Cuba: Solidarity, Ebola and COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Escobedo AA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8136810 | biostudies-literature | 2021
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Cuba: Solidarity, Ebola and COVID-19.
Escobedo Angel A AA Auza-Santiváñez Cristians C Rumbaut Raisa R Bonati Maurizio M Choonara Imti I
BMJ paediatrics open 20210519 1
Similar Datasets
Project description:Many charities are appealing for donations to address problems caused by the COVID-19 crisis. Two survey studies (total N = 500) tested predictors of donation intentions of British participants to help those suffering from the crisis in Britain (ingroup donations) and overseas (outgroup donations). Perceptions of international, global common fate in our success in managing and overcoming the crisis was positively associated with prosocial intentions towards both national ingroup and outgroup targets. In contrast, a desire to 'close ranks' within the national ingroup in the face of the pandemic threat was associated with more prosocial intentions towards national ingroup targets only, but it was associated with fewer prosocial intentions towards outgroup targets. This suggests that a focus on global solidarity (in the form of global common fate and identification with all humans) has positive effects on helping both within and across group boundaries, whereas a focus on national solidarity (in the form of 'closing ranks' in the face of the pandemic threat) has positive effects on helping within the national group but negative effects on prosocial tendencies towards outgroup members. The effect of perceived global common fate on both ingroup and outgroup helping was mediated by identification with all of humanity. Findings are discussed in terms of practical implications for managing the COVID-19 crisis. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.
| S-EPMC8426876 | biostudies-literature
Project description:While the World was busy mitigating the disastrous health and economic effects of the novel coronavirus, a less direct, but not less concerning peril has largely remained unexplored: the COVID-19 crisis may have disrupted some of the most fundamental social and political relationships in democratic societies. We interviewed samples resembling the national population of Denmark, Hungary, Italy and the US three times: in April, June and December of 2020 (14K observations). We show that multiple (but not all) measures of support for the political system decreased between April and December. Exploiting the panel setup, we demonstrate that within-respondent increases in indicators of pandemic fatigue (specifically, the perceived subjective burden of the pandemic and feelings of anomie) correspond to decreases in system support and increases in extreme anti-systemic attitudes. At the same time, we find no systematic trends in feelings of social solidarity, which are largely unaffected by changes in pandemic burden.
| S-EPMC10434936 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The global COVID-19 pandemic poses challenges to the economy, politics and public health systems of developed and developing countries alike. However, the latter are less well placed to cope with adverse effects. In particular, important advances towards sustainable development might be reversed. Tackling the pandemic and its effects therefore requires global cooperation as well as solidarity in the form of development assistance. Yet, support for development assistance among donor publics might be dampened by individual health-related and economic worries as well as decreasing trust in government during the pandemic. Against this backdrop, we investigate the possible effect of pandemic-induced worries on public support for development assistance as well as the moderating role of moral considerations and trust in government. Drawing on literature on aid attitudes, and using survey data for Germany provided by the COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) project from April 2020 (N = 1,006), our analyses show that neither health-related nor economic worries are associated with less support for providing development assistance during the first wave of the pandemic. However, we observe a marginal interaction between health-related worries and trust in government in predicting support for development assistance. For those with high levels of trust in government the effect of worry regarding the loss of friends or relatives on support for development assistance is positive, whereas it is close to zero for those with low levels of trust. We conclude that at the peak of the first wave of the pandemic there was little need for concern by policy-makers endorsing development assistance as neither form of worry correlated negatively with public support for development assistance and trust was high. However, when worries recur and trust in government simultaneously decreases, public support for global solidarity may wane.
