Project description:Past studies have demonstrated that higher perceived social support among coupled individuals and greater gender equality foster a more supportive social context. Less is known about how the link between relationship status and perceived social support may vary across countries that differ in gender equality. Employing the data collected from the COVIDiSTRESS I (39 countries; N = 99,075) and COVIDiSTRESS II (23 countries; N = 8293) projects, we examined whether country-level gender equality moderates the link between relationship status and perceived social support. Multilevel regression analyses indicated that gender equality moderated the link between relationship status and perceived social support. Single people in countries with less gender equality reported less perceived social support than was reported by both coupled people and single people from countries with moderate and high levels of gender equality, however, the effect of the interaction between relationship status and gender equality on perceived social support was very low. The results suggest that gender equality fosters perceived social support, both for single people and for partnered people.
Project description:BackgroundGlobalization of clinical trials fosters inclusion of higher and lower income countries, but the influence of enrolling country income level on heart failure trial performance is unclear. This study sought to evaluate associations between enrolling country income level, acute heart failure patient profile, protocol completion, and trial end points.Methods and resultsThe ASCEND-HF (Acute Study of Clinical Effectiveness of Nesiritide in Decompensated Heart Failure) trial included 7141 patients with acute heart failure from 30 countries. Country income data in gross national income per capita in current US dollars from the year 2007 (ie, the year trial enrollment began) were abstracted from the World Bank. Patients were grouped by enrolling country income level (ie, high [>$11 455], upper middle [$3706-$11 455], lower middle [$936-$3705], and low [<$936]). Income data were available for 29 (97%) countries (N=7064). There were 3996 (57%), 1518 (21%), and 1550 (22%) patients from high-income, upper-middle-income, and lower-middle-income countries, respectively. There were no patients from low-income countries. Patients from lower-middle-income countries tended to be younger with fewer comorbidities and lower utilization of guideline-directed therapies. Rates of adverse events (13.8%) and protocol noncompletion (4.9%) during 180-day follow-up were highest among high-income countries (all P <0.01). After adjustment for race, geographic region, and clinical characteristics, compared with lower-middle-income countries, enrollment from higher income countries was associated with increased 30-day mortality or rehospitalization (high income: odds ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.02-2.85; upper-middle-income: odds ratio, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.23-3.81), driven by higher rates of rehospitalization. Mortality was similar at 30 and 180 days. The association between higher country income and the 30-day composite end point was similar across geographic regions, with exception of Latin America ( P for interaction, 0.03).ConclusionsIn this global acute heart failure trial, patients from higher income countries had lower rates of protocol completion, higher rates of adverse events, and similar mortality rates. After adjustment for race, geographic region, and clinical factors, enrollment from a higher income country was associated with worse clinical outcomes, driven by higher rates of rehospitalization. Variation in enrolling country income level may influence study end points and trial performance independent of geographic region.Clinical trial registrationURL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00475852.
Project description:BackgroundThe rapid development and rollout of COVID-19 vaccines helped reduce the pandemic's mortality burden. The vaccine rollout, however, has been uneven; it is well known that vaccination rates tend to be lower in lower income countries. Vaccine uptake, however, ultimately depends on the willingness of individuals to get vaccinated. If vaccine confidence is low, then uptake will be low, regardless of country income level. We investigated the impact on country-level COVID-19 vaccination rates of both national income and vaccine hesitancy.MethodsWe estimated a linear regression model of COVID-19 vaccine uptake across 145 countries; this cross-sectional model was estimated at each of four time points: 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after the onset of global vaccine distribution. Vaccine uptake reflects the percentage of the population that had completed their primary vaccination series at the time point. Covariates include per capita GDP, an estimate of the percentage of country residents who strongly disagreed that vaccines are safe, and a variety of control variables. Next, we estimated these models of vaccine uptake by country income (countries below, and above the international median per capita GDP) to examine whether the impact of vaccine hesitancy varies by country income.ResultsWe find that GDP per capita has a pronounced impact on vaccine uptake at 6 months after global rollout. After controlling for other factors, there was a 22 percentage point difference in vaccination rates between the top 20% and the bottom 20% of countries ranked by per capita GDP; this difference grew to 38% by 12 months. The deleterious impact of distrust of vaccine safety on vaccine uptake became apparent by 12 months and then increased over time. At 24 months, there was a 17% difference in vaccination rates between the top 20% and the bottom 20% of countries ranked by distrust. The income stratified models reveal that the deleterious impact of vaccine distrust on vaccine uptake at 12 and 24 months is particularly evident in lower income countries.ConclusionsOur study highlights the important role of both national income and vaccine hesitancy in determining COVID-19 vaccine uptake globally. There is a need to increase the supply and distribution of pandemic vaccines to lower-income countries, and to take measures to improve vaccine confidence in these countries.
