirds had vulnerabilities of particular concern during the COVID-19 lockdowns., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)