Factors Influencing Global Variations in COVID-19 Cases and Fatalities; A Review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Abu Hammad O
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7551068 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Factors Influencing Global Variations in COVID-19 Cases and Fatalities; A Review.
Abu-Hammad Osama O Alnazzawi Ahmad A Borzangy Sary S SS Abu-Hammad Abdalla A Fayad Mostafa M Saadaledin Selma S Abu-Hammad Shaden S Dar-Odeh Najla N
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) 20200717 3
Since the first cases of the novel corona virus disease (COVID-19) were diagnosed in China, outcomes associated with this infection in terms of total numbers of cases and deaths have varied widely between countries. While some countries had minimal rates of infections and deaths, other countries were hit hard by the pandemic. Countries with highest numbers of cases continued to change over time, but at the time of submission of this article they are: USA, Brazil, Russia, UK, India, Spain, Italy, ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:In this paper, we examine the stock markets' response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Using daily COVID-19 confirmed cases and deaths and stock market returns data from 64 countries over the period January 22, 2020 to April 17, 2020, we find that stock markets responded negatively to the growth in COVID-19 confirmed cases. That is, stock market returns declined as the number of confirmed cases increased. We further find that stock markets reacted more proactively to the growth in number of confirmed cases as compared to the growth in number of deaths. Our analysis also suggests negative market reaction was strong during early days of confirmed cases and then between 40 and 60 days after the initial confirmed cases. Overall, our results suggest that stock markets quickly respond to COVID-19 pandemic and this response varies over time depending on the stage of outbreak.
| S-EPMC7244441 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe United States has the highest number of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the world, with high variability in cases and mortality between communities. We aimed to quantify the associations between socio-economic status and COVID-19-related cases and mortality in the U.S.Study designThe study design includes nationwide COVID-19 data at the county level that were paired with the Distressed Communities Index (DCI) and its component metrics of socio-economic status.MethodsSeverely distressed communities were classified by DCI>75 for univariate analyses. Adjusted rate ratios were calculated for cases and fatalities per 100,000 persons using hierarchical linear mixed models.ResultsThis cohort included 1,089,999 cases and 62,298 deaths in 3127 counties for a case fatality rate of 5.7%. Severely distressed counties had significantly fewer deaths from COVID-19 but higher number of deaths per 100,000 persons. In risk-adjusted analysis, the two socio-economic determinants of health with the strongest association with both higher cases per 100,000 persons and higher fatalities per 100,000 persons were the percentage of adults without a high school degree (cases: RR 1.10; fatalities: RR 1.08) and proportion of black residents (cases and fatalities: Relative risk(RR) 1.03). The percentage of the population aged older than 65 years was also highly predictive for fatalities per 100,000 persons (RR 1.07).ConclusionLower education levels and greater percentages of black residents are strongly associated with higher rates of both COVID-19 cases and fatalities. Socio-economic factors should be considered when implementing public health interventions to ameliorate the disparities in the impact of COVID-19 on distressed communities.
| S-EPMC7568122 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Countries worldwide have deployed mass COVID-19 vaccination drives, but there are people who are hesitant to receive the vaccine. Studies assessing the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy are inconclusive. This study aimed to assess the global prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy and determine the potential factors associated with such hesitancy. We performed an organized search for relevant articles in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Extraction of the required information was performed for each study. A single-arm meta-analysis was performed to determine the global prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy; the potential factors related to vaccine hesitancy were analyzed using a Z-test. A total of 56 articles were included in our analysis. We found that the global prevalence of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy was 25%. Being a woman, being a 50-year-old or younger, being single, being unemployed, living in a household with five or more individuals, having an educational attainment lower than an undergraduate degree, having a non-healthcare-related job and considering COVID-19 vaccines to be unsafe were associated with a higher risk of vaccination hesitancy. In contrast, living with children at home, maintaining physical distancing norms, having ever tested for COVID-19, and having a history of influenza vaccination in the past few years were associated with a lower risk of hesitancy to COVID-19 vaccination. Our study provides valuable information on COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy, and we recommend special interventions in the sub-populations with increased risk to reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.
