Is there life beyond the Spanish government's aid to furloughed employees by COVID-19?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Laborda J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8221470 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7537013 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has hit all corners of the world, challenging governments to act promptly in controlling the spread of the pandemic. Due to limited resources and inferior technological capacities, developing countries including Vietnam have faced many challenges in combating the pandemic. Since the first cases were detected on 23 January 2020, Vietnam has undergone a 3-month fierce battle to control the outbreak with stringent measures from the government to mitigate the adverse impacts. In this study, we aim to give insights into the Vietnamese government's progress during the first three months of the outbreak. Additionally, we relatively compare Vietnam's response with that of other Southeast Asia countries to deliver a clear and comprehensive view on disease control strategies.MethodsThe data on the number of COVID-19 confirmed and recovered cases in Vietnam was obtained from the Dashboard for COVID-19 statistics of the Ministry of Health (https://ncov.vncdc.gov.vn/). The review on Vietnam's country-level responses was conducted by searching for relevant government documents issued on the online database 'Vietnam Laws Repository' (https://thuvienphapluat.vn/en/index.aspx), with the grey literature on Google and relevant official websites. A stringency index of government policies and the countries' respective numbers of confirmed cases of nine Southeast Asian countries were adapted from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/research/research-projects/coronavirus-government-response-tracker). All data was updated as of 24 April 2020.ResultsPreliminary positive results have been achieved given that the nation confirmed no new community-transmitted cases since 16 April and zero COVID-19 - related deaths throughout the 3-month pandemic period. To date, the pandemic has been successfully controlled thanks to the Vietnamese government's prompt, proactive and decisive responses including mobilization of the health care systems, security forces, economic policies, along with a creative and effective communication campaign corresponding with crucial milestones of the epidemic's progression.ConclusionsVietnam could be one of the role models in pandemic control for low-resource settings. As the pandemic is still ongoing in an unpredictable trajectory, disease control measures should continue to be put in place in the foreseeable short term.
| S-EPMC7567433 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough it is known that mortality due to COVID-19 increases progressively with age, the probability of dying from this serious infection among the oldest-old population is little known, and controversial data are found in literature.MethodsWe examine the mortality by year and month of birth of Belgians who had turned 100 during the current COVID-19 pandemic and whose birth fell on the years around the end the First World War and the outbreak of the H1N1 "Spanish flu" pandemic.FindingsThe COVID-19 mortality of the "older" centenarians is significantly lower than that of "younger" centenarians, and this difference between the two groups reaches a maximum on August 1, 1918 as the discriminating cut-off date of birth. Having excluded the plausible impact of the end of WWI it becomes clear that this date corresponds to the time of reporting the first victims of the Spanish flu pandemic in Belgium.InterpretationIn this study, the striking temporal coincidence between the outbreak of the Spanish flu epidemic and the birth of the cohorts characterized by greater fragility towards COVID-19 in 2020 strongly suggests a link between exposure to 1918 H1N1 pandemic influenza and resistance towards 2020 SARS-Cov-2. It can be speculated that the lifetime persistence of cross-reactive immune mechanisms has enabled centenarians exposed to the Spanish flu to overcome the threat of COVID-19 a century later.
| S-EPMC8507269 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST563 | biostudies-other
Project description:Given the overwhelming worldwide rate of infection and the disappointing pace of vaccination, addressing reinfection is critical. Understanding reinfection, including longevity after natural infection, will allow us to better know the prospect of herd immunity, which hinges on the assumption that natural infection generates sufficient, protective immunity. The primary objective of this observational cohort study is to establish the incidence of reinfection of COVID-19 among healthcare employees who experienced a prior COVID-19 infection over a 10-month period. Of 2,625 participants who experienced at least one COVID-19 infection during the 10-month study period, 156 (5.94%) experienced reinfection and 540 (20.57%) experienced recurrence after prior infection. Median days were 126.50 (105.50-171.00) to reinfection and 31.50 (10.00-72.00) to recurrence. Incidence rate of COVID-19 reinfection was 0.35 cases per 1,000 person-days, with participants working in COVID-clinical and clinical units experiencing 3.77 and 3.57 times, respectively, greater risk of reinfection relative to those working in non-clinical units. Incidence rate of COVID-19 recurrence was 1.47 cases per 1,000 person-days. This study supports the consensus that COVID-19 reinfection, defined as subsequent infection ≥ 90 days after prior infection, is rare, even among a sample of healthcare workers with frequent exposure.
