Short-sighted decision-making by those not vaccinated against COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Halilova JG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9277980 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Policy decision-making for system resilience to a hazard requires the estimation and prediction of the trends of growth and decline of the impacts of the hazard. With focus on the recent worldwide spread of CoVid-19, we take the infection rate as the relevant metric whose trend of evolution to follow for verifying the effectiveness of the countermeasures applied. By comparison with the theories of growth and recovery in coupled socio-medical systems, we find that the data for many countries show infection rate trends that are exponential in form. In particular, the recovery trajectory is universal in trend and consistent with the learning theory, which allows for predictions useful in the assistance of decision-making of emergency recovery actions. The findings are validated by extensive data and comparison to medical pandemic models.
| S-EPMC7407614 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:The number of cases from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic has overwhelmed existing medical facilities and forced clinicians, patients, and families to make pivotal decisions with limited time and information. Main body:While machine learning (ML) methods have been previously used to augment clinical decisions, there is now a demand for "Emergency ML." Throughout the patient care pathway, there are opportunities for ML-supported decisions based on collected vitals, laboratory results, medication orders, and comorbidities. With rapidly growing datasets, there also remain important considerations when developing and validating ML models. Conclusion:This perspective highlights the utility of evidence-based prediction tools in a number of clinical settings, and how similar models can be deployed during the COVID-19 pandemic to guide hospital frontlines and healthcare administrators to make informed decisions about patient care and managing hospital volume.
| S-EPMC7347420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Graphical abstract Context The vaccine distribution for the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) is a multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) problem based on three issues, namely, identification of different distribution criteria, importance criteria and data variation. Thus, the Pythagorean fuzzy decision by opinion score method (PFDOSM) for prioritising vaccine recipients is the correct approach because it utilises the most powerful MCDM ranking method. However, PFDOSM weighs the criteria values of each alternative implicitly, which is limited to explicitly weighting each criterion. In view of solving this theoretical issue, the fuzzy-weighted zero-inconsistency (FWZIC) can be used as a powerful weighting MCDM method to provide explicit weights for a criteria set with zero inconstancy. However, FWZIC is based on the triangular fuzzy number that is limited in solving the vagueness related to the aforementioned theoretical issues. Objectives This research presents a novel homogeneous Pythagorean fuzzy framework for distributing the COVID-19 vaccine dose by integrating a new formulation of the Pythagorean fuzzy-weighted zero-inconsistency (PFWZIC) and PFDOSM methods. Methods The methodology is divided into two phases. Firstly, an augmented dataset was generated that included 300 recipients based on five COVID-19 vaccine distribution criteria (i.e., vaccine recipient memberships, chronic disease conditions, age, geographic location severity and disabilities). Then, a decision matrix was constructed on the basis of an intersection of the ‘recipients list’ and ‘COVID-19 distribution criteria’. Then, the MCDM methods were integrated. An extended PFWZIC was developed, followed by the development of PFDOSM. Results (1) PFWZIC effectively weighted the vaccine distribution criteria. (2) The PFDOSM-based group prioritisation was considered in the final distribution result. (3) The prioritisation ranks of the vaccine recipients were subject to a systematic ranking that is supported by high correlation results over nine scenarios of the changing criteria weights values. A comparison with previous work also proved the efficiency of the proposed framework. Conclusion The findings of this study are expected to contribute to ensuring equitable protection against COVID-19 and thus help accelerate vaccine progress worldwide.
