Preparing for uncertainty: endemic paediatric viral illnesses after COVID-19 pandemic disruption.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Messacar K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9282759 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Preparing for uncertainty: endemic paediatric viral illnesses after COVID-19 pandemic disruption.
Messacar Kevin K Baker Rachel E RE Park Sang Woo SW Nguyen-Tran Hai H Cataldi Jessica R JR Grenfell Bryan B
Lancet (London, England) 20220714 10364
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST1055 | biostudies-other
Project description:During the initial surge of the COVID-19 pandemic in the spring and summer of 2020, paediatric heart centres were forced to rapidly alter the way patient care was provided to minimise interruption to patient care as well as exposure to the virus. In this survey-based descriptive study, we characterise changes that occurred within paediatric cardiology practices across the United States and described provider experience and attitudes towards these changes during the pandemic. Common changes that were implemented included decreased numbers of procedures, limiting visitors and shifting towards telemedicine encounters. The information obtained from this survey may be useful in guiding and standardising responses to future public health crises.
| S-EPMC8545844 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To understand and analyse the global impact of COVID-19 on outpatient services, inpatient care, elective surgery, and perioperative colorectal cancer care, a DElayed COloRectal cancer surgery (DECOR-19) survey was conducted in collaboration with numerous international colorectal societies with the objective of obtaining several learning points from the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on our colorectal cancer patients which will assist us in the ongoing management of our colorectal cancer patients and to provide us safe oncological pathways for future outbreaks.
| 2346925 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:BackgroundNurses, as the largest group of health professionals, are at the frontline of the healthcare system in response to COVID-19 epidemic. This study aimed to evaluate the nurses' certainty and satisfaction with medical gloves when exposed to coronavirus in Fars province, south of Iran.MethodsUsing convenience sampling, 400 hospital nurses during the COVID-19 outbreak were selected from eight hospitals of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS). A questionnaire about glove reliability, including protection in tasks, durability, integrity and tear resistance, feeling fearful, and focusing on duties, and the nurses' anxiety regarding their infection with coronavirus was distributed to the selected nurses to complete. 375 questionnaires were completed (response rate of 93.75%). Among the participants, 180 (48%) were in the corona section and 195 (52%) were hardly possible to have contact with coronavirus pneumonia patients.ResultsThe mean score (SD) of anxiety about infection with COVID-19 for nurses in the COVID-19 section and those in the non-COVID-19 section were 6.08 (2.8) and 4.56 (2.58), respectively (p<0.05). The mean duration of gloves usage in a day was almost similar in the two groups (about 5h), but the number of glove replacements was significantly higher among the nurses in the corona section (6 times) compared to those in the non-corona section (3 times). The two groups were also significantly different regarding glove protection in daily tasks and glove durability.ConclusionThe nurses in the corona section had more concerns about medical gloves as a type of personal protective equipment. In addition to health education on controlling and preventing the spread of diseases, raising awareness about the reliability of personal protective equipment can improve nurses' performance.
| S-EPMC8075845 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCommunicating scientific uncertainty about public health threats such as COVID-19 is an ethically desirable task endorsed by expert guidelines on crisis communication. However, the communication of scientific uncertainty is challenging because of its potential to promote ambiguity aversion-a well-described syndrome of negative psychological responses consisting of heightened risk perceptions, emotional distress, and decision avoidance. Communication strategies that can inform the public about scientific uncertainty while mitigating ambiguity aversion are a critical unmet need.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate whether an "uncertainty-normalizing" communication strategy-aimed at reinforcing the expected nature of scientific uncertainty about the COVID-19 pandemic-can reduce ambiguity aversion, and to compare its effectiveness to conventional public communication strategies aimed at promoting hope and prosocial values.MethodsIn an online factorial experiment conducted from May to June 2020, a national sample of 1497 US adults read one of five versions of an informational message describing the nature, transmission, prevention, and treatment of COVID-19; the versions varied in level of expressed scientific uncertainty and supplemental focus (ie, uncertainty-normalizing, hope-promoting, and prosocial). Participants then completed measures of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral manifestations of ambiguity aversion (ie, perceived likelihood of getting COVID-19, COVID-19 worry, and intentions for COVID-19 risk-reducing behaviors and vaccination). Analyses assessed (1) the extent to which communicating uncertainty produced ambiguity-averse psychological responses; (2) the comparative effectiveness of uncertainty-normalizing, hope-promoting, and prosocial communication strategies in reducing ambiguity-averse responses; and (3) potential moderators of the effects of alternative uncertainty communication strategies.ResultsThe communication of scientific uncertainty about the COVID-19 pandemic increased perceived likelihood of getting COVID-19 and worry about COVID-19, consistent with ambiguity aversion. However, it did not affect intentions for risk-reducing behaviors or vaccination. The uncertainty-normalizing strategy reduced these aversive effects of communicating scientific uncertainty, resulting in levels of both perceived likelihood of getting COVID-19 and worry about COVID-19 that did not differ from the control message that did not communicate uncertainty. In contrast, the hope-promoting and prosocial strategies did not decrease ambiguity-averse responses to scientific uncertainty. Age and political affiliation, respectively, moderated the effects of uncertainty communication strategies on intentions for COVID-19 risk-reducing behaviors and worry about COVID-19.ConclusionsCommunicating scientific uncertainty about the COVID-19 pandemic produces ambiguity-averse cognitive and emotional, but not behavioral, responses among the general public, and an uncertainty-normalizing communication strategy reduces these responses. Normalizing uncertainty may be an effective strategy for mitigating ambiguity aversion in crisis communication efforts. More research is needed to test uncertainty-normalizing communication strategies and to elucidate the factors that moderate their effectiveness.