| S-EPMC9412456 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsAlthough vaccines are considered the most effective and fundamental therapeutic tools for consistently preventing the COVID-19 disease, worldwide vaccine hesitancy has become a widespread public health issue for successful immunization. The aim of this review was to identify an up-to-date and concise assessment of potential factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and refusal intention, and to outline the key message in order to organize these factors according to country count.MethodsA systematic search of the peer-reviewed literature articles indexed in reputable databases, mainly Pub Med (MEDLINE), Elsevier, Science Direct, and Scopus, was performed between21stJune 2021 and10th July 2021. After obtaining the results via careful screening using a PRISMA flow diagram, 47 peer-reviewed articles met the inclusion criteria and formed the basic structure of the review.ResultsIn total, 11 potential factors were identified, of which the greatest number of articles (n = 28) reported "safety" (34.46%; 95% CI 25.05─43.87) as the overarching consideration, while "side effects" (38.73%; 95% CI 28.14─49.32) was reported by 22 articles, which was the next common factor. Other potential factors such as "effectiveness" were identified in 19 articles (29.98%; 95% CI 17.09─41.67), followed by "trust" (n = 15 studies; 27.91%; 95% CI 17.1─38.73),"information sufficiency"(n = 12; 34.46%; 95% CI 35.87─63.07),"efficacy"(n = 8; 28.73%; 95% CI 9.72─47.74), "conspiracy beliefs" (n = 8; 14.30%; 95% CI 7.97─20.63),"social influence" (n = 6; 42.11%; 95% CI 14.01─70.21), "political roles" (n = 4; 16.75%; 95% CI 5.34─28.16), "vaccine mandated" (n = 4; 51.20%; 95% CI 20.25─82.15), and "fear and anxiety" (n = 3; 8.73%; 95% CI 0.59─18.05). The findings for country-specific influential vaccination factors revealed that, "safety" was recognized mostly (n = 14) in Asian continents (32.45%; 95% CI 19.60─45.31), followed by the United States (n = 6; 33.33%; 95% CI12.68─53.98). "Side effects" was identified from studies in Asia and Europe (n = 6; 35.78%; 95% CI 16.79─54.77 and 16.93%; 95% CI 4.70─28.08, respectively), followed by Africa (n = 4; 74.60%, 95% CI 58.08─91.11); however, public response to "effectiveness" was found in the greatest (n = 7) number of studies in Asian countries (44.84%; 95% CI 25─64.68), followed by the United States (n = 6; 16.68%, 95% CI 8.47─24.89). In Europe, "trust" (n = 5) appeared as a critical predictor (24.94%; 95% CI 2.32─47.56). "Information sufficiency" was identified mostly (n = 4) in articles from the United States (51.53%; 95% CI = 14.12─88.74), followed by Asia (n = 3; 40%; 95% CI 27.01─52.99). More concerns was observed relating to "efficacy" and "conspiracy beliefs" in Asian countries (n = 3; 27.03%; 95% CI 10.35─43.71 and 18.55%; 95% CI 8.67─28.43, respectively). The impact of "social influence" on making a rapid vaccination decision was high in Europe (n = 3; 23.85%, 95% CI -18.48─66.18), followed by the United States (n = 2; 74.85%). Finally, "political roles" and "vaccine-mandated" were important concerns in the United States.ConclusionsThe prevailing factors responsible for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy varied globally; however, the global COVID-19 vaccine acceptance relies on several common factors related to psychological and, societal aspect, and the vaccine itself. People would connect with informative and effective messaging that clarifies the safety, side effects, and effectiveness of prospective COVID-19 vaccines, which would foster vaccine confidence and encourage people to be vaccinated willingly.
| S-EPMC8942251 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The continuously growing number of COVID-19 cases pressures healthcare services worldwide. Accurate short-term forecasting is thus vital to support country-level policy making. The strategies adopted by countries to combat the pandemic vary, generating different uncertainty levels about the actual number of cases. Accounting for the hierarchical structure of the data and accommodating extra-variability is therefore fundamental. We introduce a new modelling framework to describe the pandemic's course with great accuracy and provide short-term daily forecasts for every country in the world. We show that our model generates highly accurate forecasts up to seven days ahead and use estimated model components to cluster countries based on recent events. We introduce statistical novelty in terms of modelling the autoregressive parameter as a function of time, increasing predictive power and flexibility to adapt to each country. Our model can also be used to forecast the number of deaths, study the effects of covariates (such as lockdown policies), and generate forecasts for smaller regions within countries. Consequently, it has substantial implications for global planning and decision making. We present forecasts and make all results freely available to any country in the world through an online Shiny dashboard.
| S-EPMC8024267 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Many respiratory viruses and their associated diseases are sensitive to meteorological factors. For SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, evidence on this sensitivity is inconsistent. Understanding the influence of meteorological factors on SARS-CoV-2 transmission and COVID-19 epidemiology can help to improve pandemic preparedness. This review aimed to examine the recent evidence about the relation between meteorological factors and SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19. We conducted a global scoping review of peer-reviewed studies published from January 2020 up to January 2023 about the associations between temperature, solar radiation, precipitation, humidity, wind speed, and atmospheric pressure and SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19. From 9,156 initial records, we included 474 relevant studies. Experimental studies on SARS-CoV-2 provided consistent evidence that higher temperatures and solar radiation negatively affect virus viability. Studies on COVID-19 (epidemiology) were mostly observational and provided less consistent evidence. Several studies considered interactions between meteorological factors or other variables such as demographics or air pollution. None of the publications included all determinants holistically. The association between short-term meteorological factors and SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 dynamics is complex. Interactions between environmental and social components need further consideration. A more integrated research approach can provide valuable insights to predict the dynamics of respiratory viruses with pandemic potential.
