Machine Learning Techniques to Explore Clinical Presentations of COVID-19 Severity and to Test the Association With Unhealthy Opioid Use: Retrospective Cross-sectional Cohort Study

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated health inequities in the United States. People with unhealthy opioid use (UOU) may face disproportionate challenges with COVID-19 precautions, and the pandemic has disrupted access to opioids and UOU treatments. UOU impairs the immunological, cardiovascular, pulmonary, renal, and neurological systems and may increase severity of outcomes for COVID-19.ObjectiveWe applied machine learning techniques to explore clinical presentations of hospitalized patients with UOU and COVID-19 and to test the association between UOU and COVID-19 disease severity.MethodsThis retrospective, cross-sectional cohort study was conducted based on data from 4110 electronic health record patient encounters at an academic health center in Chicago between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020. The inclusion criterion was an unplanned admission of a patient aged ≥18 years; encounters were counted as COVID-19-positive if there was a positive test for COVID-19 or 2 COVID-19 International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision codes. Using a predefined cutoff with optimal sensitivity and specificity to identify UOU, we ran a machine learning UOU classifier on the data for patients with COVID-19 to estimate the subcohort of patients with UOU. Topic modeling was used to explore and compare the clinical presentations documented for 2 subgroups: encounters with UOU and COVID-19 and those with no UOU and COVID-19. Mixed effects logistic regression accounted for multiple encounters for some patients and tested the association between UOU and COVID-19 outcome severity. Severity was measured with 3 utilization metrics: low-severity unplanned admission, medium-severity unplanned admission and receiving mechanical ventilation, and high-severity unplanned admission with in-hospital death. All models controlled for age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance status, and BMI.ResultsTopic modeling yielded 10 topics per subgroup and highlighted unique comorbidities associated with UOU and COVID-19 (eg, HIV) and no UOU and COVID-19 (eg, diabetes). In the regression analysis, each incremental increase in the classifier’s predicted probability of UOU was associated with 1.16 higher odds of COVID-19 outcome severity (odds ratio 1.16, 95% CI 1.04-1.29; P=.009).ConclusionsAmong patients hospitalized with COVID-19, UOU is an independent risk factor associated with greater outcome severity, including in-hospital death. Social determinants of health and opioid-related overdose are unique comorbidities in the clinical presentation of the UOU patient subgroup. Additional research is needed on the role of COVID-19 therapeutics and inpatient management of acute COVID-19 pneumonia for patients with UOU. Further research is needed to test associations between expanded evidence-based harm reduction strategies for UOU and vaccination rates, hospitalizations, and risks for overdose and death among people with UOU and COVID-19. Machine learning techniques may offer more exhaustive means for cohort discovery and a novel mixed methods approach to population health.     

The Anticipated Future of Public Health Services Post COVID-19: Viewpoint

In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 as a global pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has affected various public health functions and essential services in different ways and magnitudes. Although all countries have witnessed the effect of COVID-19, the impact differed based on many factors including the integrity and resiliency of the countries’ health systems. This paper presents opinions and expectations of the authors about the anticipated changes in the future of public health at the global, regional, and national levels. The viewpoint is based on the current efforts and challenges that various stakeholders have carried out to control COVID-19 and the contribution from the literature on the future of public health. Numerous agencies and actors are involved in the fight against COVID-19 with variations in their effectiveness. The public health services showed weaknesses in most of the countries, in addition to the lack of adequate curative medicine settings. The pandemic highlighted the need for better governance and stronger and more resilient health systems and capacities. The COVID-19 experience has also emphasized the importance of coordination and collaboration among the countries and stakeholders. The COVID-19 pandemic might lead to a wide discussion to improve international and national approaches to prepare for and respond to similar events in terms of preparedness and response mechanisms and tools. Public health will not be the same as before COVID-19. New health priorities, approaches, and new agendas will be on the table of the global platforms and initiatives. More investment in research and technology to meet the demand for new vaccines and medicines, innovative methods like distance learning and working, more respect and remuneration to health professionals, and normalization of the public health and social measures that were induced during the COVID-19 pandemic are expected to be seen in future.     