| S-EPMC8378994 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The elderly may represent a specific cluster of high-risk patients for developing COVID-19 with rapidly progressive clinical deterioration. Indeed, in older individuals, immunosenescence and comorbid disorders are more likely to promote viral-induced cytokine storm resulting in life-threatening respiratory failure and multisystemic involvement. Early diagnosis and individualized therapeutic management should be developed for elderly subjects based on personal medical history and polypharmacotherapy. Our review examines the pathogenesis and clinical implications of ageing in COVID-19 patients; finally, we discuss the evidence and controversies in the management in the long-stay residential care homes and aspects of end-of-life care for elderly patients with COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7298699 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo describe youth sport participation behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic as reported by parents of youth sport athletes, to examine the association of family demographics with the likelihood of children resuming sports, and to qualitatively report the factors influencing parental decision-making regarding youth sport participation during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA national sample of parents of youth athletes from across the United States (n=236, age: 39.2±8.1 years, 57.2% female) were recruited to complete an online questionnaire by Qualtrics Online Samples (Qualtrics, Provo, UT) using a combination of actively managed, double-opt-in market research panels. The questionnaire focused on changes in child sport participation and family finances as a result of COVID-19 and included both close-ended and open-ended questions.ResultsMost parents (63.1%) reported the time their children spent participating in organized youth sports had decreased because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Three-quarters of parents (75.5%) reported that it was likely that their children would fully resume participating in organized youth sports within the next year. Parents whose financial situation was worsened by COVID-19 were less likely to report that their children would resume sports in the upcoming year. Three domains related to parental decision-making emerged from the open-ended responses: safety, fear, and normalcy.ConclusionsUnderstanding the factors influencing changes in youth sport participation during the pandemic can allow systems to implement strategies for safe participation in youth sport and physical activity among children. Encouraging participation in outdoor sports with appropriate safety precautions such as masking, social distancing, and hygiene may reduce fear of participation among parents.
| S-EPMC9112262 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly contagious zoonotic pathogen that has exacted heavy public health, social and economic tolls. In February 2020, the World Health Organization acronymed the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 as COVID-19, for coronavirus disease 2019. The number of confirmed COVID-19 infections, which has been detected in at least 103 countries, has reached 1,970,225 worldwide as of April 14, 2020 with 124,544 deaths, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Many cases of COVID-19 resolve quickly. However, the disease, which, like other respiratory pathogens that cause common cold symptoms is believed to be transmitted through respiratory droplets. Infection with COVID-19 can also lead to significant morbidity and death; this is particularly the case for cancer patients. Moreover, because the signs and symptoms of COVID-19 are easily misattributed to the sequelae of cancer itself, such as pulmonary embolism, or its treatment, such as nausea and diarrhea, diagnosis may be delayed or missed. Potential COVID-19 rule out criteria, based on the Wells' criteria for pulmonary embolism, another protean disease entity, are provided as a decision-making aid. This review summarizes the current understanding of the transmission, clinical presentation, diagnosis and differential diagnosis, pathogenesis, rationale to treat the cancer or not, treatment and prevention of COVID-19 with an emphasis on implications in cancer.
| S-EPMC7438345 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In December 2019, cases of pneumonia were detected in Wuhan, China, which were caused by the highly contagious coronavirus. This study is aimed at comparing the confusion regarding the selection of effective diagnostic methods to make a mutual comparison among existing SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests and at determining the most effective one. Based on available published evidence and clinical practice, diagnostic tests of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) were evaluated by multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods, namely, fuzzy preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation (fuzzy PROMETHEE) and fuzzy technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (fuzzy TOPSIS). Computerized tomography of chest (chest CT), the detection of viral nucleic acid by polymerase chain reaction, cell culture, CoV-19 antigen detection, CoV-19 antibody IgM, CoV-19 antibody IgG, and chest X-ray were evaluated by linguistic fuzzy scale to compare among the diagnostic tests. This scale consists of selected parameters that possessed different weights which were determined by the experts' opinions of the field. The results of our study with both proposed MCDM methods indicated that the most effective diagnosis method of COVID-19 was chest CT. It is interesting to note that the methods that are consistently used in the diagnosis of viral diseases were ranked in second place for the diagnosis of COVID-19. However, each country should use appropriate diagnostic solutions according to its own resources. Our findings also show which diagnostic systems can be used in combination.
