\
This version of BIP! Finder aims to ease the exploration of COVID-19-related literature by enabling ranking articles based on various impact metrics.
Last Update: 18 - 01 - 2023 (628506 entries)
Title | Venue | Year | Impact | Source | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
751 | Broad and Differential Animal Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 Receptor Usage by SARS-CoV-2 The COVID-19 pandemic has caused an unprecedented global public health and economic crisis. The origin and emergence of its causal agent, SARS-CoV-2, in the human population remains mysterious, although bat and pangolin were proposed to be the natural reservoirs. Strikingly, unlike the SARS-CoV-2-like coronaviruses (CoVs) identified in bats and pangolins, SARS-CoV-2 harbors a polybasic furin cleavage site in its spike (S) glycoprotein. SARS-CoV-2 uses human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) as its receptor to infect cells. Receptor recognition by the S protein is the major determinant of host range, tissue tropism, and pathogenesis of coronaviruses. In an effort to search for the potential intermediate or amplifying animal hosts of SARS-CoV-2, we examined receptor activity of ACE2 from 14 mammal species and found that ACE2s from multiple species can support the infectious entry of lentiviral particles pseudotyped with the wild-type or furin cleavage site-deficient S protein of SARS-CoV-2. ACE2 of human/rhesus monkey and rat/mouse exhibited the highest and lowest receptor activities, respectively. Among the remaining species, ACE2s from rabbit and pangolin strongly bound to the S1 subunit of SARS-CoV-2 S protein and efficiently supported the pseudotyped virus infection. These findings have important implications for understanding potential natural reservoirs, zoonotic transmission, human-to-animal transmission, and use of animal models. IMPORTANCE SARS-CoV-2 uses human ACE2 as a primary receptor for host cell entry. Viral entry mediated by the interaction of ACE2 with spike protein largely determines host range and is the major constraint to interspecies transmission. We examined the receptor activity of 14 ACE2 orthologs and found that wild-type and mutant SARS-CoV-2 lacking the furin cleavage site in S protein could utilize ACE2 from a broad range of animal species to enter host cells. These results have important implications in the natural hosts, interspecies transmission, animal models, and molecular basis of receptor binding for SARS-CoV-2. | J Virol | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
752 | Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions as a clinical presentation of mild-to-moderate forms of the coronavirus disease: a multicenter European study OBJECTIVE: To investigate the occurrence of olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions in patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection were recruited from 12 European hospitals. The following epidemiological and clinical outcomes have been studied: age, sex, ethnicity, comorbidities, and general and otolaryngological symptoms. Patients completed olfactory and gustatory questionnaires based on the smell and taste component of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, and the short version of the Questionnaire of Olfactory Disorders-Negative Statements (sQOD-NS). RESULTS: A total of 417 mild-to-moderate COVID-19 patients completed the study (263 females). The most prevalent general symptoms consisted of cough, myalgia, and loss of appetite. Face pain and nasal obstruction were the most disease-related otolaryngological symptoms. 85.6% and 88.0% of patients reported olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions, respectively. There was a significant association between both disorders (p < 0.001). Olfactory dysfunction (OD) appeared before the other symptoms in 11.8% of cases. The sQO-NS scores were significantly lower in patients with anosmia compared with normosmic or hyposmic individuals (p = 0.001). Among the 18.2% of patients without nasal obstruction or rhinorrhea, 79.7% were hyposmic or anosmic. The early olfactory recovery rate was 44.0%. Females were significantly more affected by olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions than males (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Olfactory and gustatory disorders are prevalent symptoms in European COVID-19 patients, who may not have nasal symptoms. The sudden anosmia or ageusia need to be recognized by the international scientific community as important symptoms of the COVID-19 infection. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00405-020-05965-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. | Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
753 | Consensus summary report for CEPI/BC March 12-13, 2020 meeting: Assessment of risk of disease enhancement with COVID-19 vaccines A novel coronavirus (CoV), Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), emerged in late 2019 in Wuhan, China and has since spread as a global pandemic. Safe and effective vaccines are thus urgently needed to reduce the significant morbidity and mortality of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease and ease the major economic impact. There has been an unprecedented rapid response by vaccine developers with now over one hundred vaccine candidates in development and at least six having reached clinical trials. However, a major challenge during rapid development is to avoid safety issues both by thoughtful vaccine design and by thorough evaluation in a timely manner. A syndrome of “disease enhancement” has been reported in the past for a few viral vaccines where those immunized suffered increased severity or death when they later encountered the virus or were found to have an increased frequency of infection. Animal models allowed scientists to determine the underlying mechanism for the former in the case of Respiratory Syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine and have been utilized to design and screen new RSV vaccine candidates. Because some Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and SARS-CoV-1 vaccines have shown evidence of disease enhancement in some animal models, this is a particular concern for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. To address this challenge, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) and the Brighton Collaboration (BC) Safety Platform for Emergency vACcines (SPEAC) convened a scientific working meeting on March 12 and 13, 2020 of experts in the field of vaccine immunology and coronaviruses to consider what vaccine designs could reduce safety concerns and how animal models and immunological assessments in early clinical trials can help to assess the risk. This report summarizes the evidence presented and provides considerations for safety assessment of COVID-19 vaccine candidates in accelerated vaccine development. | Vaccine | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
754 | Coronavirus-19 induces acute severe lung inflammation via IL-1 causing cytokine storm in COVID-19: a promising inhibitory strategy N/A | J Biol Regul Homeost Agents | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
755 | A neutralizing human antibody binds to the N-terminal domain of the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 Developing therapeutics against SARS-CoV-2 could be guided by the distribution of epitopes, not only on the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the Spike (S) protein, but also across the full Spike (S) protein. We isolated and characterized monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) from ten convalescent COVID-19 patients. Three mAbs showed neutralizing activities against authentic SARS-CoV-2. An mAb, named 4A8, exhibits high neutralization potency against both authentic and pseudotyped SARS-CoV-2, but does not bind the RBD. We defined the epitope of 4A8 as the N terminal domain (NTD) of the S protein by determining its cryo-EM structure in complex with the S protein to an overall resolution of 3.1 Angstrom and local resolution of 3.3 Angstrom for the 4A8-NTD interface. This points to the NTD as a promising target for therapeutic mAbs against COVID-19. | Science | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
756 | Factors Affecting Side Effects, Seroconversion Rates and Antibody Response After Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Healthcare Workers N/A | Mikrobiyol Bul | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
757 | The Second Shot of CoronaVac Vaccine May Cause Reduction of Antibody Levels in People who Previously had COVID-19 N/A | Mikrobiyol Bul | 2022 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
758 | PTSD symptoms among health workers and public service providers during the COVID-19 outbreak In the frontline of the pandemic stand healthcare workers and public service providers, occupations which have proven to be associated with increased mental health problems during pandemic crises. This cross-sectional, survey-based study collected data from 1773 healthcare workers and public service providers throughout Norway between March 31, 2020 and April 7, 2020, which encompasses a timeframe where all non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) were held constant. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety and depression were assessed by the Norwegian version of the PTSD checklist (PCL-5), General Anxiety Disorder –7, and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), respectively. Health anxiety and specific predictors were assessed with specific items. Multiple regression analysis was used for predictor analysis. A total of 28.9% of the sample had clinical or subclinical symptoms of PTSD, and 21.2% and 20.5% were above the established cut-offs for anxiety and depression. Those working directly in contrast to indirectly with COVID-19 patients had significantly higher PTSD symptoms. Worries about job and economy, negative metacognitions, burnout, health anxiety and emotional support were significantly associated with PTSD symptoms, after controlling for demographic variables and psychological symptoms. Health workers and public service providers are experiencing high levels of PTSD symptoms, anxiety and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health workers working directly with COVID-19 patients have significantly higher levels of PTSD symptoms and depression compared to those working indirectly. Appropriate action to monitor and reduce PTSD, anxiety, and depression among these groups of individuals working in the frontline of pandemic with crucial societal roles should be taken immediately. | PLoS One | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
759 | A novel coronavirus associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome N/A | N Engl J Med | 2003 | CORD-19 | |
760 | High risk of thrombosis in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection: a multicenter prospective cohort study PURPOSE: Little evidence of increased thrombotic risk is available in COVID-19 patients. Our purpose was to assess thrombotic risk in severe forms of SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: All patients referred to 4 intensive care units (ICUs) from two centers of a French tertiary hospital for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 between March 3rd and 31st 2020 were included. Medical history, symptoms, biological data and imaging were prospectively collected. Propensity score matching was performed to analyze the occurrence of thromboembolic events between non-COVID-19 ARDS and COVID-19 ARDS patients. RESULTS: 150 COVID-19 patients were included (122 men, median age 63 [53; 71] years, SAPSII 49 [37; 64] points). Sixty-four clinically relevant thrombotic complications were diagnosed in 150 patients, mainly pulmonary embolisms (16.7%). 28/29 patients (96.6%) receiving continuous renal replacement therapy experienced circuit clotting. Three thrombotic occlusions (in 2 patients) of centrifugal pump occurred in 12 patients (8%) supported by ECMO. Most patients (> 95%) had elevated D-dimer and fibrinogen. No patient developed disseminated intravascular coagulation. Von Willebrand (vWF) activity, vWF antigen and FVIII were considerably increased, and 50/57 tested patients (87.7%) had positive lupus anticoagulant. Comparison with non-COVID-19 ARDS patients (n = 145) confirmed that COVID-19 ARDS patients (n = 77) developed significantly more thrombotic complications, mainly pulmonary embolisms (11.7 vs. 2.1%, p < 0.008). Coagulation parameters significantly differed between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Despite anticoagulation, a high number of patients with ARDS secondary to COVID-19 developed life-threatening thrombotic complications. Higher anticoagulation targets than in usual critically ill patients should therefore probably be suggested. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00134-020-06062-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. | Intensive Care Med | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