| S-EPMC11291467 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Emerging evidence supports a link between environmental factors-including air pollution and chemical exposures, climate, and the built environment-and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) susceptibility and severity. Climate, air pollution, and the built environment have long been recognized to influence viral respiratory infections, and studies have established similar associations with COVID-19 outcomes. More limited evidence links chemical exposures to COVID-19. Environmental factors were found to influence COVID-19 through four major interlinking mechanisms: increased risk of preexisting conditions associated with disease severity; immune system impairment; viral survival and transport; and behaviors that increase viral exposure. Both data and methodologic issues complicate the investigation of these relationships, including reliance on coarse COVID-19 surveillance data; gaps in mechanistic studies; and the predominance of ecological designs. We evaluate the strength of evidence for environment-COVID-19 relationships and discuss environmental actions that might simultaneously address the COVID-19 pandemic, environmental determinants of health, and health disparities.
| S-EPMC10044492 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRoad traffic fatalities (RTF) is the 8th cause of mortality around the world. At the end of the Decade of Action, it would be of utmost importance to revisit our knowledge on the determinants of RTF. The aim of this study is to assess factors related to RTF at global level.MethodsWe used road safety development index which accounts for the interactions between system, human and products to assess the RTF in 115 and 113 countries in 2013 and 2016, respectively. To analyze data, three statistical procedures (linear regression, classification and regression trees, and multivariate adaptive regression splines) were employed.ResultsClassification and regression trees has the best performance amongst all others followed by multivariate adaptive regression splines for 2013 and 2016 data set with an R2 around 0.83. Results show that any increase in human development index was associated with RTF reduction. Comparing RTF data of 2013 and 2016, 8 countries experienced a change of more than 30%, which demonstrated a significant relationship with GINI index (named after Corrado Gini). Considering the three components of human development index, it is revealed that education explained most of RTF variation in classification and regression trees model followed by income and life expectancy.ConclusionPolicymakers should consider road collisions as a socio-economic issue. In this regard, they can make provisions to reduce RTF in the long run by focusing on enhancing the three components of human development index, mainly education. However, there is a need to investigate the causation pathway among these three components with RTF with different time-trend procedures.
| S-EPMC7646406 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic wreaked havoc on long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Some LTCFs performed better than others at slowing COVID-19 transmission. Emerging literature has mostly described infection prevention and control strategies implemented by LTCFs during the pandemic. However, there is a need for a comprehensive review of factors that influenced the performance of LTCFs in containing COVID-19 spread to inform public health policy.ObjectiveTo build on the existing literature, we conducted a scoping review of factors that influenced LTCF performance during the COVID-19 pandemic using a multidimensional conceptual framework of performance.MethodsWe followed the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology for scoping reviews. We queried CINAHL, MEDLINE (Ovid), CAIRN, Science Direct, Scopus, and Web of Science for peer-reviewed literature in English or French published between January 1st, 2020 and December 31st, 2021. Retrieved records were screened for context (COVID-19 pandemic), population (LTCFs), interest (internal and external factors that influenced LTCF performance), and outcomes (dimensions of performance: equity, accessibility, reactivity, safety, continuity, efficacy, viability, efficiency). Descriptive characteristics of included articles were summarized. Dimensions of performance as well as internal (e.g., facility characteristics) and external (e.g., visitors) factors identified to have influenced LTCF performance were presented.ResultsWe retained 140 articles of which 68% were classified as research articles, 47% originated in North America, and most covered a period between March and July 2020. The most frequent dimensions of performance were "efficacy" (75.7%) and "safety" (75.7%). The most common internal factors were "organizational context" (72.9%) and "human resources" (62.1%), and the most common external factors were "visitors" (27.1%) and "public health guidelines" (25.7%).ConclusionsOur review contributes to a global interest in understanding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on vulnerable populations residing and working in LTCFs. Though a myriad of factors were reported, a lack of randomized controlled trials makes it impossible to establish causality between the identified factors and LTCF performance. The use of a multidimensional framework can be recommended to evaluate healthcare system performance not merely in terms of efficacy and safety, but alongside other critical dimensions such as efficiency and equity.Trial registrationResearch Registry ID: researchregistry7026.
| S-EPMC11304669 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveContact tracing plays an essential role in mitigating the impact of an epidemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, studies of those who have been in close contact with confirmed cases offer critical insights to understand the epidemiological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 better. This study conducts a meta-analysis of existing studies' infection rates and affecting factors.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Web of Science and CNKI from the inception to April 30 2022 to identify systematic reviews. Two reviewers independently extracted the data and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate pooled estimates by using Stata/SE 15.1 software.ResultsThere were 47 studies in the meta-analysis. Among COVID-19 close contacts, older age (RR = 1.94, 95% CI: 1.70, 2.21), contacts in households (RR = 2.83, 95% CI: 2.20, 3.65), and people in close contact with symptomatic infections (RR = 3.62, 95% CI: 1.88, 6.96) were associated with higher infection rates.ConclusionOn average, each primary infection corresponded to 5.8 close contacts. Among COVID-19 close contacts, older age and contacts in households were associated with higher infection rates, and people in close contact with symptomatic infections had three times higher risk of infection compared to people in close contact with asymptomatic infections. In general, there are significantly more studies from China about close contacts, and the infection rate among close contacts was lower compared to other countries.
| S-EPMC9877962 | biostudies-literature