| S-EPMC7411452 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The world is going through an unprecedented time in history, and Urologists are, like many other healthcare professionals, facing and combating on two fronts: against the pandemic itself and cancer. When looking at the fatality rates, bladder cancer overcomes Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by far and can be as high as 52%, so Urologists must not postpone investigation. Cystoscopy remains the gold standard for the investigation of bladder cancer and computed tomography (CT) urography for obtaining images of the upper tract in cases of macroscopic hematuria. Whenever transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURB) is necessary, extra care must be taken to assure muscle sample, avoiding another surgical intervention and hospitalization, but when necessary it should not be postponed due to the elevated progression rate of the disease. Follow-up cystoscopies can be postponed for 6 months for low risk, 3 months for intermediate, 6 weeks for high risk, and not beyond 24 hours in case of emergencies as life-threatening hematuria, anemia, and urinary retention. Regarding chemotherapy, more than ever the key point is to evaluate each case individually. Bacille Calmette Guerin (BCG) must be considered only as an inducing course, in selected intermediate and most high-risk cancers. Whenever possible patients should be tested before surgery. Based on the current literature on optimal bladder cancer patients approach we comprehensively synthetize the major societies guidelines on the issue so far, adding a critical view to the topic. This article aims to guide Urologists on decision making against bladder cancer in the COVID-19 era.
| S-EPMC8012830 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe pace of the COVID-19 pandemic poses an unprecedented challenge to the evidence-to-decision process. Latin American countries have responded to COVID-19 by introducing interventions to both mitigate the risk of infection and to treat cases. Understanding how evidence is used to inform government-level decision-making at a national scale is crucial for informing country and regional actors in ongoing response efforts.ObjectivesThis study was undertaken between February-May 2021 and aims to characterise the best available evidence (BAE) and assess the extent to which it was used to inform decision-making in 21 Latin American countries, in relation to pharmaceutical (PI) and non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) related to COVID-19, including the use of therapeutics (corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine and ivermectin), facemask use in the community setting and the use of diagnostic tests as a requirement for international travel.MethodA three-phase methodology was used to; (i) characterise the BAE for each intervention using an umbrella review, (ii) identify government-level decisions for each intervention through a document review and (iii) assess the use of evidence to inform decisions using a novel adapted framework analysis.FindingsThe BAE is characterized by 17 living and non-living systematic reviews as evolving, and particularly uncertain for NPIs. 107 country-level documents show variation in both content and timing of decision outcomes across intervention types, with the majority of decisions taken at a time of evidence uncertainty, with only 5 documents including BAE. Seven out of eight key indicators of an evidence-to-decision process were identified more frequently among PIs than either NPI of facemask use or testing prior to travel. Overall evidence use was reported more frequently among PIs than either NPI of facemask use or travel testing (92%, 28% and 29%, respectively).InterpretationThere are limitations in the extent to which evidence use in decision-making is reported across the Latin America region. Institutionalising this process and grounding it in existing and emerging methodologies can facilitate the rapid response in an emergency setting.FundingNo funding was sourced for this work.
| S-EPMC9299752 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Given that individual differences influence virus-mitigating behaviors and the COVID-19 pandemic posed new moral dilemmas for individuals to resolve, across three studies (N = 704), we assessed how masculine honor beliefs (MHB), beliefs in pure good (BPG), evil (BPE), and the dark triad (DT) influence COVID-19 moral decision-making. Specifically, we analyzed moral decision-making at the microlevel (i.e., individual- and familial-level; Study 1), in decisions with (hypothetical) life-or-death consequences (Study 2), and at the macrolevel (i.e., nationwide virus-mitigation efforts; Study 3). In all studies, participants completed the four individual difference scales and rated their pandemic attitudes on Likert-type agreement scales, and resolved various moral dilemmas in Studies 2 and 3. Consistent with our hypotheses, individuals reported more virus-mitigation efforts in order to protect their families than themselves. In terms of hypothetical life-or-death and nationwide decisions, MHB, BPE, and the DT predicted more confidence and social motivations, whereas BPG predicted more distress. This research has implications for moral decision-making at varying degrees of severity during the COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC7847405 | biostudies-literature