761 | Function is more reliable than quantity to follow up the humoral response to the Receptor Binding Domain of SARS- CoV-2 Spike protein after natural infection or COVID-19 vaccination On this work we report that despite of a decline in the total anti-Spike antibodies the neutralizing antibodies remains at a similar level for an average of 98 days in a longitudinal cohort of 59 Hispanic/Latino exposed to SARS-CoV-2. We are also reporting that the percentage of neutralization correlates with the IgG titers and that in the first collected samples, IgG1 was the predominant isotype (62.71%), followed by IgG4 (15.25%), IgG3 (13.56%), and IgG2 (8.47%) during the tested period. The IgA was detectable in 28.81% of subjects. Only 62.71% of all subjects have detectable IgM in the first sample despite of confirmed infection by a molecular method. Our data suggests that 100% that seroconvert make detectable neutralizing antibody responses measured by a surrogate viral neutralization test. We also found that the IgG titers and neutralizing activity were higher after the first dose in 10 vaccinated subjects out of the 59 with prior infection compare to a subgroup of 21 subjects naïve to SARS-CoV-2. One dose was enough but two were necessary to reach the maximum percentage of neutralization in subjects with previous natural infection or naïve to SARS-CoV-2 respectively. Like the pattern seen after the natural infection, after the second vaccine dose, the total anti-S antibodies and titers declined but not the neutralizing activity which remains at same levels for more than 80 days after the first vaccine dose. That decline, however, was significantly lower in pre-exposed individuals which denotes the contribution of the natural infection priming a more robust immune response to the vaccine. Also, our data indicates that the natural infection induces a more robust humoral immune response than the first vaccine dose in unexposed subjects. However, the difference was significant only when the neutralization was measured but not by assessing the total anti-S antibodies or the IgG titers. This work is an important contribution to understand the natural immune response to the novel coronavirus in a population severely hit by the virus. Also provide an invaluable data by comparing the dynamic of the immune response after the natural infection vs. the vaccination and suggesting that a functional test is a better marker than the presence or not of antibodies. On this context our results are also highly relevant to consider standardizing methods that in addition to serve as a tool to follow up the immune response to the vaccines may also provide a correlate of protection. | medRxiv | 2021 | CORD-19 | |
762 | Waning Immunity after the BNT162b2 Vaccine in Israel BACKGROUND: In December 2020, Israel began a mass vaccination campaign against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) by administering the BNT162b2 vaccine, which led to a sharp curtailing of the outbreak. After a period with almost no cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, a resurgent Covid-19 outbreak began in mid-June 2021. Possible reasons for the resurgence were reduced vaccine effectiveness against the delta (B.1.617.2) variant and waning immunity. The extent of waning immunity of the vaccine against the delta variant in Israel is unclear. METHODS: We used data on confirmed infection and severe disease collected from an Israeli national database for the period of July 11 to 31, 2021, for all Israeli residents who had been fully vaccinated before June 2021. We used a Poisson regression model to compare rates of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe Covid-19 among persons vaccinated during different time periods, with stratification according to age group and with adjustment for possible confounding factors. RESULTS: Among persons 60 years of age or older, the rate of infection in the July 11–31 period was higher among persons who became fully vaccinated in January 2021 (when they were first eligible) than among those fully vaccinated 2 months later, in March (rate ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 2.0). Among persons 40 to 59 years of age, the rate ratio for infection among those fully vaccinated in February (when they were first eligible), as compared with 2 months later, in April, was 1.7 (95% CI, 1.4 to 2.1). Among persons 16 to 39 years of age, the rate ratio for infection among those fully vaccinated in March (when they were first eligible), as compared with 2 months later, in May, was 1.6 (95% CI, 1.3 to 2.0). The rate ratio for severe disease among persons fully vaccinated in the month when they were first eligible, as compared with those fully vaccinated in March, was 1.8 (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.9) among persons 60 years of age or older and 2.2 (95% CI, 0.6 to 7.7) among those 40 to 59 years of age; owing to small numbers, the rate ratio could not be calculated among persons 16 to 39 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that immunity against the delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 waned in all age groups a few months after receipt of the second dose of vaccine. | N Engl J Med | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
763 | A cohort analysis of SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike protein receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG levels and neutralizing antibodies in fully vaccinated healthcare workers N/A | Clin Chem Lab Med | 2022 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
764 | A longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 biorepository for COVID-19 survivors with and without post-acute sequelae BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 has swept across the globe, causing millions of deaths worldwide. Though most survive, many experience symptoms of COVID-19 for months after acute infection. Successful prevention and treatment of acute COVID-19 infection and its associated sequelae is dependent on in-depth knowledge of viral pathology across the spectrum of patient phenotypes and physiologic responses. Longitudinal biobanking provides a valuable resource of clinically integrated, easily accessed, and quality-controlled samples for researchers to study differential multi-organ system responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection, post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC), and vaccination. METHODS: Adults with a history of a positive SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal PCR are actively recruited from the community or hospital settings to enroll in the Northern Colorado SARS-CoV-2 Biorepository (NoCo-COBIO). Blood, saliva, stool, nasopharyngeal specimens, and extensive clinical and demographic data are collected at 4 time points over 6 months. Patients are assessed for PASC during longitudinal follow-up by physician led symptom questionnaires and physical exams. This clinical trial registration is NCT04603677. RESULTS: We have enrolled and collected samples from 119 adults since July 2020, with 66% follow-up rate. Forty-nine percent of participants assessed with a symptom surveillance questionnaire (N = 37 of 75) had PASC at any time during follow-up (up to 8 months post infection). Ninety-three percent of hospitalized participants developed PASC, while 23% of those not requiring hospitalization developed PASC. At 90–174 days post SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, 67% of all participants had persistent symptoms (N = 37 of 55), and 85% percent of participants who required hospitalization during initial infection (N = 20) still had symptoms. The most common symptoms reported after 15 days of infection were fatigue, loss of smell, loss of taste, exercise intolerance, and cognitive dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who were hospitalized for COVID-19 were significantly more likely to have PASC than those not requiring hospitalization, however 23% of patients who were not hospitalized also developed PASC. This patient-matched, multi-matrix, longitudinal biorepository from COVID-19 survivors with and without PASC will allow for current and future research to better understand the pathophysiology of disease and to identify targeted interventions to reduce risk for PASC. Registered 27 October 2020 - Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04603677. | BMC Infect Dis | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
765 | A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker) N/A | Nat Hum Behav | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
766 | Mental health circumstances among Healthcare workers and general public under the pandemic situation of COVID-19 (HOME-COVID-19) BACKGROUND: After the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) globally, upgraded quarantine and physical distancing strategy, strict infection measures, and government's strict lockdown have been abided to confront the spread of the COVID-19 in Thailand. During the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns about the mental health and psychosocial problems among health care workers and the general population are now arising. Yet, information on mental health and psychosocial problems among health care workers and the general population have not been comprehensively reported in Thailand. As such, we conduct a cross-sectional study, a national online survey to describe the short- and long-term consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health and psychosocial problems among health care workers and the general population in Thailand. METHODS: This study is a repeated cross-sectional study, an open online voluntary national-based survey during the wave I (April 21–May 4, 2020) follow-up in the wave II (August 3–16, 2020), wave III (November 15–28, 2020), and a 1-year follow-up survey (wave IV: April 21–May 4, 2021) in Thailand. Health care workers at the hospitals and the adult general population will be invited to participate in the online survey via the SurveyMonkey that limits one-time participation per unique internet protocol address. The target sample size of at least 1182 health care workers and 1310 general populations will be required to complete the online survey for each wave of the survey. Sociodemographic characteristics and a set of measurement tools for mental and psychosocial problems for each subcohort including depression, anxiety, stress, resilient copings, neuroticism, perceived social support, wellbeing, somatic symptoms, insomnia, burnout (for healthcare workers), and public stigma toward COVID-19 infection (for the general population) will be collected. For all estimates of prevalence, we will weigh data for all wave analyses under the complex design of the survey. Subgroup analyses stratified by key characteristics will also be done to analyze the proportion differences. For the repeated cross-sectional survey, we will combine the data from the wave I to wave IV survey to analyze changes in the mental health status. We will perform multilevel logistic regression models with random intercepts to explore associations with individual-level and region-level/hospital-level predictors. We also plan to perform an ancillary systematic review and meta-analysis by incorporating data from our findings to all available evidence. RESULTS: Our findings will provide information on the short- and long-term mental health status as well as the psychosocial responses to the COVID-19 outbreak in a national sample of health care workers and the general population in Thailand. CONCLUSION: This prospective, nationally based, a repeated cross-sectional study will describe the mental health status and psychosocial problems among health care workers and the general population in Thailand during the COVID-19 pandemic. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Faculty of Public Health and Faculty of Pharmacy, Chiang Mai University. The findings will be disseminated through public, scientific, and professional meetings, and publications in peer-reviewed journals. THAI CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY (TCTR) REGISTRATION NUMBER: TCTR20200425001. | Medicine (Baltimore) | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