| S-EPMC8446708 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWorld Health Organization expert groups recommended mortality trials of four repurposed antiviral drugs - remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, and interferon beta-1a - in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19).MethodsWe randomly assigned inpatients with Covid-19 equally between one of the trial drug regimens that was locally available and open control (up to five options, four active and the local standard of care). The intention-to-treat primary analyses examined in-hospital mortality in the four pairwise comparisons of each trial drug and its control (drug available but patient assigned to the same care without that drug). Rate ratios for death were calculated with stratification according to age and status regarding mechanical ventilation at trial entry.ResultsAt 405 hospitals in 30 countries, 11,330 adults underwent randomization; 2750 were assigned to receive remdesivir, 954 to hydroxychloroquine, 1411 to lopinavir (without interferon), 2063 to interferon (including 651 to interferon plus lopinavir), and 4088 to no trial drug. Adherence was 94 to 96% midway through treatment, with 2 to 6% crossover. In total, 1253 deaths were reported (median day of death, day 8; interquartile range, 4 to 14). The Kaplan-Meier 28-day mortality was 11.8% (39.0% if the patient was already receiving ventilation at randomization and 9.5% otherwise). Death occurred in 301 of 2743 patients receiving remdesivir and in 303 of 2708 receiving its control (rate ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.11; P = 0.50), in 104 of 947 patients receiving hydroxychloroquine and in 84 of 906 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.59; P = 0.23), in 148 of 1399 patients receiving lopinavir and in 146 of 1372 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.25; P = 0.97), and in 243 of 2050 patients receiving interferon and in 216 of 2050 receiving its control (rate ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.39; P = 0.11). No drug definitely reduced mortality, overall or in any subgroup, or reduced initiation of ventilation or hospitalization duration.ConclusionsThese remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, and interferon regimens had little or no effect on hospitalized patients with Covid-19, as indicated by overall mortality, initiation of ventilation, and duration of hospital stay. (Funded by the World Health Organization; ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN83971151; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04315948.).
| S-EPMC7727327 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the event of the Covid-19 spread, the entire world has been brought to a stop due to the imposed lockdown, to counter the effects of the spreading virus. This paper proposes to study the change in how people are experiencing a pandemic very differently and what such changes imply with respect to social connections and human interactions. The networked digital citizens come together in the time of crisis, sharing a sense of nostalgia as well as perseverance on Facebook. The paper will refer to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs in order to explain the human need for the sense of belonging. A pandemic has not been experienced in earlier time as a global phenomenon with far reaching consequences as in the present context. People across the world are experiencing a similar form of loneliness, boredom, and anxiety irrespective of which profession one belongs to. The absence of physical movement has suddenly caused a great shift of interaction on to the Facebook platform. The corner stone for virtual social interaction had already been laid down with the rise of a ‘convergence culture’. Social communities depicting shared interests like music, dance, photography, food, and other aspects of life have been redesigned and restructured as a result of the lockdown. More and more people are sharing videos of activities they are engaging in during this time of immobility. A greater focus of family experiences are being shared by celebrities, creating a semblance of solidarity in fighting against the psychological effects of a long term lockdown. The provision of the care button on Facebook also intensifies this sense of a shared trauma and the human desire to overcome all hurdles together. The paper will focus on a number of Facebook trends, beginning from Dalgona coffee and its perception to music covers of popular songs such as ‘Dance Monkey’ and Bella Ciao. The historical meaning associated with the term ‘crisis’ is being redefined in a social context which greatly based on a networked population. This has an entirely different social and psychological implication. Analysing the Facebook updates will go a long way in understanding the term ‘crisis’ with respect to the time of Corona.
| S-EPMC7816138 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Since introducing the first non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to decelerate the spread of the virus, European governments have highlighted the role of "solidarity". However, the role and levels of solidarity, especially during the past lockdowns, is uncertain. The present study thus explores the levels, the role, and the distribution of received and demonstrated interpersonal solidarity during the COVID-19 pandemic. This pooled cross-sectional study was conducted from March 2020 to March 2021 in Germany, including 19,977 participants. Levels of solidarity between the first and the second lockdowns in Germany were compared, possible predictors were examined, and three clusters were defined to unveil distributional patterns of solidarity reception and/or demonstration. To compare solidarity levels between the first and the second lockdowns in Germany, a dummy-coded lockdown variable was introduced and regressed on the two solidarity items. To identify predictors of received and demonstrated solidarity, two multiple linear regression models were computed, testing several demographic and psychological factors. For further exploratory analyses, clusters of "helpers", "non-helpers", and "help-receivers and helpers" were computed based on a k-means cluster analysis. Results revealed a lower level of solidarity during the second lockdown compared with the first one. Demonstrated solidarity was positively predicted by adherent safety behavior to avoid COVID-19 infection and by middle age, and negatively by depression symptoms, male gender, and high age. Received solidarity was positively predicted by higher age, by both adherent and dysfunctional safety behavior in avoidance of COVID-19 infection, and by lower educational level. "Helpers" reported little received solidarity but demonstrated high solidarity, "non-helpers" showed both little demonstrated and received solidarity, and "help-receivers and helpers" showed middle-high received and demonstrated solidarity. The three clusters differed the most regarding the variables of age, adherent and dysfunctional safety behavior, fear of COVID-19, subjective risk perceptions regarding contraction of COVID-19 and the respective consequences, and trust in governmental interventions in response to COVID-19. The decrease in interpersonal solidarity over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as its predictors, should be considered regarding prospective impositions. Furthermore, as depressive symptoms were identified to negatively predict interpersonal solidarity, the adequate provision of mental health services, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, becomes even more important.