India’s efforts to achieve 1.5 billion COVID-19 vaccinations: a narrative review

The initial case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in India was reported on January 30, 2020, and subsequently, the number of COVID-19-infected patients surged during the first wave of April 2020 and the second wave in the same month of 2021. The government of India imposed a strict nationwide lockdown in April 2020 and extended it until May 2020. The second wave of COVID-19 in India overwhelmed the country’s health facilities and exhausted its medical and paramedical workforce. This narrative review was conducted with the aim of summarizing the evidence drawn from policy documents of governmental and non-governmental organizations, as well as capturing India''s COVID-19 vaccination efforts. The findings from this review cover the Indian government''s vaccination initiatives, which ranged from steps taken to combat vaccine hesitancy to vaccination roadmaps, deployment plans, the use of digital health technology, vaccination monitoring, adverse effects, and innovative strategies such as Har Ghar Dastak and Jan Bhagidari Andolan (people’s participation). These efforts collectively culminated in the successful administration of more than 1.8 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines in India. This review also provides insights into other countries’ responses to COVID-19 and guidance for future pandemics.     

突发公共卫生事件中国内外生物医学期刊的发文特征分析——以COVID-19专题论文为例

【目的】 探讨COVID-19疫情下国内外生物医学期刊专题论文的发文趋势及分布特征,为今后应对突发公共卫生事件的科学传播提供借鉴。【方法】 检索2019年12月1日至2020年6月30日PubMed文献数据库及我国新型冠状病毒肺炎科研成果学术交流平台(以下简称“我国新冠学术交流平台”)的发文量及时间、作者信息、期刊信息、论文类型等,描述国内外COVID-19论文的发文趋势和来源期刊、作者分布。【结果】 PubMed文献数据库共收录COVID-19论文26391篇,期刊3133种。美国作者发文量领先,中国、意大利、英国作者发文量相近。我国新冠学术交流平台共收录专题论文993篇,期刊106种。中国作者总数及第一作者数均仅次于美国。来自北京、湖北、上海的作者发表的中文医学论文最多。国际期刊中,病毒学、传染病学、环境科学、公共卫生学科期刊发文量居前列;国内期刊中,流行病学、内科学、传染病学、急诊医学、传染病学、药学期刊发文量较多。论文类型以论著、病例报告、综述为主,在国际、国内期刊中占比分别为68.4%和56.3%,国内期刊指南与共识类论文占比较国际期刊多(17.7% vs 0.7%)【结论】 突发公共卫生事件中的科学传播因疫情驱动,由科研实力支撑。我国作者发文呈现阶段性特点,2020年4月以前,中国作者的科研成果较多刊发于我国生物医学领域期刊,此后的大样本量报道、深入分析和国际合作研究主要刊发于国外期刊。我国期刊的指南与共识类论文数量优势明显。     

COVID-19 International Collaborative Research by the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service Using Its Nationwide Real-world Data: Database,Outcomes, and Implications

This article aims to introduce the inception and operation of the COVID-19 International Collaborative Research Project, the world’s first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) open data project for research, along with its dataset and research method, and to discuss relevant considerations for collaborative research using nationwide real-world data (RWD). COVID-19 has spread across the world since early 2020, becoming a serious global health threat to life, safety, and social and economic activities. However, insufficient RWD from patients was available to help clinicians efficiently diagnose and treat patients with COVID-19, or to provide necessary information to the government for policy-making. Countries that saw a rapid surge of infections had to focus on leveraging medical professionals to treat patients, and the circumstances made it even more difficult to promptly use COVID-19 RWD. Against this backdrop, the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) of Korea decided to open its COVID-19 RWD collected through Korea’s universal health insurance program, under the title of the COVID-19 International Collaborative Research Project. The dataset, consisting of 476 508 claim statements from 234 427 patients (7590 confirmed cases) and 18 691 318 claim statements of the same patients for the previous 3 years, was established and hosted on HIRA’s in-house server. Researchers who applied to participate in the project uploaded analysis code on the platform prepared by HIRA, and HIRA conducted the analysis and provided outcome values. As of November 2020, analyses have been completed for 129 research projects, which have been published or are in the process of being published in prestigious journals.     