767 | The epidemiology and pathogenesis of coronavirus disease outbreak Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is caused by SARS-COV2 and represents the causative agent of a potentially fatal disease that is of great global public health concern. Based on the large number of infected people that were exposed to the wet animal market in Wuhan City, China, it is suggested that this is likely the zoonotic origin of COVID-19. Person-to-person transmission of COVID-19 infection led to the isolation of patients that were subsequently administered a variety of treatments. Extensive measures to reduce person-to-person transmission of COVID-19 have been implemented to control the current outbreak. Special attention and efforts to protect or reduce transmission should be applied in susceptible populations including children, health care providers, and elderly people. In this review, we highlights the symptoms, epidemiology, transmission, pathogenesis, phylogenetic analysis and future directions to control the spread of this fatal disease. | J Autoimmun | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
768 | Hydroxychloroquine efficacy and safety in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease severity during pregnancy (COVID-Preg): a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised placebo controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives of the study are: 1. To assess the effect of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in reducing SARS-CoV-2 viral shedding by PCR in infected pregnant women with mild symptoms. 2. To assess the efficacy of HCQ to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant women in contact with an infected or suspected case. 3. To evaluate the effect of HCQ in preventing the development of the COVID-19 disease in asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant women. The secondary objectives are: 1. To determine the effect of HCQ on the clinical course and duration of the COVID-19 disease in SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant women. 2. To determine the impact of HCQ on the risk of hospitalization and mortality of SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant women. 3. To assess the safety and tolerability of HCQ in pregnant women. 4. To describe the clinical presentation of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. 5. To describe the effects of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection on pregnancy and perinatal outcomes by treatment group. 6. To determine the risk of vertical transmission (intra-utero and intra-partum) of SARS-CoV-2. TRIAL DESIGN: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled two-arm multicentre clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of HCQ to prevent and/or minimize SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. Participants will be randomized to receive a 14-day oral treatment course of HCQ or placebo, ratio 1:1. PARTICIPANTS: Study population: pregnant women undergoing routine prenatal follow up or attending emergency units at the participating hospitals who report either symptoms/signs suggestive of COVID-19 disease or close contact with a suspected or confirmed COVID-19 case. Inclusion criteria Women will be invited to participate in the trial and sign an informed consent if they meet the following inclusion criteria. • Presenting with fever (≥37.5°C) and/or one mild symptom suggestive of COVID-19 disease (cough, dyspnoea, chills, odynophagia, diarrhoea, muscle pain, anosmia, dysgeusia, headache) OR being contact* of a SARS-CoV-2 confirmed or suspected case in the past 14 days • More than 12 weeks of gestation (dated by ultrasonography) • Agreement to deliver in the study hospitals Exclusion criteria • Known hypersensitivity to HCQ or other 4-amonoquinoline compounds • History of retinopathy of any aetiology • Concomitant use of digoxin, cyclosporine, cimetidine • Known liver disease • Clinical history of cardiac pathology including known long QT syndrome • Unable to cooperate with the requirements of the study • Participating in other intervention studies • Delivery onset (characterized by painful uterine contractions and variable changes of the cervix, including some degree of effacement and slower progression of dilatation up to 5 cm for first and subsequent labours) The study participants will be stratified by clinical presentation and SARS-CoV-2 PCR results. Assignment of participants to study groups will be as follows: • SARS-CoV-2-PCR confirmed, infected pregnant women: a. symptomatic (n=100) b. asymptomatic (n=100) • SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative pregnant women in contact* with a SARS-CoV-2-infected confirmed or suspected case (n=514). *The ECDC definition of close contact will be followed. The trial will be conducted in five hospitals in Spain: Hospital Clínic of Barcelona, Hospital Sant Joan de Déu and Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, in Barcelona, and HM Puerta del Sur and Hospital Universitario de Torrejón, in Madrid. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Participants will be randomized to HCQ (400 mg/day for three days, followed by 200 mg/day for 11 days) or placebo (2 tablets for three days, followed by one tablet for 11 days). MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is the number of PCR-confirmed infected pregnant women assessed from collected nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs at day 21 after treatment start (one week after treatment is completed). RANDOMISATION: Allocation of participants to study arms will be done centrally by the trial’s Sponsor (the Barcelona Institute for Global Health, ISGlobal) by block randomization. This method will ensure balanced allocation to both arms. The electronic CRF will automatically assign a study number to each participant, depending on her study group and recruitment site. Each number will be related to a treatment number, which assigns them to one of the study arms. BLINDING (MASKING): Participants, caregivers, investigators and those assessing the outcomes will be blinded to group assignment. Study tablets (HCQ and placebo) will be identically packaged in small opaque bottles. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): This study requires 200 SARS-CoV-2 infected and 514 contact pregnant women, randomised 1:1 with 100 and 227 respectively in each study arm. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 1.0, from May 8(th), 2020. Recruitment is ongoing (first patient recruited the 19(th) May 2020 and recruitment end anticipated by December 2020). TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number: 2020-001587-29, registered 2 April 2020. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04410562, retrospectively registered 1 June 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. | Trials | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
769 | Potent neutralizing antibodies against multiple epitopes on SARS-CoV-2 spike N/A | Nature | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
770 | Comparing Public Perceptions and Preventive Behaviors During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Hong Kong and the United Kingdom: Cross-sectional Survey Study BACKGROUND: Given the public health responses to previous respiratory disease pandemics, and in the absence of treatments and vaccines, the mitigation of the COVID-19 pandemic relies on population engagement in nonpharmaceutical interventions. This engagement is largely driven by risk perception, anxiety levels, and knowledge, as well as by historical exposure to disease outbreaks, government responses, and cultural factors. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare psychobehavioral responses in Hong Kong and the United Kingdom during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Comparable cross-sectional surveys were administered to adults in Hong Kong and the United Kingdom during the early phase of the epidemic in each setting. Explanatory variables included demographics, risk perception, knowledge of COVID-19, anxiety level, and preventive behaviors. Responses were weighted according to census data. Logistic regression models, including effect modification to quantify setting differences, were used to assess the association between the explanatory variables and the adoption of social distancing measures. RESULTS: Data from 3431 complete responses (Hong Kong, 1663; United Kingdom, 1768) were analyzed. Perceived severity of symptoms differed by setting, with weighted percentages of 96.8% for Hong Kong (1621/1663) and 19.9% for the United Kingdom (366/1768). A large proportion of respondents were abnormally or borderline anxious (Hong Kong: 1077/1603, 60.0%; United Kingdom: 812/1768, 46.5%) and regarded direct contact with infected individuals as the transmission route of COVID-19 (Hong Kong: 94.0%-98.5%; United Kingdom: 69.2%-93.5%; all percentages weighted), with Hong Kong identifying additional routes. Hong Kong reported high levels of adoption of various social distancing measures (Hong Kong: 32.6%-93.7%; United Kingdom: 17.6%-59.0%) and mask-wearing (Hong Kong: 98.8% (1647/1663); United Kingdom: 3.1% (53/1768)). The impact of perceived severity of symptoms and perceived ease of transmission of COVID-19 on the adoption of social distancing measures varied by setting. In Hong Kong, these factors had no impact, whereas in the United Kingdom, those who perceived their symptom severity as “high” were more likely to adopt social distancing (adjusted odds ratios [aORs] 1.58-3.01), and those who perceived transmission as “easy” were prone to adopt both general social distancing (aOR 2.00, 95% CI 1.57-2.55) and contact avoidance (aOR 1.80, 95% CI 1.41-2.30). The impact of anxiety on adopting social distancing did not vary by setting. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that health officials should ascertain baseline levels of risk perception and knowledge in populations, as well as prior sensitization to infectious disease outbreaks, during the development of mitigation strategies. Risk should be communicated through suitable media channels—and trust should be maintained—while early intervention remains the cornerstone of effective outbreak response. | J Med Internet Res | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
771 | Who should be prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination in China? A descriptive study BACKGROUND: All countries are facing decisions about which population groups to prioritize for access to COVID-19 vaccination after the first vaccine products have been licensed, at which time supply shortages are inevitable. Our objective is to define the key target populations, their size, and priority for a COVID-19 vaccination program in the context of China. METHODS: On the basis of utilitarian and egalitarian principles, we define and estimate the size of tiered target population groups for a phased introduction of COVID-19 vaccination, considering evolving goals as vaccine supplies increase, detailed information on the risk of illness and transmission, and past experience with vaccination during the 2009 influenza pandemic. Using publicly available data, we estimated the size of target population groups, and the number of days needed to vaccinate 70% of the target population. Sensitivity analyses considered higher vaccine coverages and scaled up vaccine delivery relative to the 2009 pandemic. RESULTS: Essential workers, including staff in the healthcare, law enforcement, security, nursing homes, social welfare institutes, community services, energy, food and transportation sectors, and overseas workers/students (49.7 million) could be prioritized for vaccination to maintain essential services in the early phase of a vaccination program. Subsequently, older adults, individuals with underlying health conditions and pregnant women (563.6 million) could be targeted for vaccination to reduce the number of individuals with severe COVID-19 outcomes, including hospitalizations, critical care admissions, and deaths. In later stages, the vaccination program could be further extended to target adults without underlying health conditions and children (784.8 million), in order to reduce symptomatic infections and/or to stop virus transmission. Given 10 million doses administered per day, and a two-dose vaccination schedule, it would take 1 week to vaccinate essential workers but likely up to 7 months to vaccinate 70% of the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed framework is general but could assist Chinese policy-makers in the design of a vaccination program. Additionally, this exercise could be generalized to inform other national and regional strategies for use of COVID-19 vaccines, especially in low- and middle-income countries. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12916-021-01923-8. | BMC Med | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
