Analyzing Indian general public’s perspective on anxiety,stress and trauma during Covid-19 - A machine learning study of 840,000 tweets

Background and aimsEver since COVID-19 was declared a pandemic by WHO in late March 2020, more and more people began to share their opinions online about the anxiety, stress, and trauma they suffered because of the pandemic. However, very few studies were conducted to analyze the general public’s perception of what causes stress, anxiety, and trauma during COVID-19. This study focuses particularly on understanding Indian citizens.MethodsBy using Machine learning techniques, particularly Natural language processing, this study focuses on understanding the attitude of Indian citizens while discussing the anxiety, stress, and trauma created because of COVID-19 and the major reasons that cause it. We used Tweets as data for this study. We have used 840,000 tweets for this study.ResultsOur sentiment analysis study revealed the interesting fact that, even while discussing about the stress, anxiety, and trauma caused by COVID-19, most of the tweets were in neutral sentiments. Death and Lockdown caused by the COVID-19 were the two most important aspects that cause stress, anxiety, and Trauma among Indian citizens.ConclusionIt is important for policymakers and health professionals to understand common citizen’s perspectives of what causes them stress, anxiety, and trauma to formulate policies and treat the patients. Our study shows that Indian citizens use social media to share their opinions about COVID-19 and as a coping mechanism in unprecedented time.     

Indian citizen's perspective about side effects of COVID-19 vaccine – A machine learning study

Background and aimsEver since the vaccination drive for COVID-19 has started in India, the citizens have been sharing their views on social media about it. The present study examines the attitude of Indian citizens towards the side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine.MethodsSocial media posts were used for this research. Using Python, we have collected social media posts of Indians focusing on side effects of COVID -19 vaccines. In study one, sentimental analysis was done to find overall attitude of Indian citizens towards the side effects of COVID-19 vaccine and in study two, topic modeling done to analyze the major side effects voiced out by the citizens after taking COVID-19 vaccine.ResultsThe studies conducted have revealed that nearly 78.5% of tweets posted by Indian citizens about the side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine were either in neutral or positive sentiments. Our topic modeling studies have found that fear of efficiency in the workplace and the fear of death as the prime two issues that contributes Indian citizens to have negative sentiment about the side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine.ConclusionWhile it is important for the Indian government to actively encourage its citizens to have vaccine, it is also important to help the citizens understand the important of the vaccination program. The best way to educate citizens regarding the positive aspect of the vaccination program is by addressing the fears, Indian citizens have voiced in their social media post about the COVID-19 vaccines.     

Analyzing the attitude of Indian citizens towards COVID-19 vaccine – A text analytics study

Background and aimsThe government of India recently planned to start the process of the mass vaccination program to end the COVID-19 crises. However, the process of vaccination was not made mandatory, and there are a lot of aspects that arise skepticism in the minds of common people regarding COVID-19 vaccines. This study using machine learning techniques analyzes the major concerns Indian citizens voice out about COVID-19 vaccines in social media.MethodsFor this study, we have used social media posts as data. Using Python, we have scrapped the social media posts of Indian citizens discussing about the COVID- 19 vaccine. In Study 1, we performed a sentimental analysis to determine how the general perception of Indian citizens regarding the COVID-19 vaccine changes over different months of COVID-19 crises. In Study 2, we have performed topic modeling to understand the major issues that concern the general public regarding the COVID- 19 vaccine.ResultsOur results have indicated that 47% of social media posts discussing vaccines were in a neutral tone, and nearly 17% of the social media posts discussing the COVID-19 vaccine were in a negative tone. Fear of health and allergic reactions towards the vaccine are the two prominent issues that concern Indian citizens regarding the COVID-19 vaccine.ConclusionWith the positive sentiments regarding vaccine is just over 35%, the Indian government needs to focus especially on addressing the fear of vaccines before implementing the process of mass vaccination.     

Role of Cardiac Biomarkers in COVID-19: What Recent Investigations Tell Us?

Purpose of review: Although the respiratory system is the main target of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), it is evident from recent data that other systems, especially cardiovascular and hematological, are also significantly affected. In fact, in severe form, COVID-19 causes a systemic illness with widespread inflammation and cytokine flood, resulting in severe cardiovascular injury. Therefore, we reviewed cardiac injury biomarkers' role in various cardiovascular complications of COVID 19 in recent studies. Recent findings: Cardiac injury biomarkers were elevated in most of the complicated cases of COVID-19, and their elevation is directly proportional to the worst outcome. Evaluation of cardiac biomarkers with markers of other organ damage gives a more reliable tool for case fatalities and future outcome. Summary: Significant association of cardiac biomarkers in COVID-19 cases helps disease management and prognosis, especially in severely ill patients.     

Fever: Could A Cardinal Sign of COVID-19 Infection Reduce Mortality?