Assessing the Implementation of Digital Innovations in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic to Address Key Public Health Functions: Scoping Review of Academic and Nonacademic Literature

BackgroundDigital technologies have been central to efforts to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. In this context, a range of literature has reported on developments regarding the implementation of new digital technologies for COVID-19–related surveillance, prevention, and control.ObjectiveIn this study, scoping reviews of academic and nonacademic literature were undertaken to obtain an overview of the evidence regarding digital innovations implemented to address key public health functions in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to expand on the work of existing reviews by drawing on additional data sources (including nonacademic sources) by considering literature published over a longer time frame and analyzing data in terms of the number of unique digital innovations.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review of the academic literature published between January 1, 2020, and September 15, 2020, supplemented by a further scoping review of selected nonacademic literature published between January 1, 2020, and October 13, 2020. Both reviews followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) approach.ResultsA total of 226 academic articles and 406 nonacademic articles were included. The included articles provided evidence of 561 (academic literature) and 497 (nonacademic literature) unique digital innovations. The most common implementation settings for digital innovations were the United States, China, India, and the United Kingdom. Technologies most commonly used by digital innovations were those belonging to the high-level technology group of integrated and ubiquitous fixed and mobile networks. The key public health functions most commonly addressed by digital innovations were communication and collaboration and surveillance and monitoring.ConclusionsDigital innovations implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic have been wide ranging in terms of their implementation settings, the digital technologies used, and the public health functions addressed. However, evidence gathered through this study also points to a range of barriers that have affected the successful implementation of digital technologies for public health functions. It is also evident that many digital innovations implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic are yet to be formally evaluated or assessed.     

Health inequality experienced by the socially disadvantaged populations during the outbreak of COVID-19 in Hong Kong: An interaction with social inequality

Health inequality creates conditions for the transmission of infectious diseases, and existing health disparities can contribute to unequal burdens of morbidity and mortality. In Hong Kong, low socioeconomic districts were the epicentres of third-wave outbreak of COVID-19 in July and August 2020, suggesting that people from low socioeconomic class are vulnerable groups. Socially disadvantaged people are relatively more vulnerable to the physical, mental, and social impacts of infectious diseases. To achieve more effective infection control, the social determinants of health and existing health inequalities should be identified, and understanding the experiences of socially disadvantaged groups in the COVID-19 outbreak will be beneficial to health authorities in formulating a responsive infection control policy targeting the needs of the socially disadvantaged. This article investigates the experiences of economically disadvantaged groups during the COVID-19 outbreak and examines how they were further disadvantaged in the outbreak by delineating how health inequality intersected with social inequality. In-depth, semistructured interviews were conducted from February to April 2020 with 35 participants from the poverty class in Hong Kong. The high prices of surgical face masks and disinfecting products as well as the economic impacts induced by COVID-19-related social distancing policies imposed severe economic burden on the participants. In addition to economic and housing deprivation, social inequality was closely associated with health inequality, which made the participants more vulnerable to infection. Social inequality is associated with and can worsen health inequality. Here, the participants, who were of low socioeconomic status were more disadvantaged in health and in the attainment of social resources such as employment, education, face masks, disinfection products and right to use public facilities, during the COVID-19 outbreak. All these elements may have interrelated effects and in turn limit accessibility to healthcare and lead to less positive health outcomes and consequently to health inequality.     