772 | Serological study of CoronaVac vaccine and booster doses in Chile: immunogenicity and persistence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike antibodies N/A | BMC Med | 2022 | LitCov | |
773 | Effectiveness of isolation, testing, contact tracing and physical distancing on reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in different settings: a mathematical modelling study BACKGROUND: The isolation of symptomatic cases and tracing of contacts has been used as an early COVID-19 containment measure in many countries, with additional physical distancing measures also introduced as outbreaks have grown. To maintain control of infection while also reducing disruption to populations, there is a need to understand what combination of measures—including novel digital tracing approaches and less intensive physical distancing—might be required to reduce transmission. We aimed to estimate the reduction in transmission under different control measures across settings and how many contacts would be quarantined per day in different strategies for a given level of symptomatic case incidence. METHODS: For this mathematical modelling study, we used a model of individual-level transmission stratified by setting (household, work, school, or other) based on BBC Pandemic data from 40 162 UK participants. We simulated the effect of a range of different testing, isolation, tracing, and physical distancing scenarios. Under optimistic but plausible assumptions, we estimated reduction in the effective reproduction number and the number of contacts that would be newly quarantined each day under different strategies. RESULTS: We estimated that combined isolation and tracing strategies would reduce transmission more than mass testing or self-isolation alone: mean transmission reduction of 2% for mass random testing of 5% of the population each week, 29% for self-isolation alone of symptomatic cases within the household, 35% for self-isolation alone outside the household, 37% for self-isolation plus household quarantine, 64% for self-isolation and household quarantine with the addition of manual contact tracing of all contacts, 57% with the addition of manual tracing of acquaintances only, and 47% with the addition of app-based tracing only. If limits were placed on gatherings outside of home, school, or work, then manual contact tracing of acquaintances alone could have an effect on transmission reduction similar to that of detailed contact tracing. In a scenario where 1000 new symptomatic cases that met the definition to trigger contact tracing occurred per day, we estimated that, in most contact tracing strategies, 15 000–41 000 contacts would be newly quarantined each day. INTERPRETATION: Consistent with previous modelling studies and country-specific COVID-19 responses to date, our analysis estimated that a high proportion of cases would need to self-isolate and a high proportion of their contacts to be successfully traced to ensure an effective reproduction number lower than 1 in the absence of other measures. If combined with moderate physical distancing measures, self-isolation and contact tracing would be more likely to achieve control of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, European Commission, Royal Society, Medical Research Council. | Lancet Infect Dis | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
774 | Vaccine Hesitancy and Exposure to Misinformation: a Survey Analysis INTRODUCTION: Despite the widespread availability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the USA, vaccine hesitancy continues to represent a significant impediment to the attainment of herd immunity and the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. This survey analysis provides an update for clinical healthcare providers and public health officials regarding current trends in misinformation exposure, as well as common objections to COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey of 600 adults in the state of Florida between June 3 and June 14, 2021. Access to the sample was purchased through an industry-leading market research provider (Prodege MR), and survey respondents were selected using a stratified, quota sampling approach to ensure representativeness. Balanced quotas were determined (by region of the state) for gender, age, race, education, and ethnicity. The survey responses were analyzed using basic descriptive statistics, as well as chi-square testing and a logit regression model. FINDINGS: High levels of misinformation exposure were observed among participants, with 73% reporting some exposure to misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines in the past 6 months. Exposure to misinformation was directly correlated with vaccine hesitancy. Among those who did not report any exposure to misinformation, 73.8% of respondents were vaccinated. That number fell to 62.9% with exposure to just one misinformation theme and 52.2% for six or more (χ(2) = 11.349; φ = 0.138; p ≤ 0.05). Politicization was also found to be a major factor in vaccine hesitancy, with 73.4% of self-identified Democrats being vaccinated, compared to only 58.5% of Republicans and 56.5% of Independents (χ(2) = 16.334; φ = 0.165; p ≤ 0.001). Both misinformation exposure and political affiliation were strong predictors of vaccination even after accounting for other demographic predictors. DISCUSSION: The survey results add to previous research on misinformation and vaccine hesitancy by quantifying exposure to specific misinformation themes and identifying its relationship to vaccine hesitancy. Overcoming these impediments to vaccination will require strategic and targeted messaging on the part of public health professionals, which may be aided by collaboration with political thought leaders. Understanding the volume and nature of misinformation themes the public is exposed to regarding COVID-19 vaccines may aid public health officials in targeting this vaccine messaging to more directly address reasons for vaccine hesitancy. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11606-021-07171-z. | J Gen Intern Med | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
775 | Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2: Genomics, transmissibility and responses to current COVID-19 vaccines Currently, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) has spread worldwide as an Omicron variant. This variant is a heavily mutated virus and designated as a variant of concern by the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO cautioned that the Omicron variant of SARS‐CoV‐2 held a very high risk of infection, reigniting anxieties about the economy's recovery from the 2‐year pandemic. The extensively mutated Omicron variant is likely to spread internationally, posing a high risk of infection surges with serious repercussions in some areas. According to preliminary data, the Omicron variant of SARS‐CoV‐2 has a higher risk of reinfection. On the other hand, whether the current COVID‐19 vaccines could effectively resist the new strain is still under investigation. However, there is very limited information on the current situation of the Omicron variant, such as genomics, transmissibility, efficacy of vaccines, treatment, and management. This review focused on the genomics, transmission, and effectiveness of vaccines against the Omicron variant, which will be helpful for further investigation of a new variant of SARS‐CoV‐2. | J Med Virol | 2022 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
776 | Clinical characteristics and intrauterine vertical transmission potential of COVID-19 infection in nine pregnant women: a retrospective review of medical records Summary Background Previous studies on the pneumonia outbreak caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) were based on information from the general population. Limited data are available for pregnant women with COVID-19 pneumonia. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in pregnancy and the intrauterine vertical transmission potential of COVID-19 infection. Methods Clinical records, laboratory results, and chest CT scans were retrospectively reviewed for nine pregnant women with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia (ie, with maternal throat swab samples that were positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]) who were admitted to Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China, from Jan 20 to Jan 31, 2020. Evidence of intrauterine vertical transmission was assessed by testing for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in amniotic fluid, cord blood, and neonatal throat swab samples. Breastmilk samples were also collected and tested from patients after the first lactation. Findings All nine patients had a caesarean section in their third trimester. Seven patients presented with a fever. Other symptoms, including cough (in four of nine patients), myalgia (in three), sore throat (in two), and malaise (in two), were also observed. Fetal distress was monitored in two cases. Five of nine patients had lymphopenia (<1·0 × 10⁹ cells per L). Three patients had increased aminotransferase concentrations. None of the patients developed severe COVID-19 pneumonia or died, as of Feb 4, 2020. Nine livebirths were recorded. No neonatal asphyxia was observed in newborn babies. All nine livebirths had a 1-min Apgar score of 8–9 and a 5-min Apgar score of 9–10. Amniotic fluid, cord blood, neonatal throat swab, and breastmilk samples from six patients were tested for SARS-CoV-2, and all samples tested negative for the virus. Interpretation The clinical characteristics of COVID-19 pneumonia in pregnant women were similar to those reported for non-pregnant adult patients who developed COVID-19 pneumonia. Findings from this small group of cases suggest that there is currently no evidence for intrauterine infection caused by vertical transmission in women who develop COVID-19 pneumonia in late pregnancy. Funding Hubei Science and Technology Plan, Wuhan University Medical Development Plan. | Lancet | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
777 | SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in Upper Respiratory Specimens of Infected Patients | N Engl J Med | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
778 | Fertility patients under COVID-19: attitudes, perceptions and psychological reactions STUDY QUESTION: What are the perceptions of infertility patients and the factors correlating with their psychological distress, following suspension of fertility treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic? SUMMARY ANSWER: Most patients preferred to resume treatment given the chance regardless of background characteristics; higher self-mastery and greater perceived social support were associated with lower distress, while feeling helpless was associated with higher distress. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Infertility diagnosis and treatment frequently result in significant psychological distress. Recently published data has shown that clinic closure during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a sharp increase in the prevalence of anxiety and depression among infertile patients undergoing IVF and was perceived as an uncontrollable and stressful event. Personal resources play an important protective role in times of crisis, helping reduce levels of distress. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This cross-sectional questionnaire study included patients whose fertility treatment was suspended following the COVID-19 pandemic, in a tertiary hospital. The survey was delivered to 297 patients within 12 days at the beginning of April 2020. