To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This paper describes the epidemiology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Northern Ireland (NI) between 26 February 2020 and 26 April 2020, and analyses enhanced surveillance and contact tracing data collected between 26 February 2020 and 13 March 2020 to estimate secondary attack rates (SAR) and relative risk of infection among different categories of contacts of individuals with laboratory confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Our results show that during the study period COVID-19 cumulative incidence and mortality was lower in NI than the rest of the UK. Incidence and mortality were also lower than in the Republic of Ireland (ROI), although these observed differences are difficult to interpret given considerable differences in testing and surveillance between the two nations. SAR among household contacts was 15.9% (95% CI 6.6%–30.1%), over 6 times higher than the SAR among ‘high-risk’ contacts at 2.5% (95% CI 0.9%–5.4%). The results from logistic regression analysis of testing data on contacts of laboratory-confirmed cases show that household contacts had 11.0 times higher odds (aOR: 11.0, 95% CI 1.7–70.03, P-value: 0.011) of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 compared to other categories of contacts. These results demonstrate the importance of the household as a locus of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and the urgency of identifying effective interventions to reduce household transmission.
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate thrombocytopenia as a prognostic biomarker in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We performed a systematic literature search using PubMed, Embase and EuropePMC. The main outcome was composite poor outcome, a composite of mortality, severity, need for intensive care unit care and invasive mechanical ventilation. There were 8963 patients from 23 studies. Thrombocytopenia occurred in 18% of the patients. Male gender (P = 0.037) significantly reduce the incidence. Thrombocytopenia was associated with composite poor outcome (RR 1.90 (1.43–2.52), P < 0.001; I2: 92.3%). Subgroup analysis showed that thrombocytopenia was associated with mortality (RR 2.34 (1.23–4.45), P < 0.001; I2: 96.8%) and severity (RR 1.61 (1.33–1.96), P < 0.001; I2: 62.4%). Subgroup analysis for cut-off <100 × 109/l showed RR of 1.93 (1.37–2.72), P < 0.001; I2: 83.2%). Thrombocytopenia had a sensitivity of 0.26 (0.18–0.36), specificity of 0.89 (0.84–0.92), positive likelihood ratio of 2.3 (1.6–3.2), negative likelihood ratio of 0.83 (0.75–0.93), diagnostic odds ratio of 3 (2, 4) and area under curve of 0.70 (0.66–0.74) for composite poor outcome. Meta-regression analysis showed that the association between thrombocytopenia and poor outcome did not vary significantly with age, male, lymphocyte, d-dimer, hypertension, diabetes and CKD. Fagan's nomogram showed that the posterior probability of poor outcome was 50% in patients with thrombocytopenia, and 26% in those without thrombocytopenia. The Deek's funnel plot was relatively symmetrical and the quantitative asymmetry test was non-significant (P = 0.14). This study indicates that thrombocytopenia was associated with poor outcome in patients with COVID-19.
This paper adds to extant research by examining the relationship between employees’ fear of coronavirus disease 2019 and their suffering from insomnia. It specifically proposes mediating roles of employees' economic concerns and psychological distress and a moderating role of mindfulness in this process. The research hypotheses are tested with survey data collected through two studies among Pakistani-based professionals: 316 in study 1 and 421 in study 2. The results pinpoint a salient risk for employees who experience fear during a pandemic crisis, in that the associated economic and psychological hardships make the situation worse by undermining their sleep quality, which eventually could diminish the quality of their lives even further. It also reveals how organizations can mitigate this risk if employees can leverage pertinent personal resources, such as mindfulness.
To better understand coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission among healthcare workers (HCWs), we investigated occupational and nonoccupational risk factors associated with cumulative COVID-19 incidence among a Massachusetts HCW cohort.
Design, setting, and participants:
The retrospective cohort study included adult HCWs in a single healthcare system from March 9 to June 3, 2020.
Methods:
The SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal RT-PCR results and demographics of the study participants were deidentified and extracted from an established occupational health, COVID-19 database at the healthcare system. HCWs from each particular job grouping had been categorized into frontline or nonfrontline workers. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and odds ratios (ORs) were used to compare subgroups after excluding HCWs involved in early infection clusters before universal masking began. A sensitivity analysis was performed comparing jobs with the greatest potential occupational risks with others.
Results:
Of 5,177 HCWs, 152 (2.94%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. Affected HCWs resided in areas with higher community attack rates (median, 1,755.2 vs 1,412.4 cases per 100,000; P < .001; multivariate-adjusted IRR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.03–3.44 comparing fifth to first quintile of community rates). After multivariate adjustment, African-American and Hispanic HCWs had higher incidence of COVID-19 than non-Hispanic white HCWs (IRR, 2.78; 95% CI, 1.78–4.33; and IRR, 2.41, 95% CI, 1.42–4.07, respectively). After adjusting for race and residential rates, frontline HCWs had a higher IRR (1.73, 95% CI, 1.16–2.54) than nonfrontline HCWs overall, but not within specific job categories nor when comparing the highest risk jobs to others.