Self-reported COVID-19 vaccination acceptance and hesitancy among autistic adults

Identifying factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among vulnerable groups, including autistic individuals, can increase vaccination rates and support public health. The purpose of this study was to determine differences among autistic adults who reported COVID-19 vaccination acceptance from those who did not. In this study we describe COVID-19 vaccination status and self-reported preferences among autistic adults and identify related factors. Vaccine accepters were more likely to report increased loneliness during COVID-19, lived in more populous counties (p = 0.02), and lived in counties won by President Biden in the 2020 US presidential election (p < 0.001). Positive correlations were found between desire to protect others, concern about contracting COVID-19, and trusting vaccine safety (p < 0.001). Concern about vaccine safety was common among the vaccine hesitant, while lack of concern about COVID-19 overall was not. Identifying health promotion strategies based on self-reported, lived experiences about COVID-19 among vulnerable groups is key for public health impact.     

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Health Status and Behaviors of Adults in Korea: National Cross-sectional Web-Based Self-report Survey

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has radically shifted living practices, thereby influencing changes in the health status and behaviors of every person.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on the self-reported health status and health behaviors along with any associated factors in adults in the Republic of Korea wherein no stringent lockdown measures were implemented during the pandemic.MethodsWe conducted a web-based self-reported survey from November 2020 to December 2020. The study participants (N=2097) were identified through quota sampling by age, sex, and geographical regions among residents aged 19 years or older in Korea. The survey collected information on basic demographics, changes in self-reported health status, and health behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Self-reported health status and health behaviors were categorized into 3 groups: unchanged, improved, or worsened. A chi-square test and logistic regression analyses were conducted.ResultsWith regard to changes in the self-reported health status, the majority (1478/2097, 70.5%) of the participants reported that their health was unchanged, while 20% (420/2097) of the participants reported having worser health after the COVID-19 outbreak. With regard to changes in health behaviors, the proportion of participants who increased tobacco consumption was similar to that of those who decreased tobacco consumption (110/545, 20.2% vs 106/545, 19.5%, respectively), while the proportion of those who decreased their drinking frequency was more than twice as many as those who increased their drinking frequency (578/1603, 36.1% vs 270/1603, 16.8%, respectively). Further, those who decreased their exercising frequency were more than those who increased their exercising frequency (333/823, 15.9% vs 211/823, 10%, respectively). The factor that had the greatest influence on lifestyle was age. In the subgroup analysis, the group aged 20-29 years had the highest number of individuals with both a worsened (100/377, 26.5%) and an improved (218/377, 15.7%) health status. Further, individuals aged 20-29 years had greater odds of increased smoking (6.44, 95% CI 2.15-19.32), increased alcohol use (4.64, 95% CI 2.60-8.28), and decreased moderate or higher intensity aerobic exercise (3.39, 95% CI 1.82-6.33) compared to individuals aged 60 years and older. Younger adults showed deteriorated health behaviors, while older adults showed improved health behaviors.ConclusionsThe health status and the behavior of the majority of the Koreans were not found to be heavily affected by the COVID-19 outbreak. However, in some cases, changes in health status or health behavior were identified. This study highlighted that some groups were overwhelmingly affected by COVID-19 compared to others. Certain groups reported experiencing both worsening and improving health, while other groups reported unchanged health status. Age was the most influential factor for behavior change; in particular, the younger generation’s negative health behaviors need more attention in terms of public health. As COVID-19 prolongs, public health interventions for vulnerable groups may be needed.     

A comparison of health system responses to COVID-19 in Bulgaria,Croatia and Romania in 2020

This article compares the health system responses to COVID-19 in Bulgaria, Croatia and Romania from February 2020 until the end of 2020. It explores similarities and differences between the three countries, building primarily on the methodology and content compiled in the COVID-19 Health System Response Monitor (HSRM). We find that all three countries entered the COVID-19 crisis with common problems, including workforce shortages and underdeveloped and underutilized preventive and primary care. The countries reacted swiftly to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, declaring a state of emergency in March 2020 and setting up new governance mechanisms. The initial response benefited from a centralized approach and high levels of public trust but proved to be only a short-term solution. Over time, governance became dominated by political and economic considerations, communication to the public became contradictory, and levels of public trust declined dramatically. The three countries created additional bed capacity for the treatment of COVID-19 patients in the first wave, but a greater challenge was to ensure a sufficient supply of qualified health workers. New digital and remote tools for the provision of non-COVID-19 health services were introduced or used more widely, with an increase in telephone or online consultations and a simplification of administrative procedures. However, the provision and uptake of non-COVID-19 health services was still affected negatively by the pandemic. Overall, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed pre-existing health system and governance challenges in the three countries, leading to a large number of preventable deaths.     