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The self-administered questionnaire included items addressing: 1. patients' demographic characteristics, 2. anxiety related to COVID-19 infection risk and level of social support, 3. patients' perceptions of the new guidelines and description of subsequently related emotions, and 4. two validated scales assessing levels of emotional distress and self-mastery. Multivariate analysis was conducted to assess factors alleviating or increasing emotional distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: There were 168 patients who completed the survey, giving a response rate of 57%. Study variables in the regression model explained 38.9% of the variance in psychological distress experienced by patients during treatment suspension. None of the background characteristics (e.g. age, marital status, parity, economic level or duration of treatments) had a significant contribution. Feeling helpless following the suspension of treatments was associated with higher distress (P < 0.01). Higher self-mastery and greater perceived social support were associated with lower distress (p < 0.01). Despite the ministry of health’s decision, 72% of patients wished to resume treatment at the time of survey. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This was a cross-sectional study, thus information about patients’ characteristics prior to the COVID-19 pandemic was not available. The length and implications of this pandemic are unknown. Therefore, the ability to draw conclusions about the psychological consequences of the crisis is limited at this point of time. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Personal resources play an important protective role in times of crisis, helping to reduce levels of distress. Study findings suggest that attention should be paid to strengthening and empowering patients’ personal resources together with directly confronting and containing feelings of helplessness. In line with the ESHRE guidelines, especially at this time of high levels of distress, it is imperative to offer emotional support to reduce stress and concerns. Furthermore, as the pandemic is stabilising, resumption of treatment should be considered as soon as appropriate according to local conditions. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by the IVF unit of the Shamir Medical Center. All authors declare no conflicts of interest. | Hum Reprod | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
779 | SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and Construction Industry: insights from Italian data N/A | Acta Biomed | 2022 | LitCov | |
780 | Anxiety, depression, stress, fear and social support during COVID-19 pandemic among Jordanian healthcare workers The emergence of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected health-care workers’ psychological and mental health. Few studies have been conducted examining the psychological effect of COVID-19 on health-care worker psychological health in Jordan. Therefore, the present study aims to assess the respective levels of fear, anxiety, depression, stress, social support, and the associated factors, experienced by Jordanian health-care workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic. This study adopted a cross-sectional, correlational design to collect data from 365 health-care workers in Amman, Jordan, from August 16th to 23rd, 2020. Along with collecting sociodemographic characteristics, the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, the Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scale, and the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support electronically administered to participants. The majority of the participants (69.3%) were registered nurses. The mean overall score for the Fear of COVID-19 scale was 23.64 (SD + 6.85) which again exceeded the mid-point for the total score range (21), indicating elevated level fear of the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants had displayed extremely severe depression 40%, extremely severe anxiety 60%, and 35% severely distressed. Scores for depression (21.30 ± 10.86), anxiety (20.37 ± 10.80), stress (23.33 ± 10.87) were also high. Factors determined to be associated with psychological distress were being male, married, aged 40 years and older, and having more clinical experience. Assessment of social support indicated moderate-to-high levels of perceived support for all dimensions (significant other: 5.17 ± 1.28, family: 5.03 ± 1.30, friends: 5.05 ± 1.30). Weak significant correlations were found between social support and the other study variables (r < 0.22), indicating a weak association with fear, depression, anxiety, and stress, respectively. Overall, Jordanian health-care workers sample reported fear, depression, anxiety, and stress. The associated factors were being male, married, aged 40 years and older, and having more clinical experience. Regarding social support, participants primarily relied on support from their families, followed by support from friends. | PLoS One | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
781 | Generalized anxiety and depressive symptoms in various age groups during the COVID-19 lockdown in Poland. Specific predictors and differences in symptoms severity N/A | Compr Psychiatry | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
782 | Nowcasting and forecasting the potential domestic and international spread of the 2019-nCoV outbreak originating in Wuhan, China: a modelling study Summary Background Since Dec 31, 2019, the Chinese city of Wuhan has reported an outbreak of atypical pneumonia caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). Cases have been exported to other Chinese cities, as well as internationally, threatening to trigger a global outbreak. Here, we provide an estimate of the size of the epidemic in Wuhan on the basis of the number of cases exported from Wuhan to cities outside mainland China and forecast the extent of the domestic and global public health risks of epidemics, accounting for social and non-pharmaceutical prevention interventions. Methods We used data from Dec 31, 2019, to Jan 28, 2020, on the number of cases exported from Wuhan internationally (known days of symptom onset from Dec 25, 2019, to Jan 19, 2020) to infer the number of infections in Wuhan from Dec 1, 2019, to Jan 25, 2020. Cases exported domestically were then estimated. We forecasted the national and global spread of 2019-nCoV, accounting for the effect of the metropolitan-wide quarantine of Wuhan and surrounding cities, which began Jan 23–24, 2020. We used data on monthly flight bookings from the Official Aviation Guide and data on human mobility across more than 300 prefecture-level cities in mainland China from the Tencent database. Data on confirmed cases were obtained from the reports published by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Serial interval estimates were based on previous studies of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV). A susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered metapopulation model was used to simulate the epidemics across all major cities in China. The basic reproductive number was estimated using Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods and presented using the resulting posterior mean and 95% credibile interval (CrI). Findings In our baseline scenario, we estimated that the basic reproductive number for 2019-nCoV was 2·68 (95% CrI 2·47–2·86) and that 75 815 individuals (95% CrI 37 304–130 330) have been infected in Wuhan as of Jan 25, 2020. The epidemic doubling time was 6·4 days (95% CrI 5·8–7·1). We estimated that in the baseline scenario, Chongqing, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen had imported 461 (95% CrI 227–805), 113 (57–193), 98 (49–168), 111 (56–191), and 80 (40–139) infections from Wuhan, respectively. If the transmissibility of 2019-nCoV were similar everywhere domestically and over time, we inferred that epidemics are already growing exponentially in multiple major cities of China with a lag time behind the Wuhan outbreak of about 1–2 weeks. Interpretation Given that 2019-nCoV is no longer contained within Wuhan, other major Chinese cities are probably sustaining localised outbreaks. Large cities overseas with close transport links to China could also become outbreak epicentres, unless substantial public health interventions at both the population and personal levels are implemented immediately. Independent self-sustaining outbreaks in major cities globally could become inevitable because of substantial exportation of presymptomatic cases and in the absence of large-scale public health interventions. Preparedness plans and mitigation interventions should be readied for quick deployment globally. Funding Health and Medical Research Fund (Hong Kong, China). | Lancet | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
783 | Population Immunity and Covid-19 Severity with Omicron Variant in South Africa BACKGROUND: The B.1.1.529 (omicron) variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was first identified on November 25, 2021, in Gauteng province, South Africa. Data regarding the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG in Gauteng before the fourth wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), in which the omicron variant was dominant, are needed. METHODS: We conducted a seroepidemiologic survey from October 22 to December 9, 2021, in Gauteng to determine the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG. Households included in a previous seroepidemiologic survey (conducted from November 2020 to January 2021) were contacted; to account for changes in the survey population, there was a 10% increase in the households contacted, with the use of the same sampling framework. Dried-blood-spot samples were tested for IgG against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and nucleocapsid protein with the use of quantitative assays. We also evaluated Covid-19 epidemiologic trends in Gauteng, including cases, hospitalizations, recorded deaths, and excess deaths from the start of the pandemic through January 12, 2022. RESULTS: Samples were obtained from 7010 participants, of whom 1319 (18.8%) had received a Covid-19 vaccine. The seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG ranged from 56.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52.6 to 59.7) among children younger than 12 years of age to 79.7% (95% CI, 77.6 to 81.5) among adults older than 50 years of age. Vaccinated participants were more likely to be seropositive for SARS-CoV-2 than unvaccinated participants (93.1% vs. 68.4%). Epidemiologic data showed that the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection increased and subsequently declined more rapidly during the fourth wave than it had during the three previous waves. The incidence of infection was decoupled from the incidences of hospitalization, recorded death, and excess death during the fourth wave, as compared with the proportions seen during previous waves. CONCLUSIONS: Widespread underlying SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity was observed in Gauteng before the omicron-dominant wave of Covid-19. Epidemiologic data showed a decoupling of hospitalizations and deaths from infections while omicron was circulating. (Funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.) | N Engl J Med | 2022 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