Project description:A poor start in life shapes children's development over the life-course. Children from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are exposed to low levels of early stimulation, greater socioeconomic deprivation and persistent environmental and health challenges. Nevertheless, little is known about country-specific factors affecting early childhood development (ECD) in LMICs. Using data from 68 LMICs collected as part of the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys between 2010 and 2018, along with other publicly available data sources, we employed a multivariate linear regression analysis at a national level to assess the association between the average Early Childhood Development Index (ECDI) in children aged 3-5 and country-level ecological characteristics: early learning and nurturing care and socioeconomic and health indicators. Our results show that upper-middle-income country status, attendance at early childhood education (ECE) programs and the availability of books at home are positively associated with a higher ECDI. Conversely, the prevalence of low birthweight and high under-5 and maternal mortality are negatively associated with ECDI nationally. On average, LMICs with inadequate stimulation at home, higher mortality rates and without mandatory ECE programs are at greater risks of poorer ECDI. Investment in early-year interventions to improve nurturing care and ECD outcomes is essential for achieving Sustainable Development Goals.
Project description:Identifying the motives underpinning punishment is crucial for understanding its evolved function. In principle, punishment of distributional inequality could be motivated by the desire to reciprocate losses ('revenge') or by the desire to reduce payoff asymmetries between the punisher and the target ('inequality aversion'). By separating these two possible motivations, recent work suggests that punishment is more likely to be motivated by disadvantageous inequality aversion than by a desire for revenge. Nevertheless, these findings have not consistently replicated across different studies. Here, we suggest that considering country of origin-previously overlooked as a possible source of variation in responses-is important for understanding when and why individuals punish one another. We conducted a two-player stealing game with punishment, using data from 2,400 subjects recruited from the USA and India. US-based subjects punished in response to losses and disadvantageous inequality, but seldom invested in antisocial punishment (defined here as punishment of non-stealing partners). India-based subjects, on the other hand, punished at higher levels than US-based subjects and, so long as they did not experience disadvantageous inequality, punished stealing and non-stealing partners indiscriminately. Nevertheless, as in the USA, when stealing resulted in disadvantageous inequality, India-based subjects punished stealing partners more than non-stealing partners. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that variation in punitive behavior varies across societies, and support the idea that punishment might sometimes function to improve relative status, rather than to enforce cooperation.
Project description:We use a dynamic panel data model to generate density forecasts for daily active Covid-19 infections for a panel of countries/regions. Our specification that assumes the growth rate of active infections can be represented by autoregressive fluctuations around a downward sloping deterministic trend function with a break. Our fully Bayesian approach allows us to flexibly estimate the cross-sectional distribution of slopes and then implicitly use this distribution as prior to construct Bayes forecasts for the individual time series. We find some evidence that information from locations with an early outbreak can sharpen forecast accuracy for late locations. There is generally a lot of uncertainty about the evolution of active infection, due to parameter and shock uncertainty, in particular before and around the peak of the infection path. Over a one-week horizon, the empirical coverage frequency of our interval forecasts is close to the nominal credible level. Weekly forecasts from our model are published at https://laurayuliu.com/covid19-panel-forecast/.
Project description:IntroductionAlthough gender discrimination and bias (GD/bias) experienced by female surgeons in the developed world has received much attention, GD/bias in lower-middle-income countries like Pakistan remains unexplored. Thus, our study explores how GD/bias is perceived and reported by surgeons in Pakistan.MethodA single-center cross-sectional anonymous online survey was sent to all surgeons practicing/training at a tertiary care hospital in Pakistan. The survey explored the frequency, source and impact of GD/bias among surgeons.Results98/194 surgeons (52.4%) responded to the survey, of which 68.4% were males and 66.3% were trainees. Only 19.4% of women surgeons reported 'significant' frequency of GD/bias during residency. A higher percentage of women reported 'insignificant' frequency of GD/bias during residency, as compared to males (61.3% vs. 32.8%; p = 0.004). However, more women surgeons reported facing GD/bias in various aspects of their career/training, including differences in mentorship (80.6% vs. 26.9%; p < 0.005) and differences in operating room opportunities (77.4% vs. 32.8%; p < 0.005). The source was most frequently reported to be co-residents of the opposite gender. Additionally, a high percentage of female surgeons reported that their experience of GD/bias had had a significant negative impact on their career/training progression, respect/value in the surgical team, job satisfaction and selection of specialty.ConclusionAlthough GD/bias has widespread impacts on the training/career of female surgeons in Pakistan, most females fail to recognize this GD/bias as "significant". Our results highlight a worrying lack of recognition of GD/bias by female surgeons, representing a major barrier to gender equity in surgery in Pakistan and emphasizing the need for future research.