Findings from an online survey on the mental health effects of COVID-19 on Canadians with disabilities and chronic health conditions

BackgroundAlthough the COVID-19 pandemic has led to worsening mental health outcomes throughout the Canadian population, its effects have been more acute among already marginalized groups, including people with disabilities and chronic health conditions. This paper examines how heightened fears of contracting the virus, financial impacts, and social isolation contribute to declining mental health among this already vulnerable group.Objective/hypothesisThis paper investigates how increases in anxiety, stress, and despair are associated with concerns about getting infected, COVID-19-induced financial hardship, and increased social isolation as a result of adhering to protective measures among people with disabilities and chronic health conditions.MethodsThis study uses original national quota-based online survey data (n = 1027) collected in June 2020 from people with disabilities and chronic health conditions. Three logistic regression models investigate the relationship between COVID-19’s effects on finances, concerns about contracting the virus, changes in loneliness and belonging, and measures taken to combat the spread of COVID-19 and reports of increased anxiety, stress, and despair, net of covariates.ResultsModels show that increased anxiety, stress, and despair were associated with negative financial effects of COVID-19, greater concerns about contracting COVID-19, increased loneliness, and decreased feelings of belonging. Net of other covariates, increased measures taken to combat COVID-19 was not significantly associated with mental health outcomes.ConclusionsFindings address how the global health crisis is contributing to declining mental health status through heightened concerns over contracting the virus, increases in economic insecurity, and growing social isolation, speaking to how health pandemics exacerbate health inequalities.     

Protective Behaviors and Secondary Harms Resulting From Nonpharmaceutical Interventions During the COVID-19 Epidemic in South Africa: Multisite,Prospective Longitudinal Study

BackgroundIn March 2020, South Africa implemented strict nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to contain the spread of COVID-19. Over the subsequent 5 months, NPI policies were eased in stages according to a national strategy. COVID-19 spread throughout the country heterogeneously; the disease reached rural areas by July and case numbers peaked from July to August. A second COVID-19 wave began in late 2020. Data on the impact of NPI policies on social and economic well-being and access to health care are limited.ObjectiveWe aimed to determine how rural residents in three South African provinces changed their behaviors during the first COVID-19 epidemic wave.MethodsThe South African Population Research Infrastructure Network nodes in the Mpumalanga (Agincourt), KwaZulu-Natal, (Africa Health Research Institute) and Limpopo (Dikgale-Mamabolo-Mothiba) provinces conducted up to 14 rounds of longitudinal telephone surveys among randomly sampled households from rural and periurban surveillance populations every 2-3 weeks. Interviews included questions on the following topics: COVID-19–related knowledge and behaviors, the health and economic impacts of NPIs, and mental health. We analyzed how responses varied based on NPI stringency and household sociodemographics.ResultsIn total, 5120 households completed 23,095 interviews between April and December 2020. Respondents’ self-reported satisfaction with their COVID-19–related knowledge and face mask use rapidly rose to 85% and 95%, respectively, by August. As selected NPIs were eased, the amount of travel increased, economic losses were reduced, and the prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms fell. When the number of COVID-19 cases spiked at one node in July, the amount of travel dropped rapidly and the rate of missed daily medications doubled. Households where more adults received government-funded old-age pensions reported concerns about economic matters and medication access less often.ConclusionsSouth Africans complied with stringent, COVID-19–related NPIs despite the threat of substantial social, economic, and health repercussions. Government-supported social welfare programs appeared to buffer interruptions in income and health care access during local outbreaks. Epidemic control policies must be balanced against the broader well-being of people in resource-limited settings and designed with parallel support systems when such policies threaten peoples’ income and access to basic services.     