784 | COVID-19 in children and adolescents in Europe: a multinational, multicenter cohort study BACKGROUND: To date, few data on paediatric COVID-19 have been published, and most reports originate from China. This study aimed to capture key data on children and adolescents with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection across Europe to inform physicians and health-care service planning during the ongoing pandemic. METHODS: This multicentre cohort study involved 82 participating health-care institutions across 25 European countries, using a well established research network—the Paediatric Tuberculosis Network European Trials Group (ptbnet)—that mainly comprises paediatric infectious diseases specialists and paediatric pulmonologists. We included all individuals aged 18 years or younger with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, detected at any anatomical site by RT-PCR, between April 1 and April 24, 2020, during the initial peak of the European COVID-19 pandemic. We explored factors associated with need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission and initiation of drug treatment for COVID-19 using univariable analysis, and applied multivariable logistic regression with backwards stepwise analysis to further explore those factors significantly associated with ICU admission. FINDINGS: 582 individuals with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included, with a median age of 5·0 years (IQR 0·5–12·0) and a sex ratio of 1·15 males per female. 145 (25%) had pre-existing medical conditions. 363 (62%) individuals were admitted to hospital. 48 (8%) individuals required ICU admission, 25 (4%) mechanical ventilation (median duration 7 days, IQR 2–11, range 1–34), 19 (3%) inotropic support, and one (<1%) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Significant risk factors for requiring ICU admission in multivariable analyses were being younger than 1 month (odds ratio 5·06, 95% CI 1·72–14·87; p=0·0035), male sex (2·12, 1·06–4·21; p=0·033), pre-existing medical conditions (3·27, 1·67–6·42; p=0·0015), and presence of lower respiratory tract infection signs or symptoms at presentation (10·46, 5·16–21·23; p<0·0001). The most frequently used drug with antiviral activity was hydroxychloroquine (40 [7%] patients), followed by remdesivir (17 [3%] patients), lopinavir–ritonavir (six [1%] patients), and oseltamivir (three [1%] patients). Immunomodulatory medication used included corticosteroids (22 [4%] patients), intravenous immunoglobulin (seven [1%] patients), tocilizumab (four [1%] patients), anakinra (three [1%] patients), and siltuximab (one [<1%] patient). Four children died (case-fatality rate 0·69%, 95% CI 0·20–1·82); at study end, the remaining 578 were alive and only 25 (4%) were still symptomatic or requiring respiratory support. INTERPRETATION: COVID-19 is generally a mild disease in children, including infants. However, a small proportion develop severe disease requiring ICU admission and prolonged ventilation, although fatal outcome is overall rare. The data also reflect the current uncertainties regarding specific treatment options, highlighting that additional data on antiviral and immunomodulatory drugs are urgently needed. FUNDING: ptbnet is supported by Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit. | Lancet Child Adolesc Health | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
785 | Impact of COVID-19 pandemic waves on changes in surgical urgency volumes and severity in the regional hospital network of Trento (Northern Italy): a descriptive epidemiological analysis N/A | Epidemiol Prev | 2021 | LitCov | |
786 | Treatment of severely ill COVID-19 patients with anti-interleukin drugs (COV-AID): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to test the safety and effectiveness of individually or simultaneously blocking IL-6, IL-6 receptor and IL-1 versus standard of care on blood oxygenation and systemic cytokine release syndrome in patients with COVID-19 coronavirus infection and acute hypoxic respiratory failure and systemic cytokine release syndrome. TRIAL DESIGN: A phase 3 prospective, multi-center, interventional, open label, 6-arm 2x2 factorial design study. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects will be recruited at the specialized COVID-19 wards and/or ICUs at 16 Belgian participating hospitals. Only adult (≥18y old) patients will be recruited with recent (≤16 days) COVID-19 infection and acute hypoxia (defined as PaO2/FiO2 below 350mmHg or PaO2/FiO2 below 280 on supplemental oxygen and immediately requiring high flow oxygen device or mechanical ventilation) and signs of systemic cytokine release syndrome characterized by high serum ferritin, or high D-dimers, or high LDH or deep lymphopenia or a combination of those, who have not been on mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours before randomisation. Patients should have had a chest X-ray and/or CT scan showing bilateral infiltrates within the last 2 days before randomisation. Patients with active bacterial or fungal infection will be excluded. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Patients will be randomized to 1 of 5 experimental arms versus usual care. The experimental arms consist of Anakinra alone (anti-IL-1 binding the IL-1 receptor), Siltuximab alone (anti-IL-6 chimeric antibody), a combination of Siltuximab and Anakinra, Tocilizumab alone (humanised anti-IL-6 receptor antibody) or a combination of Anakinra with Tocilizumab in addition to standard care. Patients treated with Anakinra will receive a daily subcutaneous injection of 100mg for a maximum of 28 days or until hospital discharge, whichever comes first. Siltuximab (11mg/kg) or Tocilizumab (8mg/kg, with a maximum dose of 800mg) are administered as a single intravenous injection immediately after randomization. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary end point is the time to clinical improvement defined as the time from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a six-category ordinal scale measured daily till day 28 or discharge from the hospital or death. This ordinal scale is composed of (1) Death; (2) Hospitalized, on invasive mechanical ventilation or ECMO; (3) Hospitalized, on non-invasive ventilation or high flow oxygen devices; (4) Hospitalized, requiring supplemental oxygen; (5) Hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen; (6) Not hospitalized. RANDOMISATION: Patients will be randomized using an Interactive Web Response System (REDCap). A 2x2 factorial design was selected with a 2:1 randomization regarding the IL-1 blockade (Anakinra) and a 1:2 randomization regarding the IL-6 blockade (Siltuximab and Tocilizumab). BLINDING (MASKING): In this open-label trial neither participants, caregivers, nor those assessing the outcomes are blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A total of 342 participants will be enrolled: 76 patients will receive usual care, 76 patients will receive Siltuximab alone, 76 patients will receive Tocilizumab alone, 38 will receive Anakinra alone, 38 patients will receive Anakinra and Siltuximab and 38 patients will receive Anakinra and Tocilizumab. TRIAL STATUS: COV-AID protocol version 3.0 (15 Apr 2020). Participant recruitment is ongoing and started on April 4(th) 2020. Given the current decline of the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium, it is difficult to anticipate the rate of participant recruitment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on Clinical Trials.gov on April 1st, 2020 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04330638) and on EudraCT on April 3rd 2020 (Identifier: 2020-001500-41). FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. | Trials | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
787 | An investigation of the association between religious coping, fatigue, anxiety and depressive symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic in Morocco: a web-based cross-sectional survey BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has triggered fear and distress among the public, thus potentiating the incidence rate of anxiety and depression. This study aims to investigate the psychological effect of quarantine on persons living in Morocco when the first COVID-19 cases were identified. The associations between anxiety, depression symptoms, and their predictors (sociodemographics, fatigue, and religious coping) were examined. METHODS: A web-based cross-sectional survey, with a total of 1435 participants (≥18 years) recruited anonymously, was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic (from 3 to 30 April 2020). A structured questionnaire was used to assess psychosocial factors, COVID-19 epidemic-related factors, and religious coping. Religious coping, fatigue, and depression, and anxiety were measured by Brief Religious Coping Scale (Brief RCOPE), Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFS), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), respectively. A generalized linear model (logistic regression) was used to determine the predictive factors of depression and anxiety. RESULTS: The prevalence of anxiety and depression was 43.0% (n = 621) and 53.0% (n = 766), respectively. Both were associated with female gender, household income decline, tracking COVID-19 news, and fear to contract COVID-19 (aOR = 1.36 to 2.85). Additionally, 32.0% (n = 453) and 26.0% (n = 372) reported severe physical fatigue, and mental fatigue, respectively. Both latter factors were significantly and positively associated with depression as well as with anxiety. Depressive and anxious patients used more negative religious coping, while positive religious coping was slightly associated with depression. CONCLUSION: In this online survey of the general population in Morocco, anxiety and depressive symptoms are prevalent during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pandemic and psychosocial factors, such as female gender, income decline, infection fears, massive COVID-19 news exposure, negative religious coping, and fatigue were associated with increased risk of depression and anxiety symptoms. Psychosocial and financial support should be provided to the quarantined population. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12888-021-03271-6. | BMC Psychiatry | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
788 | Willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 among Bangladeshi adults: Understanding the strategies to optimize vaccination coverage BACKGROUND: Although the approved COVID-19 vaccine has been shown to be safe and effective, mass vaccination in Bangladeshi people remains a challenge. As a vaccination effort, the study provided an empirical evidence on willingness to vaccinate by sociodemographic, clinical and regional differences in Bangladeshi adults. METHODS: This cross-sectional analysis from a household survey of 3646 adults aged 18 years or older was conducted in 8 districts of Bangladesh, from December 12, 2020, to January 7, 2021. Multinomial regression examined the impact of socio-demographic, clinical and healthcare-releated factors on hesitancy and reluctance of vaccination for COVID-19. RESULTS: Of the 3646 respondents (2212 men [60.7%]; mean [sd] age, 37.4 [13.9] years), 74.6% reported their willingness to vaccinate against COVID-19 when a safe and effective vaccine is available without a fee, while 8.5% were reluctant to vaccinate. With a minimum fee, 46.5% of the respondents showed intent to vaccinate. Among the respondents, 16.8% reported adequate adherence to health safety regulations, and 35.5% reported high confidence in the country’s healthcare system. The COVID-19 vaccine refusal was significantly high in elderly, rural, semi-urban, and slum communities, farmers, day-laborers, homemakers, low-educated group, and those who had low confidence in the country’s healthcare system. Also, the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy was high in the elderly population, low-educated group, day-laborers, people with chronic diseases, and people with low confidence in the country’s healthcare system. CONCLUSION: A high prevalence of vaccine refusal and hesitancy was observed in rural people and slum dwellers in Bangladesh. The rural community and slum dwellers had a low literacy level, low adherence to health safety regulations and low confidence in healthcare system. The ongoing app-based registration for vaccination increased hesitancy and reluctancy in low-educated group. For rural, semi-urban, and slum people, outreach centers for vaccination can be established to ensure the vaccine’s nearby availability and limit associated travel costs. In rural areas, community health workers, valued community-leaders, and non-governmental organizations can be utilized to motivate and educate people for vaccination against COVID-19. Further, emphasis should be given to the elderly and diseased people with tailored health messages and assurance from healthcare professionals. The media may play a responsible role with the vaccine education program and eliminate the social stigma about the vaccination. Finally, vaccination should be continued without a fee and thus Bangladesh’s COVID vaccination program can become a model for other low and middle-income countries. | PLoS One | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