| S-EPMC8726474 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9765003 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSARS-CoV-2 is a highly contagious virus, and despite professionals' best efforts, nosocomial COVID-19 (NC) infections have been reported. This work aimed to describe differences in symptoms and outcomes between patients with NC and community-acquired COVID-19 (CAC) and to identify risk factors for severe outcomes among NC patients.MethodsThis is a nationwide, retrospective, multicenter, observational study that analyzed patients hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 in 150 Spanish hospitals (SEMI-COVID-19 Registry) from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021. NC was defined as patients admitted for non-COVID-19 diseases with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test on the fifth day of hospitalization or later. The primary outcome was 30-day in-hospital mortality (IHM). The secondary outcome was other COVID-19-related complications. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed.ResultsOf the 23,219 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 1,104 (4.8%) were NC. Compared to CAC patients, NC patients were older (median 76 vs. 69 years; p < 0.001), had more comorbidities (median Charlson Comorbidity Index 5 vs. 3; p < 0.001), were less symptomatic (p < 0.001), and had normal chest X-rays more frequently (30.8% vs. 12.5%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for sex, age, dependence, COVID-19 wave, and comorbidities, NC was associated with lower risk of moderate/severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-0.87; p < 0.001) and higher risk of acute heart failure (aOR: 1.40; 1.12-1.72; p = 0.003), sepsis (aOR: 1.73; 1.33-2.54; p < 0.001), and readmission (aOR: 1.35; 1.03-1.83; p = 0.028). NC was associated with a higher case fatality rate (39.1% vs. 19.2%) in all age groups. IHM was significantly higher among NC patients (aOR: 2.07; 1.81-2.68; p < 0.001). Risk factors for increased IHM in NC patients were age, moderate/severe dependence, malignancy, dyspnea, moderate/severe ARDS, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and shock; odynophagia was associated with lower IHM.ConclusionsNC is associated with greater mortality and complications compared to CAC. Hospital strategies to prevent NC must be strengthened.
| S-EPMC9893008 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is limited understanding of how older adults evaluated the federal government's COVID-19 response, despite their increased health risks during the pandemic and their important role in politics. We conducted qualitative thematic analysis on a nationally representative subsample of respondents aged 55+ from the COVID-19 Coping Study (N = 500) who were asked: "How do you feel about federal government responses to and handling of the COVID-19 pandemic?" Analyses identified largely negative opinions about the federal government and former President Trump's leadership, though some were neutral or positive. Participants expressed concerns that the federal government was undermining science, and that sending mixed messages about personal protective equipment and masks was dangerous. Perspectives were divergent and reflective of the country's polarization surrounding COVID-19 policies. Results can inform efforts to build unity between political parties and identify strategies that governments can use to better respond to future public health crises.
| S-EPMC9283959 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared coronavirus disease (COVID-19) to be a pandemic. This posed challenges to many countries, prominent among which is communication with the public to gain their cooperation. Israel faces different challenges from other countries in its management of the COVID-19 crisis because it is in the midst of a deep constitutional crisis. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this paper was to examine the response of the Israeli public to the government's emergency instructions regarding the pandemic in terms of correlations between overall risk perception and crisis management; overall risk perception and economic threat perception; crisis management and compliance with behavioral guidelines; and crisis management and economic threat perception. We also made comparisons between crisis management and spokesperson credibility and between crisis management and the credibility of information sources. METHODS:The sample was established using an online survey that enabled rapid and effective distribution of an online questionnaire during the COVID-19 crisis. The self-selection online survey method of nonprobability sampling was used to recruit participants (N=1056) through social network posts asking the general public (aged ?18 years) to answer the survey. RESULTS:Participants aged ?65 years perceived higher personal risk compared to those aged 18-30 years (mean difference 0.33, 95% CI 0.04-0.61) and those aged 46-64 years (mean difference 0.38, 95% CI 0.12-0.64). Significant correlations were found between overall risk perception and attitudes toward crisis management (r=0.19, P<.001), overall risk perception and economic threat perception (r=0.22, P<.001), attitudes toward crisis management and compliance with behavioral guidelines (r=0.15, P<.001), and attitudes toward crisis management and economic threat perception (r=-0.15, P<.001). Participants who perceived that the prime minister was the most credible spokesperson evaluated the crisis management significantly higher than all other groups. The crisis management was evaluated significantly lower by participants who stated that infectious disease specialists were the most credible spokespersons. Participants for whom the Ministry of Health website was the most credible source of information evaluated the crisis management higher than all other groups. Participants for whom scientific articles were the most credible source of information evaluated the crisis management lower than those who perceived that the WHO/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention websites or Ministry of Health/hospital websites and health care workers were the most credible. CONCLUSIONS:The higher the public trust and evaluation of crisis management, the greater the compliance of the public with guidelines. It was also found that crisis management and information cannot be approached in the same way for the overall public. Furthermore, unlike other epidemics, the COVID-19 crisis has widespread economic and social consequences; therefore, it is impossible to focus only on health risks without communicating economic and social risks as well.
| S-EPMC7236609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Amidst a worldwide vaccination campaign, trust in science plays a significant role when addressing the COVID-19 pandemic. Given current concerns regarding research standards, we were interested in how Spanish scholars perceived COVID-19 research and the extent to which questionable research practices and potentially problematic academic incentives are commonplace. We asked researchers to evaluate the expected quality of their COVID-19 projects and other peers' research and compared these assessments with those from scholars not involved in COVID-19 research. We investigated self-admitting and estimated rates of questionable research practices and attitudes towards current research status. Responses from 131 researchers suggested that COVID-19 evaluations followed partisan lines, with scholars being more pessimistic about others' colleagues' research than their own. Additionally,researchers not involved in COVID-19 projects were more negative than their participating peers. These differences were particularly notable for areas such as the expected theoretical foundations or overall quality of the research, among others. Most Spanish scholars expected questionable research practices and inadequate incentives to be widespread. In these two aspects, researchers tended to agree regardless of their involvement in COVID-19 research. We provide specific recommendations for improving future meta-science studies, such as redefining QRPs as inadequate research practices (IRP). This change could help avoid key controversies regarding QRPs' definition while highlighting their detrimental impact. Lastly, we join previous calls to improve transparency and academic career incentives as a cornerstone for generating trust in science.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-022-02797-6.
| S-EPMC8884412 | biostudies-literature