Older adolescents and young adults willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine: Implications for informing public health strategies

ImportanceThe success in ending the COVID-19 pandemic rests partly on the mass uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine. Little work has been done to understand vaccine willingness among older adolescents and young adults. This is important since this age group may be less likely to adhere to public health guidelines.ObjectiveTo understand willingness of getting a vaccine and reasons for vaccine hesitancy among a sample of older adolescents and young adults.DesignData were from the Well-Being and Experiences study (The WE Study), a longitudinal community-based sample of older adolescents and young adults collected from Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada from 2017 to 2020 (n = 664).SettingThe study setting was a community-based observational longitudinal study.ParticipantsParticipants for the study were aged 14 to 17 years old at baseline in 2016–17 (n = 1000). Data were also collected on one parent/caregiver. Waves 2 (n = 747) and 3 (n = 664) were collected in 2019 and 2020, respectively.ExposuresThe main exposures were sociodemographic factors, health conditions, COVID-19 knowledge, and adversity history.Main OutcomesThe main outcomes were COVID-19 vaccine willingness, hesitancy, and reasons for hesitancy.ResultsWillingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine was 65.4%. Willingness did not differ by age, sex, or mental health conditions, but did differ for other sociodemographic characteristics, physical health conditions, COVID-19 knowledge, practicing social/physical distancing, and adversity history. The most common reasons for not wanting a vaccine were related to safety, knowledge, and effectiveness. Sex differences were noted.Conclusions and RelevanceIncreasing uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine among older adolescents and young adults may rely on targeting individuals from households with lower income, financial burden, and adversity history, and generating public health messaging specifically aimed at vaccine safety, how it works to protect against illness, and why it is important to protect oneself against a COVID-19 infection.     

COVID-19 Assessment and Testing in Rural Communities During the Pandemic: Cross-sectional Analysis

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the need for urgent improvements in access to health care for rural, remote, and underserviced communities. The Renfrew County Virtual Triage and Assessment Centre (VTAC) was designed to provide access to COVID-19 testing and assessment with a family physician. The goal was to protect emergency departments and 911 paramedics while ensuring that nobody was left at home, suffering in silence. Residents were encouraged to call their own family physician for any urgent health needs. If they did not have a family physician or could not access their usual primary care provider, then they could call VTAC. This study reports on the output of a service model offering access to assessment and COVID-19 testing through a blend of virtual and in-person care options by a multidisciplinary team.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess the ability of VTAC to provide access to COVID-19 assessment and testing across rural, remote, and underserviced communities.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the data derived from the cases handled by VTAC between March 27, 2020 (launch day), and September 30, 2020.ResultsResidents from all 19 census subdivisions and municipalities of Renfrew County accessed VTAC. A total of 10,086 family physician assessments were completed (average 64 per day). Of these, 8535 (84.6%) assessments were to unique patient users. Thirty physicians provided care. Using digital equipment setup in the patients’ home, 31 patients were monitored remotely. VTAC community paramedics completed 14,378 COVID-19 tests and 3875 home visits.ConclusionsRenfrew County’s experience suggests that there is tremendous synergy between family physicians and community paramedics in providing access to COVID-19 assessment and COVID-19 testing. The blended model of virtual and in-person care is well suited to provide improved access to other aspects of health care post pandemic, particularly for patients without a family physician.     

全球卫生治理面临的困境、原因及应对：以新型冠状病毒肺炎疫苗实施计划为例

新型冠状病毒肺炎威胁着人民的生命健康和财产安全。新型冠状病毒肺炎疫苗是建立人群免疫屏障、实现疫情全球卫生治理的关键公共品,WHO、全球疫苗免疫联盟和流行病防范创新联盟于2020年创建新型冠状病毒肺炎疫苗实施计划（COVAX）,旨在让世界各国,尤其是中、低收入国家也能公平接种疫苗。尽管COVAX通过协调全球供应链加速了疫...     