789 | COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy: coverage and safety Background Concerns have been raised regarding a potential surge of COVID-19 in pregnancy, secondary to rising numbers of COVID-19 in the community, easing of societal restrictions, and vaccine hesitancy. Even though COVID-19 vaccination is now offered to all pregnant women in the UK, there are limited data on its uptake and safety. Objectives and study design : This was a cohort study of pregnant women who gave birth at St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK, between March 1st and July 4th 2021. The primary outcome was uptake of COVID-19 vaccination and its determinants. The secondary outcomes were perinatal safety outcomes. Data were collected on COVID-19 vaccination uptake, vaccination type, gestational age at vaccination, as well as maternal characteristics including age, parity, ethnicity, index of multiple deprivation score and co-morbidities. Further data were collected on perinatal outcomes including stillbirth (fetal death ≥24 weeks’ gestation), preterm birth, fetal/congenital abnormalities and intrapartum complications. Pregnant women who received the vaccine were compared with a matched cohort of propensity balanced pregnant women to compare outcomes. Effect magnitudes of vaccination on perinatal outcomes were reported as mean differences or odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Factors associated with antenatal vaccination were assessed with logistic regression analysis. Results Data were available for 1328 pregnant women of whom 141 received at least one dose of vaccine before giving birth and 1187 women who did not; 85.8% of those vaccinated received their vaccine in the third trimester and 14.2% in the second trimester. Of those vaccinated, 128 (90.8%) received an mRNA vaccine and 13 (9.2%) a viral vector vaccine. There was evidence of reduced vaccine uptake in younger women (P=0.002), those with high levels of deprivation (i.e., fifth quintile of Index of Multiple Deprivation, P=0.008) and women of Afro-Caribbean or Asian ethnicity, compared to Caucasian ethnicity (P<0.001). Women with pre-pregnancy diabetes had increased vaccine uptake (P=0.008). In the multivariable model adjusting for variables that had a significant effect according to the univariable analysis, fifth deprivation quintile (most deprived) was significantly associated with lower antenatal vaccine uptake (adjusted OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.02–0.39, P=0.002), while pre-pregnancy diabetes was significantly associated with higher antenatal vaccine uptake (adjusted OR 11.1, 95% CI 2.01–81.6, P=0.008). In a propensity score matched cohort, compared with non-vaccinated pregnant women, 133 women who received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine in pregnancy (vs. those unvaccinated) had similar rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes (P>0.05 for all): stillbirth (0.0% vs 0.3%), fetal abnormalities (2.2% vs 2.7%), intrapartum pyrexia (3.7% vs 1.5%), postpartum hemorrhage (9.8% vs 9.5%), cesarean section (30.8% vs. 30.6%), small for gestational age (12.0% vs 15.8%), maternal high dependency unit or intensive care admission (6.0% vs 3.5%) or neonatal intensive care unit admission (5.3% vs 5.4%). Mixed-effects Cox regression showed that vaccination was not significantly associated with birth <40 weeks’ gestation (hazard ratio 0.93, 95% CI 0.71–1.23, P=0.630). Conclusions Of pregnant women eligible for COVID-19 vaccination, less than one third accepted COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and they experienced similar pregnancy outcomes. There was lower uptake among younger women, non-white ethnicity, and lower socioeconomic background. This study contributes to the body of evidence that having COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy does not alter perinatal outcomes. Clear communication to improve awareness among pregnant women and healthcare professionals on vaccine safety is needed, alongside strategies to address vaccine hesitancy. This includes post-vaccination surveillance to gather further data on pregnancy outcomes, particularly after first trimester vaccination, as well as long-term infant follow-up. | Am J Obstet Gynecol | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
790 | Prevalence and socio-demographic correlates of psychological health problems in Chinese adolescents during the outbreak of COVID-19 Psychological health problems, especially emotional disorders, are common among adolescents. The epidemiology of emotional disorders is greatly influenced by stressful events. This study sought to assess the prevalence rate and socio-demographic correlates of depressive and anxiety symptoms among Chinese adolescents affected by the outbreak of COVID-19. We conducted a cross-sectional study among Chinese students aged 12–18 years during the COVID-19 epidemic period. An online survey was used to conduct rapid assessment. A total of 8079 participants were involved in the study. An online survey was used to collect demographic data, assess students’ awareness of COVID-19, and assess depressive and anxiety symptoms with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) questionnaire, respectively. The prevalence of depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and a combination of depressive and anxiety symptoms was 43.7%, 37.4%, and 31.3%, respectively, among Chinese high school students during the COVID-19 outbreak. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that female gender was the higher risk factor for depressive and anxiety symptoms. In terms of grades, senior high school was a risk factor for depressive and anxiety symptoms; the higher the grade, the greater the prevalence of depressive and anxiety symptoms. Our findings show there is a high prevalence of psychological health problems among adolescents, which are negatively associated with the level of awareness of COVID-19. These findings suggest that the government needs to pay more attention to psychological health among adolescents while combating COVID-19. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00787-020-01541-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. | Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
791 | A Review of the Progress and Challenges of Developing a Vaccine for COVID-19 A novel coronavirus, which has been designated as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was first detected in December 2019 in Wuhan China and causes the highly infectious disease referred to as COVID-19. COVID-19 has now spread worldwide to become a global pandemic affecting over 24 million people as of August 26th, 2020 and claimed the life of more than 800,000 people worldwide. COVID-19 is asymptomatic for some individuals and for others it can cause symptoms ranging from flu-like to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), pneumonia and death. Although it is anticipated that an effective vaccine will be available to protect against COVID-19, at present the world is relying on social distancing and hygiene measures and repurposed drugs. There is a worldwide effort to develop an effective vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 and, as of late August 2020, there are 30 vaccines in clinical trials with over 200 in various stages of development. This review will focus on the eight vaccine candidates that entered Phase 1 clinical trials in mid-May, including AstraZeneca/Oxford's AZD1222, Moderna's mRNA-1273 and Sinovac's CoronaVac vaccines, which are currently in advanced stages of vaccine development. In addition to reviewing the different stages of vaccine development, vaccine platforms and vaccine candidates, this review also discusses the biological and immunological basis required of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, the importance of a collaborative international effort, the ethical implications of vaccine development, the efficacy needed for an immunogenic vaccine, vaccine coverage, the potential limitations and challenges of vaccine development. Although the demand for a vaccine far surpasses the production capacity, it will be beneficial to have a limited number of vaccines available for the more vulnerable population by the end of 2020 and for the rest of the global population by the end of 2021. | Front Immunol | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
792 | COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among the adult population in Bangladesh: A nationwide cross-sectional survey INTRODUCTION: Studies related to the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy are scanty in Bangladesh, despite the growing necessity of understanding the population behavior related to vaccination. Thus, the present study was conducted to assess the prevalence of the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and its associated factors in Bangladesh to fill the knowledge gap. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study adopted a cross-sectional design to collect data from 1497 respondents using online (Google forms) and face-to-face interviews from eight administrative divisions of Bangladesh between 1–7 February 2021. We employed descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The prevalence of vaccine hesitancy was 46.2%. The Muslims (aOR = 1.80, p ≤ 0.01) and the respondents living in the city corporation areas (aOR = 2.14, p ≤0.001) had more hesitancy. There was significant variation in vaccine hesitancy by administrative divisions (geographic regions). Compared to the Sylhet division, the participants from Khulna (aOR = 1.31, p ≤0.001) had higher hesitancy. The vaccine hesitancy tended to decrease with increasing knowledge about the vaccine (aOR = 0.88, p≤0.001) and the vaccination process (aOR = 0.91, p ≤ 0.01). On the other hand, hesitancy increased with the increased negative attitudes towards the vaccine (aOR = 1.17, p≤0.001) and conspiracy beliefs towards the COVID-19 vaccine (aOR = 1.04, p≤0.01). The perceived benefits of COVID-19 vaccination (aOR = 0.85, p≤0.001) were negatively associated with hesitancy, while perceived barriers (aOR = 1.16, p ≤0.001) were positively associated. The participants were more hesitant to accept the vaccine from a specific country of origin (India, USA, Europe). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings warrant that a vigorous behavior change communication campaign should be designed and implemented to demystify negative public attitudes and conspiracy beliefs regarding the COVID-19 Vaccine in Bangladesh. The policymakers should also think about revisiting the policy of the online registration process to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, as online registration is a key structural barrier for many due to the persistent digital divide in the country. Finally, the government should consider the population’s preference regarding vaccines’ country of manufacture to reduce the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. | PLoS One | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
793 | Motivations for Social Distancing and App Use as Complementary Measures to Combat the COVID-19 Pandemic: Quantitative Survey Study BACKGROUND: The current COVID-19 pandemic is showing negative effects on human health as well as on social and economic life. It is a critical and challenging task to revive public life while minimizing the risk of infection. Reducing interactions between people by social distancing is an effective and prevalent measure to reduce the risk of infection and spread of the virus within a community. Current developments in several countries show that this measure can be technologically accompanied by mobile apps; meanwhile, privacy concerns are being intensively discussed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine central cognitive variables that may constitute people’s motivations for social distancing, using an app, and providing health-related data requested by two apps that differ in their direct utility for the individual user. The results may increase our understanding of people’s concerns and convictions, which can then be specifically addressed by public-oriented communication strategies and appropriate political decisions. METHODS: This study refers to the protection motivation theory, which is adaptable to both health-related and technology-related motivations. The concept of social trust was added. The quantitative survey included answers from 406 German-speaking participants who provided assessments of data security issues, trust components, and the processes of threat and coping appraisal related to the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection by social distancing. With respect to apps, one central focus was on the difference between a contact tracing app and a data donation app. RESULTS: Multiple regression analyses showed that the present model could explain 55% of the interindividual variance in the participants’ motivation for social distancing, 46% for using a contact tracing app, 42% for providing their own infection status to a contact tracing app, and 34% for using a data donation app. Several cognitive components of threat and coping appraisal were related to motivation measurements. Trust in other people’s social distancing behavior and general trust in official app providers also played important roles; however, the participants’ age and gender did not. Motivations for using and accepting a contact tracing app were higher than those for using and accepting a data donation app. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed some important cognitive factors that constitute people’s motivation for social distancing and using apps to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Concrete implications for future research, public-oriented communication strategies, and appropriate political decisions were identified and are discussed. | J Med Internet Res | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