| S-EPMC8064708 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9384519 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Two online studies (Total N = 331) tested the hypothesis that individual differences in self-control and responses to uncertainty would predict adherence to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 2020a) guidelines, reported stockpiling, and intentions to engage in hedonic behavior in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Trait self-control (b = 0.27, p = .015), desire for self-control (Study 1: b = 0.28, p = .001; Study 2: b = 0.27, p = .005), and cognitive uncertainty (b = 0.73, p < .001) predicted more CDC adherence. State self-control (Study 1: b = -0.15, p = .012; Study 2: b = -0.26, p < .001) predicted less stockpiling, whereas emotional uncertainty (b = 0.56, p < .001) and cognitive uncertainty (b = 0.61, p < .001) predicted more stockpiling. State self-control (b = -0.18, p = .003) predicted less hedonic behavior, whereas desire for self-control (b = 0.42, p < .001) and emotional uncertainty (b = 0.26, p = .018) predicted more hedonic behavior. Study 2 (pre-registered) also found that emotional uncertainty predicted more stockpiling and hedonic behavior for participants low in state self-control (stockpiling: b = -0.31, p < .001; hedonic behavior: b = 0.28, p = .025), but not for participants high in state self-control (stockpiling: b = 0.03, p = .795; hedonic behavior: b = -0.24, p = .066). These findings provide evidence that some forms of self-control and uncertainty influenced compliance with behavioral recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-021-02066-y.
| S-EPMC8272611 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This paper investigates the switching effect of COVID-19 pandemic and economic policy uncertainty on commodity prices. We employ Markov regime-switching dynamic model to explore price regime dynamics of eight widely traded commodities namely oil, natural gas, corn, soybeans, silver, gold, copper, and steel. We fit two Markov switching regimes to allow parameters to respond to both low and high volatilities. The empirical evidence shows oil, natural gas, corn, soybean, silver, gold, copper, and steel returns adjust to shocks in COVID-19 outcomes and economic policy uncertainty at varying degrees--in both low volatility and high volatility regimes. In contrast, oil and natural gas do not respond to changes in COVID-19 deaths in both regimes. The findings show most commodities are responsive to historical price in terms of demand and supply in both volatility regimes. Our findings further show a high probability that commodity prices will remain in low volatility regime than in high volatility regime--owing to COVID-19-attributed market uncertainties. These findings are useful to both investors and policymakers--as precious metals and agricultural commodities show less negative response to exogenous variables. Thus, investors and portfolio managers could use precious metals, viz. Gold for short-term cover against systematic risks in the market during the period of global pandemic.
| S-EPMC8459197 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe aims of this study were to examine the mediation effect of viral anxiety of healthcare workers on the influence of their intolerance of uncertainty on the adherence to physical distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsAn online survey was conducted among 329 healthcare workers (female: 81.4%, nursing professionals: 59.0%, and shift workers: 22.3%) on November 29, 2021. Participants responded to questionnaires on adherence to physical distancing, health beliefs, and perceived social norms, and rating scales of the Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics-6 items (SAVE-6), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items (PHQ-9), and the Intolerance of Uncertainty-12 items (IUS-12) scale.ResultsAdherence to physical distancing of healthcare workers was predicted by perceived benefits of physical distancing (β = 0.13, p = 0.01), personal injunctive norms (β = 0.32, p < 0.001), SAVE-6 score (β = 0.13, p = 0.02), and IUS-12 score (β = 0.10, p = 0.045) (adjusted R2 = 0.21, F = 22.3, p < 0.001). Viral anxiety mediated the association between intolerance of uncertainty and adherence to physical distancing but not the influence of perceived benefits and personal injunctive norms on adherence to physical distancing.ConclusionWe observed that viral anxiety of healthcare workers mediated the association between intolerance of uncertainty and adherence to physical distancing. During this pandemic, exploring adherence to physical distancing and its predicting factors will be helpful for the safety of healthcare workers and the patients for whom they care.
| S-EPMC9207240 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 has exacerbated endemic health inequalities resulting in a syndemic pandemic of higher mortality and morbidity rates among the most socially disadvantaged. We did a scoping review to identify and synthesise published evidence on geographical inequalities in COVID-19 mortality rates globally. We included peer-reviewed studies, from any country, written in English that showed any area-level (eg, neighbourhood, town, city, municipality, or region) inequalities in mortality by socioeconomic deprivation (ie, measured via indices of multiple deprivation: the percentage of people living in poverty or proxy factors including the Gini coefficient, employment rates, or housing tenure). 95 papers from five WHO global regions were included in the final synthesis. A large majority of the studies (n=86) found that COVID-19 mortality rates were higher in areas of socioeconomic disadvantage than in affluent areas. The subsequent discussion reflects on how the unequal nature of the pandemic has resulted from a syndemic of COVID-19 and endemic inequalities in chronic disease burden.
| S-EPMC9629845 | biostudies-literature