Project description:Background: Not much is known about correlations between country-level characteristics and country-level numbers of COVID-19 cases and mortalities. Methods: Using data from the World Health Organization and other international organisations, we summarised country-level COVID-19 case and mortality counts per 100,000 population, and COVID-19 case fatality rate from January 2020 to August 2021. We conducted adjusted linear regression analysis to assess relationships between these counts/rate and certain country-level characteristics. We reported adjusted regression coefficients, β and associated 95% confidence intervals. Results: There was a positive correlation between the number of cases and country-level male/female ratio, and positive correlations between the numbers of cases and mortalities and country-level proportion of 60+-year-olds, universal health coverage index of service coverage (UHC) and tourism. Country economic status correlated negatively with the numbers of cases and mortalities. COVID-19 case fatality rate was highest in Peru, South American region (9.2%), and lowest in Singapore, Western Pacific region (0.1%). A negative correlation was observed between case fatality rate and country-level male/female ratio, population density and economic status. These observations remained mostly among mid-/low-income countries, particularly a positive correlation between the number of cases and male/female ratio and proportion of 60+-year-olds. Conclusions: Various country-level characteristics such as male/female ratio, proportion of older adults, country economic status, UHC and tourism appear to be correlated with the country-level number of COVID-19 cases and/or mortalities. Consideration of these characteristics may be necessary when designing country-level COVID-19 epidemiological studies and in comparing COVID-19 data between countries.
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to quantify the changes that occurred in the surgical services of children during the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of a low/middle-income country.DesignA case-control study was conducted at a large referral centre in Bangladesh among patients aged ≤12 years. Comparisons were made between cases admitted during a period of 'April to September 2020' (Pandemic period) and controls during a similar period in 2019 (Reference period). The number of admissions and outpatient department (OPD) attendances, age and sex distribution, diagnosis, number and types of surgeries performed (elective vs emergency), variations in treatment of acute appendicitis, types of anaesthesia and mortality were compared.ResultsAdmissions were only 41% of previous year (635 vs 1549), and OPD attendances were only 28% of previous year (603 vs 2152). Admission of children reduced by 65.8%, but neonatal admission reduced only by 7.6%. The median age of the admitted patients was significantly lower during the pandemic period (3 vs 4 years, p<0.01). Acute appendicitis (151, 9.8%) and trauma (61, 9.6%), respectively, were the the most common causes of admission during the reference and the pandemic period. Elective surgeries were only 17% and emergency surgeries were 64% of previous year (p<0.01). Appendectomy (88, 9.1%) and laparotomy (77, 17.6%), respectively, were the most common surgeries performed during the reference and the pandemic period. Conservative treatment of acute appendicitis was more during the pandemic period (47.5% vs 28.5%, p=0.01), but patients who underwent appendectomies had more complicated appendicitis (63.3% vs 42.1%, p=0.01). In all, 90.4% of surgeries were performed by resident doctors. There were no COVID-19- related deaths.ConclusionTrauma became the most common cause of admission during the pandemic, and neonatal surgical conditions remained almost unchanged with high mortality rates. Elective procedures and laparoscopy remained low and resident doctors played a major role in providing surgical services.
Project description:IntroductionTranslation of evidence into clinical practice for use of intravenous thrombolysis in acute stroke care has been slow, especially across low- and middle-income countries. In Malaysia where the average national uptake was poor among the public hospitals in 2018, one hospital intriguingly showed comparable thrombolysis rates to high-income countries. This study aimed to explore and provide in-depth understanding of factors and explanations for the high rates of intravenous stroke thrombolysis in this hospital.MethodsThis single case study sourced data using a multimethod approach: (1) semi-structured in-depth interviews and focus group discussions, (2) surveys, and (3) review of medical records. The Tailored Implementation of Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework was used as a guide to understand the determinants of implementation. Twenty-nine participants comprising the Hospital Director, neurologists, emergency physicians, radiologists, pharmacists, nurses and medical assistants (MAs) were included. Thematic analyses were conducted inductively before triangulated with quantitative analyses and document reviews.ResultsFavorable factors contributing to the uptake included: (1) cohesiveness of team members which comprised of positive interprofessional team dynamics, shared personal beliefs and values, and passionate leadership, and (2) facilitative work process through simplification of workflow and understanding the rationale of the sense of urgency. Patient factors was a limiting factor. Almost two third of ischemic stroke patients arrived at the hospital outside the therapeutic window time, attributing patients' delayed presentation as a main barrier to the uptake of intravenous stroke thrombolysis. One other barrier was the availability of resources, although this was innovatively optimized to minimize its impact on the uptake of the therapy. As such, potential in-hospital delays accounted for only 3.8% of patients who missed the opportunity to receive thrombolysis.ConclusionsDespite the ongoing challenges, the success in implementing intravenous stroke thrombolysis as standard of care was attributed to the cohesiveness of team members and having facilitative work processes. For countries of similar settings, plans to improve the uptake of intravenous stroke thrombolysis should consider the inclusion of interventions targeting on these modifiable factors.