With mortality rising from the COVID-19 pandemic, we may be overlooking a key aspect of the immunological response. Fever is a cardinal sign of this rampant infection; however, little attention has been paid towards how a fever may work in our favor in overcoming this disease. Three key aspects of patient care – fever, fluid, and food – can be harmonized to overcome COVID-19 infection. Both animal and human studies have demonstrated that fever suppression during viral infections, either through low ambient temperatures or antipyretic use, may increase morbidity and prolong the illness. As fever rises, so do antidiuretic hormone levels, leading to solute-free water retention – making conservative fluid management essential. Finally, fever inhibits gastrointestinal function as energy is reallocated to the immunological response, underscoring the need to work in concert with these physiological changes. An opportunity awaits to investigate this natural barrier to infection, let us not pass it by.     

Mechanisms and consequences of COVID-19 associated liver injury: What can we affirm?

Since the first reports of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) cases in December 2019 in China, numerous papers have been published describing a high frequency of liver injury associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, many of them proposing a link between these findings and patient outcomes. Increases in serum aminotransferase levels(ranging from 16% to 62%) and bilirubin levels(ranging from 5% to 21%) have been reported and seem to be more often observed in patients with severe forms of COVID-19. Although absolute changes in these parameters are frequently seen, other variables, such as the ratio above the upper limit of normal, the onset of liver injury as a complication in severe cases and histopathological findings, reinforce that liver changes are of dubious clinical relevance in the course of this disease. Other factors must also be considered in these analyses, such as the repercussions of hemodynamic changes, the presence of thrombotic events, and, mainly, the possible drug-induced liver injury with the current, yet off-label, treatment. This paper aimed to analyze the currently available data on liver injury in patients with COVID-19.     

What do the Australian public think of regulatory nutrition policies? A scoping review

Effective government policies are crucial to creating healthy food environments. However, changing public policy is a slow and challenging process involving many competing factors. One cited factor is public opinion towards a proposed policy. This study aimed to systematically explore public opinion on regulatory nutrition policy issues in Australia from 2009 to 2019, to determine whether low levels of public opinion corresponded with the low levels of regulatory policy action in this country. We found that there was varying levels of public support in Australia for public health nutrition action. Regulatory‐ and legislative‐based policies generally had moderate to high levels of support except for food and drink taxes, which had low to moderate support. Despite high levels of public support for certain policy initiatives, national public health nutrition policy in Australia has not evolved consistently with the level of public support nor the evidence base over the past decade indicating other more important factors at play in policymaking.     

Is diabetes mellitus associated with mortality and severity of COVID-19? A meta-analysis

BackgroundMany studies on COVID-19 have reported diabetes to be associated with severe disease and mortality, however, the data is conflicting. The objectives of this meta-analysis were to explore the relationship between diabetes and COVID-19 mortality and severity, and to determine the prevalence of diabetes in patients with COVID-19.MethodsWe searched the PubMed for case-control studies in English, published between Jan 1 and Apr 22, 2020, that had data on diabetes in patients with COVID-19. The frequency of diabetes was compared between patients with and without the composite endpoint of mortality or severity. Random effects model was used with odds ratio as the effect size. We also determined the pooled prevalence of diabetes in patients with COVID-19. Heterogeneity and publication bias were taken care by meta-regression, sub-group analyses, and trim and fill methods.ResultsWe included 33 studies (16,003 patients) and found diabetes to be significantly associated with mortality of COVID-19 with a pooled odds ratio of 1.90 (95% CI: 1.37–2.64; p < 0.01). Diabetes was also associated with severe COVID-19 with a pooled odds ratio of 2.75 (95% CI: 2.09–3.62; p < 0.01). The combined corrected pooled odds ratio of mortality or severity was 2.16 (95% CI: 1.74–2.68; p < 0.01). The pooled prevalence of diabetes in patients with COVID-19 was 9.8% (95% CI: 8.7%–10.9%) (after adjusting for heterogeneity).ConclusionsDiabetes in patients with COVID-19 is associated with a two-fold increase in mortality as well as severity of COVID-19, as compared to non-diabetics. Further studies on the pathogenic mechanisms and therapeutic implications need to be done.     

The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Scientific Research: an Upcoming New Wave?

The coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic continues to have an impact on health care. A potential new wave can be foreseen concerning the impact of the pandemic on medical research and literature. We focused our attention on journals belonging to “Medicine, General and Internal” Clarivate™ category and “Q1” journal impact factor quartile. We found that since January 2020, 9621 papers regarding COVID-19 have been published in these journals. This occurred at the expense of non-COVID-19-related scientific papers as most journals did not increase the total number of their published articles. Thus, our analysis may outlook a new potential scientific wave related to COVID-19, in addition to the clinical ones, possibly delaying the improvement in the quality of care for other diseases in the next years.