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Uptake of Influenza Vaccine: UK-Wide Observational Study

BackgroundIn the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, the UK National Health Service (NHS) extended eligibility for influenza vaccination this season to approximately 32.4 million people (48.8% of the population). Knowing the intended uptake of the vaccine will inform supply and public health messaging to maximize vaccination.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to measure the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the acceptance of influenza vaccination in the 2020-2021 season, specifically focusing on people who were previously eligible but routinely declined vaccination and newly eligible people.MethodsIntention to receive the influenza vaccine in 2020-2021 was asked of all registrants of the largest electronic personal health record in the NHS by a web-based questionnaire on July 31, 2020. Of those who were either newly or previously eligible but had not previously received an influenza vaccination, multivariable logistic regression and network diagrams were used to examine their reasons to undergo or decline vaccination.ResultsAmong 6641 respondents, 945 (14.2%) were previously eligible but were not vaccinated; of these, 536 (56.7%) intended to receive an influenza vaccination in 2020-2021, as did 466 (68.6%) of the newly eligible respondents. Intention to receive the influenza vaccine was associated with increased age, index of multiple deprivation quintile, and considering oneself to be at high risk from COVID-19. Among those who were eligible but not intending to be vaccinated in 2020-2021, 164/543 (30.2%) gave reasons based on misinformation. Of the previously unvaccinated health care workers, 47/96 (49%) stated they would decline vaccination in 2020-2021.ConclusionsIn this sample, COVID-19 has increased acceptance of influenza vaccination in previously eligible but unvaccinated people and has motivated substantial uptake in newly eligible people. This study is essential for informing resource planning and the need for effective messaging campaigns to address negative misconceptions, which is also necessary for COVID-19 vaccination programs.     

The Impact of Funding Inpatient Treatments for COVID-19 on Health Equity in the United States: A Distributional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

ObjectivesWe conducted a distributional cost-effectiveness analysis (DCEA) to evaluate how Medicare funding of inpatient COVID-19 treatments affected health equity in the United States.MethodsA DCEA, based on an existing cost-effectiveness analysis model, was conducted from the perspective of a single US payer, Medicare. The US population was divided based on race and ethnicity (Hispanic, non-Hispanic black, and non-Hispanic white) and county-level social vulnerability index (5 quintile groups) into 15 equity-relevant subgroups. The baseline distribution of quality-adjusted life expectancy was estimated across the equity subgroups. Opportunity costs were estimated by converting total spend on COVID-19 inpatient treatments into health losses, expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), using base-case assumptions of an opportunity cost threshold of $150 000 per QALY gained and an equal distribution of opportunity costs across equity-relevant subgroups.ResultsMore socially vulnerable populations received larger per capita health benefits due to higher COVID-19 incidence and baseline in-hospital mortality. The total direct medical cost of inpatient COVID-19 interventions in the United States in 2020 was estimated at $25.83 billion with an estimated net benefit of 735 569 QALYs after adjusting for opportunity costs. Funding inpatient COVID-19 treatment reduced the population-level burden of health inequality by 0.234%. Conclusions remained robust across scenario and sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first DCEA to quantify the equity implications of funding COVID-19 treatments in the United States. Medicare funding of COVID-19 treatments in the United States could improve overall health while reducing existing health inequalities.     

基于TOPSIS法与RSR法结合的湖北省基本公共卫生服务质量综合评价

目的 综合评价在新冠疫情背景下湖北省基本公共卫生服务开展情况,为卫生部门决策提供参考。 方法 采用TOPSIS法（Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution,TOPSIS）对湖北省17个市州2020年基本公共卫生服务工作质量进行综合评价,利用多元逐步回归分析探讨主要影响因素,并结合秩和比法（Rank-sum ratio,RSR）对评价结果进行分档。结果 TOPSIS结果显示,湖北省17个市州中,排名前三位的分别是荆门市、天门市与仙桃市,排名后三位的分别是襄阳市、黄石市与神农架林区,多元逐步回归分析结果显示,X4（基本公共卫生服务知晓率）、X5（高血压患者规范管理率）、X9（儿童健康管理率）、X13（含麻疹成分疫苗接种率）、X14（新冠患者2周复查率）、X15（新冠患者4周健康监测率）与X16（新冠患者半年随访率）等7个指标是评价结果的主要影响因素,结合RSR法将结果分档,荆门市、天门市与仙桃市为较好档次,黄石市与神农架林区为较差档次,剩余12个为中等档次。结论 湖北省各市州间基本公共卫生服务质量存在差异性,应加强基本公共卫生服务宣传,提升居民认识程度,关注高血压、儿童与新冠患者等重点人群的健康管理工作,提升居民健康质量。     