| S-EPMC8872525 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Human coronaviruses (HCoV) were discovered in the 1960s and were originally thought to cause only mild upper respiratory tract diseases in immunocompetent hosts. This view changed since the beginning of this century, with the 2002 SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) epidemic and the 2012 MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome) outbreak, two zoonotic infections that resulted in mortality rates of approximately 10% and 35%, respectively. Despite the importance of these pathogens, no approved antiviral drugs for the treatment of human coronavirus infections became available. However, remdesivir, a nucleotide analogue prodrug originally developed for the treatment of Ebola virus, was found to inhibit the replication of a wide range of human and animal coronaviruses in vitro and in preclinical studies. It is therefore not surprising that when the highly pathogenic SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus emerged in late 2019 in China, causing global health concern due to the virus strong human-to-human transmission ability, remdesivir was one of the first clinical candidates that received attention. After in vitro studies had shown its antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2, and a first patient was successfully treated with the drug in the USA, a number of trials on remdesivir were initiated. Several had encouraging results, particularly the ACTT-1 double blind, randomized, and placebo controlled trial that has shown shortening of the time to recovery in hospitalized patients treated with remdesivir. The results of other trials were instead negative. Here, we provide an overview of remdesivir discovery, molecular mechanism of action, and initial and current clinical studies on its efficacy.
| S-EPMC7836944 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To monitor the COVID-19 epidemic in Cuba, data on several epidemiological indicators have been collected on a daily basis for each municipality. Studying the spatio-temporal dynamics in these indicators, and how they behave similarly, can help us better understand how COVID-19 spread across Cuba. Therefore, spatio-temporal models can be used to analyze these indicators. Univariate spatio-temporal models have been thoroughly studied, but when interest lies in studying the association between multiple outcomes, a joint model that allows for association between the spatial and temporal patterns is necessary. The purpose of our study was to develop a multivariate spatio-temporal model to study the association between the weekly number of COVID-19 deaths and the weekly number of imported COVID-19 cases in Cuba during 2021. To allow for correlation between the spatial patterns, a multivariate conditional autoregressive prior (MCAR) was used. Correlation between the temporal patterns was taken into account by using two approaches; either a multivariate random walk prior was used or a multivariate conditional autoregressive prior (MCAR) was used. All models were fitted within a Bayesian framework.
| S-EPMC10170878 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST563 | biostudies-other
Project description:Calls for solidarity have been an ubiquitous feature in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, we know little about how people have thought of and practised solidarity in their everyday lives since the beginning of the pandemic. What role does solidarity play in people's lives, how does it relate to COVID-19 public health measures and how has it changed in different phases of the pandemic? Situated within the medical humanities at the intersection of philosophy, bioethics, social sciences and policy studies, this article explores how the practice-based understanding of solidarity formulated by Prainsack and Buyx helps shed light on these questions. Drawing on 643 qualitative interviews carried out in two phases (April-May 2020 and October 2020) in nine European countries (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, German-speaking Switzerland and the UK), the data show that interpersonal acts of solidarity are important, but that they are not sustainable without consistent support at the institutional level. As the pandemic progressed, respondents expressed a longing for more institutionalised forms of solidarity. We argue that the medical humanities have much to gain from directing their attention to individual health issues, and to collective experiences of health or illness. The analysis of experiences through a collective lens such as solidarity offers unique insights to understandings of the individual and the collective. We propose three essential advances for research in the medical humanities that can help uncover collective experiences of disease and health crises: (1) an empirical and practice-oriented approach alongside more normative approaches; (2) the confidence to make recommendations for practice and policymaking and (3) the pursuit of cross-national and multidisciplinary research collaborations.
| S-EPMC7616635 | biostudies-literature