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic has had and still continues to have an extraordinary impact on health care.¹ Different types of the effects of the pandemic over the short-, medium-, and long-term periods have been interestingly depicted, and four different waves associated with COVID-19 have been identified. These address the immediate response to COVID-19 outbreak and pandemic, the postponing of other urgent health conditions, the interruption of the care of chronic conditions, and the psychological trauma caused within the broader population, respectively.² However, a potential fifth wave of COVID-19 can be foreseen concerning the impact of the pandemic on the entire world of medical science. Indeed, over the past 2 years, the attention of physicians, researchers, and scientific journals has been partially and legitimately directed to the pandemic. This might occur at the expense of scientific research in other clinical settings of similar prevalence and relevance. The ultimate and most important role of medical journals is to advance scientific knowledge and impact on patient care. This is particularly true for high-impact-factor journals, which largely influence the community of scientists, clinical guidelines, and hence, daily clinical practice.³In order to explore the impact of COVID-19-related publications, we focused our attention on journals belonging to “Medicine, General and Internal” Clarivate™ category and “Q1” journal impact factor quartile. We exploited Pubmed® to extract papers published from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2021, specifying those related to COVID-19 (adding “COVID-19” OR “Coronavirus” OR “SARS-CoV-2” as search criteria) for each journal. Then, we used histograms, box-and-dots plots, density plots, and correlation plots to assess the number of COVID-19 reports on journal publication rate. Analysis and plots were performed using the “R” statistical environment.Since January 2020, an overwhelming number (n = 9962) of papers focusing on COVID-19 has been published in the considered Q1 General and Internal Medicine journals (Fig. ​(Fig.1A).1A). Notably, the percentage of papers regarding COVID-19 ranged approximately between 10 and 50% of the total number of publications (Fig. ​(Fig.1B).1B). It occurred at the expense of non-COVID-19-related scientific papers, as most of these journals did not increase the total number of their published articles (Fig. ​(Fig.2A).2A). Interestingly, the higher was the impact factor of the journal, the greater was the percentage of articles on COVID-19 (Fig. ​(Fig.2B2B). Open in a separate windowFigure 1A The density plot shows the “scientific wave” of COVID-19, represented as the rolling average, evaluated over 3 months, of COVID-19 publications (y-axis) in each month from January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021 (x-axis). Our search criteria consisted of “COVID-19” OR “Coronavirus” OR “SARS-CoV-2” (with the possibility of abbreviations), the time range, and the name of journals we considered for the analysis: “N Engl J Med,” “Lancet,” “JAMA,” “BMJ,” “Ann Intern Med,” “JAMA Intern Med,” “PLoS Med,” “J Intern Med,” “BMC Med,” “J Travel Med,” “JAMA Netw Open,” “CMAJ,” “Mayo Clin Proc,” “Transl Res,” “Br J Gen Pract,” “J R Soc Med,” “Panminerva Med,” “Ann Fam Med,” “J Gen Intern Med,” “Front Med (Lausanne),” “Am J Prev Med,” “Am J Med,” “J Pers Med,” “Minerva Med,” “J Palliat Med,” “Eur J Clin Invest,” “Eur J Intern Med,” “J Clin Med,” and “Prev Med.” All article types were considered in the analysis. B The histogram shows the ratio between COVID-19 publications and the total number of publications in the years 2020 and 2021 for the General and Internal Medicine journals considered.Open in a separate windowFigure 2A The scatter plot shows the correlation between the number of publications in the years 2018 and 2019 (x-axis) and 2020–2021 (y-axis) for the General and Internal Medicine journals considered. Excluding 4 journals (red dots), the number of papers published by each journal (blue dots) in 2018–2019 and in 2020–2021 was comparable (R = 0.98; P < 0.001). When all journals (red and blue dots) were considered, the correlation index was 0.81 (P < 0.001). B Box-and-dot plot showing the relationship between the percentage of COVID-19 publications in the years 2020 and 2021 (y-axis) and the impact factor (IF) of the considered journals, grouped according to their IF quartiles (x-axis). First quartile = IF < 5; second quartile = IF ≥ 5–< 8; third quartile = IF ≥ 8–< 20; fourth quartile = IF ≥ 20.We fully acknowledge the crucial role of the scientific production on COVID-19 in helping health personnel and scientists in the management of this disease, especially with the frontline experiences being very precious. However, the high percentages of papers dedicated to COVID-19 on high-ranking medical journals considered in our analysis may outlook a new potential scientific wave paralleling the clinical one. In other words, just as clinical care has been largely devoted to COVID-19 and the management of other pathologies has been partially neglected, so too medical journals have prioritized COVID-19, significantly slowing down the publication of non-COVID-19-related studies. However, it cannot be excluded that some of the non-COVID-19 research articles were published in other scientific journals with lower impact or from other fields. Moreover, all the efforts dedicated to the research on COVID-19 has been partially subtracted from investigations focusing on other clinical and basic science settings. Interestingly, a recent study noted that by May 2020, ClinicalTrials.gov had registered more than 1200 COVID-19-related trials.⁴ As clinical guidelines are mainly based on studies published in high-impact-factor journals, it can be hypothesized that in the next years there will be a slowdown in updating the guidelines. Therefore, a potential delay in the improvement in the quality of care for major diseases could occur.Our preliminary observations, as well as other recent evidence,^{5, 6} rather than being a systematic analysis of all the scientific works published during the pandemic, are intended to be a message of attention to a possible future scenario. Although further confirmation is needed about a possible adverse scientific wave, the experience gained during the COVID-19 pandemic should be an instructive lesson to help us be “better prepared” and “optimize” scientific research and diffusion also when the health-care system is under extreme strain.