Conclusions:
After universal masking was instituted, the strongest risk factors associated with HCW COVID-19 infection were residential community infection rate and race.
To develop recommendations for strategies and interventions to reduce stigma and discrimination related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), through reviewing and synthesising evidence in relation to COVID-19 and other disease outbreaks and infectious/stigmatised conditions from systematic reviews and primary studies and recommendations from additional materials.
Methods
Rapid review, drawing on the World Health Organization's (WHO) methodology for developing interim guidelines during health emergencies. PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central and Campbell Collaboration searched up to mid-April 2020. Searches were supplemented by reference-searching and expert recommendations. Searches were designed to identify: (1) systematic reviews (<10 years), or (2) primary intervention studies (no date limit) reporting evidence on anti-stigma interventions (in relation to COVID-19 or other infectious/stigmatised conditions) or (3) additional relevant materials. Data were extracted on population, intervention, outcome and results. These data were compiled into evidence summary tables and narrative overviews. Recommendations on strategies for COVID-19 stigma-reduction were developed using the WHO ‘Evidence to Decision’ framework approach. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration ID: CRD42020177677).
Results
The searches identified a total of 4150 potentially relevant records, from which 12 systematic reviews and 29 additional articles were included. Overarching considerations and specific recommendations focus on: (1) language/words used in relation to COVID-19 and affected people; (2) media/journalistic practices; (3) public health interventions; (4) targeted public health interventions for key groups and (5) involving communities and key stakeholders.
Conclusions
These recommendations represent the first consolidated evidence-based guidance on stigma and discrimination reduction in relation to COVID-19. Mitigating the impact of stigma is critical in reducing distress and negative experiences, and strengthening communities' resolve to work together during exceptional circumstances. Ultimately, reducing stigma helps addressing structural inequalities that drive marginalisation and exacerbate both health risks and the impact of stigma. Administrations and decision makers are urged to consider integrating these recommendations into the ongoing COVID-19 response.
On-boat resuscitation can be applied by lifeguards in an inflatable rescue boat (IRB). Due to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-COV-2) and recommendations for the use of personal protective equipment (PPE), prehospital care procedures need to be re-evaluated. The objective of this study was to determine how the use of PPE influences the amount of preparation time needed before beginning actual resuscitation and the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR; QCPR) on an IRB.
Methods:
Three CPR tests were performed by 14 lifeguards, in teams of two, wearing different PPE: (1) Basic PPE (B-PPE): gloves, a mask, and protective glasses; (2) Full PPE (F-PPE): B-PPE + a waterproof apron; and (3) Basic PPE + plastic blanket (B+PPE). On-boat resuscitation using a bag-valve-mask (BVM) and high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter was performed sailing at 20km/hour.
Results:
Using B-PPE takes less time and is significantly faster than F-PPE (B-PPE 17 [SD = 2] seconds versus F-PPE 69 [SD = 17] seconds; P = .001), and the use of B+PPE is slightly higher (B-PPE 17 [SD = 2] seconds versus B+PPE 34 [SD = 6] seconds; P = .002). The QCPR remained similar in all three scenarios (P >.05), reaching values over 79%.
Conclusion:
The use of PPE during on-board resuscitation is feasible and does not interfere with quality when performed by trained lifeguards. The use of a plastic blanket could be a quick and easy alternative to offer extra protection to lifeguards during CPR on an IRB.
To examine associations between sociodemographic and mental health characteristics with household risk for food insecurity during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Design:
Cross-sectional online survey analysed using univariable tests and a multivariable logistic regression model.
Setting:
The United States during the week of 30 March 2020.
Participants:
A convenience sample of 1965 American adults using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform. Participants reporting household food insecurity prior to the pandemic were excluded from analyses.
Results:
One thousand two hundred and fifty participants reported household food security before the COVID-19 outbreak. Among this subset, 41 % were identified as at risk for food insecurity after COVID-19, 55 % were women and 73 % were white. On a multivariable analysis, race, income, relationship status, living situation, anxiety and depression were significantly associated with an incident risk for food insecurity. Black, Asian and Hispanic/Latino respondents, respondents with an annual income <$100 000 and those living with children or others were significantly more likely to be newly at risk for food insecurity. Individuals at risk for food insecurity were 2·60 (95 % CI 1·91, 3·55) times more likely to screen positively for anxiety and 1·71 (95 % CI 1·21, 2·42) times more likely to screen positively for depression.
Conclusions:
An increased risk for food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic is common, and certain populations are particularly vulnerable. There are strong associations between being at risk for food insecurity and anxiety/depression. Interventions to increase access to healthful foods, especially among minority and low-income individuals, and ease the socioemotional effects of the outbreak are crucial to relieving the economic stress of this pandemic.
This study aimed to identify and rank the different aspects of households’ vulnerability to food insecurity.