Reporting and Availability of COVID-19 Demographic Data by US Health Departments (April to October 2020): Observational Study

BackgroundThere is an urgent need for consistent collection of demographic data on COVID-19 morbidity and mortality and sharing it with the public in open and accessible ways. Due to the lack of consistency in data reporting during the initial spread of COVID-19, the Equitable Data Collection and Disclosure on COVID-19 Act was introduced into the Congress that mandates collection and reporting of demographic COVID-19 data on testing, treatments, and deaths by age, sex, race and ethnicity, primary language, socioeconomic status, disability, and county. To our knowledge, no studies have evaluated how COVID-19 demographic data have been collected before and after the introduction of this legislation.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate differences in reporting and public availability of COVID-19 demographic data by US state health departments and Washington, District of Columbia (DC) before (pre-Act), immediately after (post-Act), and 6 months after (6-month follow-up) the introduction of the Equitable Data Collection and Disclosure on COVID-19 Act in the Congress on April 21, 2020.MethodsWe reviewed health department websites of all 50 US states and Washington, DC (N=51). We evaluated how each state reported age, sex, and race and ethnicity data for all confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths and how they made this data available (ie, charts and tables only or combined with dashboards and machine-actionable downloadable formats) at the three timepoints.ResultsWe found statistically significant increases in the number of health departments reporting age-specific data for COVID-19 cases (P=.045) and resulting deaths (P=.002), sex-specific data for COVID-19 deaths (P=.003), and race- and ethnicity-specific data for confirmed cases (P=.003) and deaths (P=.005) post-Act and at the 6-month follow-up (P<.05 for all). The largest increases were race and ethnicity state data for confirmed cases (pre-Act: 18/51, 35%; post-Act: 31/51, 61%; 6-month follow-up: 46/51, 90%) and deaths due to COVID-19 (pre-Act: 13/51, 25%; post-Act: 25/51, 49%; and 6-month follow-up: 39/51, 76%). Although more health departments reported race and ethnicity data based on federal requirements (P<.001), over half (29/51, 56.9%) still did not report all racial and ethnic groups as per the Office of Management and Budget guidelines (pre-Act: 5/51, 10%; post-Act: 21/51, 41%; and 6-month follow-up: 27/51, 53%). The number of health departments that made COVID-19 data available for download significantly increased from 7 to 23 (P<.001) from our initial data collection (April 2020) to the 6-month follow-up, (October 2020).ConclusionsAlthough the increased demand for disaggregation has improved public reporting of demographics across health departments, an urgent need persists for the introduced legislation to be passed by the Congress for the US states to consistently collect and make characteristics of COVID-19 cases, deaths, and vaccinations available in order to allocate resources to mitigate disease spread.     

One Year of Pandemic Learning Response: Benefits of Massive Online Delivery of the World Health Organization’s Technical Guidance

The World Health Organization (WHO) launched the first web-based learning course on COVID-19 on January 26, 2020, four days before the director general of the WHO declared a public health emergency of international concern. The WHO is expanding access to web-based learning for COVID-19 through its open-learning platform for health emergencies, OpenWHO. Throughout the pandemic, OpenWHO has continued to publish learning offerings based on the WHO’s emerging evidence-based knowledge for managing the COVID-19 pandemic. This study presents the various findings derived from the analysis of the performance of the OpenWHO platform during the pandemic, along with the core benefits of massive web-based learning formats.