794 | Face Masks During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Simple Protection Tool With Many Meanings Wearing face masks is recommended as part of personal protective equipment and as a public health measure to prevent the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Their use, however, is deeply connected to social and cultural practices and has acquired a variety of personal and social meanings. This article aims to identify the diversity of sociocultural, ethical, and political meanings attributed to face masks, how they might impact public health policies, and how they should be considered in health communication. In May 2020, we involved 29 experts of an interdisciplinary research network on health and society to provide their testimonies on the use of face masks in 20 European and 2 Asian countries (China and South Korea). They reflected on regulations in the corresponding jurisdictions as well as the personal and social aspects of face mask wearing. We analyzed those testimonies thematically, employing the method of qualitative descriptive analysis. The analysis framed the four dimensions of the societal and personal practices of wearing (or not wearing) face masks: individual perceptions of infection risk, personal interpretations of responsibility and solidarity, cultural traditions and religious imprinting, and the need of expressing self-identity. Our study points to the importance for an in-depth understanding of the cultural and sociopolitical considerations around the personal and social meaning of mask wearing in different contexts as a necessary prerequisite for the assessment of the effectiveness of face masks as a public health measure. Improving the personal and collective understanding of citizens' behaviors and attitudes appears essential for designing more effective health communications about COVID-19 pandemic or other global crises in the future. To wear a face mask or not to wear a face mask? Nowadays, this question has been analogous to the famous line from Shakespeare's Hamlet: “To be or not to be, that is the question.” This is a bit allegorical, but certainly not far from the current circumstances where a deadly virus is spreading amongst us... Vanja Kopilaš, Croatia. | Front Public Health | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
795 | Estimates of the severity of COVID-19: a model-based analysis BACKGROUND: In the face of rapidly changing data, a range of case fatality ratio estimates for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been produced that differ substantially in magnitude. We aimed to provide robust estimates, accounting for censoring and ascertainment biases. METHODS: We collected individual-case data for patients who died from COVID-19 in Hubei, mainland China (reported by national and provincial health commissions to Feb 8, 2020), and for cases outside of mainland China (from government or ministry of health websites and media reports for 37 countries, as well as Hong Kong and Macau, until Feb 25, 2020). These individual-case data were used to estimate the time between onset of symptoms and outcome (death or discharge from hospital). We next obtained age-stratified estimates of the case fatality ratio by relating the aggregate distribution of cases to the observed cumulative deaths in China, assuming a constant attack rate by age and adjusting for demography and age-based and location-based under-ascertainment. We also estimated the case fatality ratio from individual line-list data on 1334 cases identified outside of mainland China. Using data on the prevalence of PCR-confirmed cases in international residents repatriated from China, we obtained age-stratified estimates of the infection fatality ratio. Furthermore, data on age-stratified severity in a subset of 3665 cases from China were used to estimate the proportion of infected individuals who are likely to require hospitalisation. FINDINGS: Using data on 24 deaths that occurred in mainland China and 165 recoveries outside of China, we estimated the mean duration from onset of symptoms to death to be 17·8 days (95% credible interval [CrI] 16·9–19·2) and to hospital discharge to be 24·7 days (22·9–28·1). In all laboratory confirmed and clinically diagnosed cases from mainland China (n=70 117), we estimated a crude case fatality ratio (adjusted for censoring) of 3·67% (95% CrI 3·56–3·80). However, after further adjusting for demography and under-ascertainment, we obtained a best estimate of the case fatality ratio in China of 1·38% (1·23–1·53), with substantially higher ratios in older age groups (0·32% [0·27–0·38] in those aged <60 years vs 6·4% [5·7–7·2] in those aged ≥60 years), up to 13·4% (11·2–15·9) in those aged 80 years or older. Estimates of case fatality ratio from international cases stratified by age were consistent with those from China (parametric estimate 1·4% [0·4–3·5] in those aged <60 years [n=360] and 4·5% [1·8–11·1] in those aged ≥60 years [n=151]). Our estimated overall infection fatality ratio for China was 0·66% (0·39–1·33), with an increasing profile with age. Similarly, estimates of the proportion of infected individuals likely to be hospitalised increased with age up to a maximum of 18·4% (11·0–7·6) in those aged 80 years or older. INTERPRETATION: These early estimates give an indication of the fatality ratio across the spectrum of COVID-19 disease and show a strong age gradient in risk of death. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council. | Lancet Infect Dis | 2020 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
796 | Effectiveness of Homologous and Heterologous COVID-19 Booster Doses Following 1 Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) Vaccine Dose Against COVID-19 Associated Emergency Department and Urgent Care Encounters and Hospitalizations Among Adults-VISION Network, 10 States, December 2021-March 2022 CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥18 years receive a single COVID-19 vaccine booster dose ≥2 months after receipt of an Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) adenovirus vector-based primary series vaccine; a heterologous COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is preferred over a homologous (matching) Janssen vaccine for booster vaccination. This recommendation was made in light of the risks for rare but serious adverse events following receipt of a Janssen vaccine, including thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome and Guillain-Barré syndrome (1), and clinical trial data indicating similar or higher neutralizing antibody response following heterologous boosting compared with homologous boosting (2). Data on real-world vaccine effectiveness (VE) of different booster strategies following a primary Janssen vaccine dose are limited, particularly during the period of Omicron variant predominance. The VISION Network§ determined real-world VE of 1 Janssen vaccine dose and 2 alternative booster dose strategies: 1) a homologous booster (i.e., 2 Janssen doses) and 2) a heterologous mRNA booster (i.e., 1 Janssen dose/1 mRNA dose). In addition, VE of these booster strategies was compared with VE of a homologous booster following mRNA primary series vaccination (i.e., 3 mRNA doses). The study examined 80,287 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits¶ and 25,244 hospitalizations across 10 states during December 16, 2021-March 7, 2022, when Omicron was the predominant circulating variant.** VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters was 24% after 1 Janssen dose, 54% after 2 Janssen doses, 79% after 1 Janssen/1 mRNA dose, and 83% after 3 mRNA doses. VE for the same vaccination strategies against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were 31%, 67%, 78%, and 90%, respectively. All booster strategies provided higher protection than a single Janssen dose against ED/UC visits and hospitalizations during Omicron variant predominance. Vaccination with 1 Janssen/1 mRNA dose provided higher protection than did 2 Janssen doses against COVID-19-associated ED/UC visits and was comparable to protection provided by 3 mRNA doses during the first 120 days after a booster dose. However, 3 mRNA doses provided higher protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations than did other booster strategies during the same time interval since booster dose. All adults who have received mRNA vaccines for their COVID-19 primary series vaccination should receive an mRNA booster dose when eligible. Adults who received a primary Janssen vaccine dose should preferentially receive a heterologous mRNA vaccine booster dose ≥2 months later, or a homologous Janssen vaccine booster dose if mRNA vaccine is contraindicated or unavailable. Further investigation of the durability of protection afforded by different booster strategies is warranted. | MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep | 2022 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
797 | Evaluation of the systemic and mucosal immune response induced by COVID-19 and the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 N/A | PLoS One | 2022 | LitCov | |
798 | Evaluation of the Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antibody Test in Samples from Vaccinated Individuals N/A | Microbiol Spectr | 2022 | LitCov and CORD-19 | |
799 | BA.2.12.1, BA.4 and BA.5 escape antibodies elicited by Omicron infection N/A | Nature | 2022 | LitCov | |
800 | Protection of BNT162b2 Vaccine Booster against Covid-19 in Israel BACKGROUND: On July 30, 2021, the administration of a third (booster) dose of the BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine (Pfizer–BioNTech) was approved in Israel for persons who were 60 years of age or older and who had received a second dose of vaccine at least 5 months earlier. Data are needed regarding the effect of the booster dose on the rate of confirmed coronavirus 2019 disease (Covid-19) and the rate of severe illness. METHODS: We extracted data for the period from July 30 through August 31, 2021, from the Israeli Ministry of Health database regarding 1,137,804 persons who were 60 years of age or older and had been fully vaccinated (i.e., had received two doses of BNT162b2) at least 5 months earlier. In the primary analysis, we compared the rate of confirmed Covid-19 and the rate of severe illness between those who had received a booster injection at least 12 days earlier (booster group) and those who had not received a booster injection (nonbooster group). In a secondary analysis, we evaluated the rate of infection 4 to 6 days after the booster dose as compared with the rate at least 12 days after the booster. In all the analyses, we used Poisson regression after adjusting for possible confounding factors. RESULTS: At least 12 days after the booster dose, the rate of confirmed infection was lower in the booster group than in the nonbooster group by a factor of 11.3 (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.4 to 12.3); the rate of severe illness was lower by a factor of 19.5 (95% CI, 12.9 to 29.5). In a secondary analysis, the rate of confirmed infection at least 12 days after vaccination was lower than the rate after 4 to 6 days by a factor of 5.4 (95% CI, 4.8 to 6.1). CONCLUSIONS: In this study involving participants who were 60 years of age or older and had received two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine at least 5 months earlier, we found that the rates of confirmed Covid-19 and severe illness were substantially lower among those who received a booster (third) dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine. | N Engl J Med | 2021 | LitCov and CORD-19 |
(1) COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19). 2020. Version 2022-06-02. Retrieved from https://ai2-semanticscholar-cord-19.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/historical_releases.html. Accessed 2022-06-05. doi:10.5281/zenodo.3715506
(2) Chen Q, Allot A, & Lu Z. (2020) Keep up with the latest coronavirus research, Nature 579:193 and Chen Q, Allot A, Lu Z. LitCovid: an open database of COVID-19 literature. Nucleic Acids Research. 2020. (version 2023-01-10)
(3) Currently tweets of June 23rd to June 29th 2022 have been considered.