Design:
The data were collected by a standard online questionnaire. The Household Food Insecurity Access Scale was used to assess food insecurity levels, and first-order structural equation modelling was applied to determine factors that affect food insecurity. Seven dimensions of vulnerability were measured: economic, social, cultural, human, physical, psychology and information, using thirty-seven items extracted from the related literature review.
Setting:
This study was implemented in Tehran province in Iran.
Participants:
The sample included 392 families residing in Tehran province which was determined using random sampling.
Results:
About 61 % of the total sample faced food insecurity, at marginal, moderate and severe levels. Economic, psychological and human aspects of vulnerability had the highest effect on food insecurity during the initial COVID-19 lockdown.
Conclusions:
Authorities and policymakers must provide economic and financial support to vulnerable households. Abolition of US economic and financial sanctions imposed on Iran must be implemented to battle with COVID-19 in this country.
To explore the use of references to the COVID-19 pandemic as part of the marketing strategies used on Facebook to promote ultra-processed products.
Design:
A search for Facebook accounts of ultra-processed products was performed using a master list of products commercialised in two online supermarkets in Uruguay. For each of the identified Facebook accounts, all the content posted from the confirmation of the first cases of COVID-19 in Uruguay, on 14 March 2020, until 1 July 2020 was recorded. Posts including mentions to COVID-19, social distancing measures or their consequences were identified and analysed using content analysis.
Setting:
Uruguay, Latin America.
Results:
A total of 135 Facebook accounts were identified, which generated a total of 1749 posts related to ultra-processed products, from which 35 % included references to COVID-19. The majority of the posts included references to prevention measures. Approximately one-third of the posts included proposals of activities to do at home, most of which were linked to a healthy lifestyle. Tips for coping with quarantine and descriptions of the charitable work undertaken by brands were also identified.
Conclusions:
Results from the present work provide evidence that industries of ultra-processed products have taken advantage of the COVID-19 pandemic to promote their products, create positive associations with the brands and improve their image as part of their digital marketing strategies.
The sensitivity of the BinaxNOW coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Ag Card test (BinaxNOW) was 51.6% among asymptomatic healthcare employees relative to real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). The odds of a positive BinaxNOW test decreased as cycle threshold value increased. BinaxNOW could facilitate rapid detection and isolation of asymptomatically infected persons in some settings while rRT-PCR results are pending.
Understanding the extent of aerosol-based transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is important for tailoring interventions for control of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Multiple studies have reported the detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid in air samples, but only one study has successfully recovered viable virus, although it is limited by its small sample size.
Objective:
We aimed to determine the extent of shedding of viable SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory aerosols from COVID-19 patients.
Methods:
In this observational air sampling study, air samples from airborne-infection isolation rooms (AIIRs) and a community isolation facility (CIF) housing COVID-19 patients were collected using a water vapor condensation method into liquid collection media. Samples were tested for presence of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR), and qRT-PCR-positive samples were tested for viability using viral culture.
Results:
Samples from 6 (50%) of the 12 sampling cycles in hospital rooms were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, including aerosols ranging from <1 µm to >4 µm in diameter. Of 9 samples from the CIF, 1 was positive via qRT-PCR. Viral RNA concentrations ranged from 179 to 2,738 ORF1ab gene copies per cubic meter of air. Virus cultures were negative after 4 blind passages.
Conclusion:
Although SARS-CoV-2 is readily captured in aerosols, virus culture remains challenging despite optimized sampling methodologies to preserve virus viability. Further studies on aerosol-based transmission and control of SARS-CoV-2 are needed.
Rapid development and deployment of diagnostic testing for COVID-19 have been a key component of the public health response to the pandemic. Out of necessity, academic and other clinical laboratories developed laboratory testing innovations for COVID-19 to meet clinical testing demands. In addition to constraints on local testing supplies and equipment, a rapidly changing regulatory framework created challenges for translational scientists. Illustrative examples of approaches used to develop laboratory tests during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrate effective team science approaches to this challenging clinical care and public health emergency. These experiences and the associated lessons learned are relevant to the development of public health response plans for future pandemics.
The rate at which the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) spread required a rapid response across many, if not all, industries. Academic medical centers had to rapidly evaluate, prioritize, and coordinate the multiple requests for clinical trial participation. This involved redirecting resources and developing a collaborative system for assessment, decision making, and implementation. Our institution formed a team with diverse representation from multiple stakeholders to review and prioritize all research protocols related to COVID-19. To accomplish this, a prioritization matrix was developed to help determine the order in which the protocols should be placed for consideration by the treating clinician. The purpose of the team was to review the COVID-19 clinical trials in the pipeline, prioritize those trials that best met the needs of our patients, oversee training and resource needs, and lead the formulation of procedures for integration with clinical care. Resources from the Clinical Research Unit were then allocated to support the swift execution of such studies. This manuscript describes that process, the challenges encountered, and the lessons learned on how to make all clinical trials more successful in a complex and dynamic environment.