Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Sci Rep ; 13(1): 7972, 2023 05 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2324386

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted the mental health of children, youth, and their families which must be addressed and prevented in future public health crises. Our objective was to measure how self-reported mental health symptoms of children/youth and their parents evolved during COVID-19 and to identify associated factors for children/youth and their parents including sources accessed for information on mental health. We conducted a nationally representative, multi-informant cross-sectional survey administered online to collect data from April to May 2022 across 10 Canadian provinces among dyads of children (11-14 years) or youth (15-18 years) and a parent (> 18 years). Self-report questions on mental health were based on The Partnership for Maternal, Newborn & Child Health and the World Health Organization of the United Nations H6+ Technical Working Group on Adolescent Health and Well-Being consensus framework and the Coronavirus Health and Impact Survey. McNemar's test and the test of homogeneity of stratum effects were used to assess differences between children-parent and youth-parent dyads, and interaction by stratification factors, respectively. Among 933 dyads (N = 1866), 349 (37.4%) parents were aged 35-44 years and 485 (52.0%) parents were women; 227 (47.0%) children and 204 (45.3%) youth were girls; 174 (18.6%) dyads had resided in Canada < 10 years. Anxiety and irritability were reported most frequently among child (44, 9.1%; 37, 7.7%) and parent (82, 17.0%; 67, 13.9%) dyads, as well as among youth (44, 9.8%; 35, 7.8%) and parent (68, 15.1%; 49, 10.9%) dyads; children and youth were significantly less likely to report worsened anxiety (p < 0.001, p = 0.006, respectively) or inattention (p < 0.001, p = 0.028, respectively) compared to parents. Dyads who reported financial or housing instability or identified as living with a disability more frequently reported worsened mental health. Children (96, 57.1%), youth (113, 62.5%), and their parents (253, 62.5%; 239, 62.6%, respectively) most frequently accessed the internet for mental health information. This cross-national survey contextualizes pandemic-related changes to self-reported mental health symptoms of children, youth, and families.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Health , Infant, Newborn , Adolescent , Humans , Female , Male , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Pandemics , Canada/epidemiology , Parent-Child Relations
2.
J Nephrol ; 2022 Sep 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2296205

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: People with kidney failure treated with dialysis are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and severe COVID-19 outcomes such as hospitalization and death. Though there are well-defined sex differences in outcomes for the general population with COVID-19, we do not know whether this translates into kidney failure populations. We aimed to estimate the differences in COVID-19 symptoms and clinical outcomes between males and females treated with maintenance dialysis. METHODS: In this prospective observational cohort study, we included adults treated with maintenance dialysis in Southern Alberta, Canada that tested positive for COVID-19 between March 2020 and February 2022. We examined the association between sex (dichotomized as male and female) with COVID-19 symptoms including fever, cough, malaise, shortness of breath, muscle joints/aches, nausea and/or vomiting, loss of appetite, diarrhea, headache, sore throat, and loss of smell/taste using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. Secondary outcomes included 30-day hospitalization, ICU admission, and death. RESULTS: Of 1,329 cohort participants, 246 (18.5%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and were included in our study, including 95 females (39%). Of 207 participants with symptoms assessed, females had less frequent fever (p = 0.003), and more nausea or vomiting (p = 0.003) compared to males, after correction for multiple testing. Males exhibited no symptoms 25% of the time, compared with 10% of females (p = 0.01, not significant when corrected for multiple testing). We did not identify statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes between the sexes, though vaccinated patients had lower odds of hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Sex differences in COVID-19 symptoms were identified in a cohort of patients treated with maintenance dialysis, which may inform sex-specific screening strategies in dialysis units. Further work is necessary to examine mechanisms for identified sex differences.

3.
BMJ Open ; 13(2): e067771, 2023 02 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2284503

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To chart the global literature on gender equity in academic health research. DESIGN: Scoping review. PARTICIPANTS: Quantitative studies were eligible if they examined gender equity within academic institutions including health researchers. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes related to equity across gender and other social identities in academia: (1) faculty workforce: representation of all genders in university/faculty departments, academic rank or position and salary; (2) service: teaching obligations and administrative/non-teaching activities; (3) recruitment and hiring data: number of applicants by gender, interviews and new hires for various rank; (4) promotion: opportunities for promotion and time to progress through academic ranks; (5) academic leadership: type of leadership positions, opportunities for leadership promotion or training, opportunities to supervise/mentor and support for leadership bids; (6) scholarly output or productivity: number/type of publications and presentations, position of authorship, number/value of grants or awards and intellectual property ownership; (7) contextual factors of universities; (8) infrastructure; (9) knowledge and technology translation activities; (10) availability of maternity/paternity/parental/family leave; (11) collaboration activities/opportunities for collaboration; (12) qualitative considerations: perceptions around promotion, finances and support. RESULTS: Literature search yielded 94 798 citations; 4753 full-text articles were screened, and 562 studies were included. Most studies originated from North America (462/562, 82.2%). Few studies (27/562, 4.8%) reported race and fewer reported sex/gender (which were used interchangeably in most studies) other than male/female (11/562, 2.0%). Only one study provided data on religion. No other PROGRESS-PLUS variables were reported. A total of 2996 outcomes were reported, with most studies examining academic output (371/562, 66.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Reviewed literature suggest a lack in analytic approaches that consider genders beyond the binary categories of man and woman, additional social identities (race, religion, social capital and disability) and an intersectionality lens examining the interconnection of multiple social identities in understanding discrimination and disadvantage. All of these are necessary to tailor strategies that promote gender equity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/8wk7e/.


Subject(s)
Faculty , Gender Equity , Pregnancy , Humans , Male , Female , Leadership , Salaries and Fringe Benefits , Workforce , Faculty, Medical
4.
Nat Hum Behav ; 6(7): 910-912, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1972606

Subject(s)
Cultural Diversity , Humans
5.
BMC Public Health ; 22(1): 699, 2022 04 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1779630

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: We explored associations between sociodemographic factors and public beliefs, behaviors, and information acquisition related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to identify how the experiences of subpopulations in Canada may vary. METHODS: We administered a national online survey through Ipsos Incorporated to adults residing in Canada. Sampling was stratified by population age, sex, and regional distributions. We used descriptive statistics to summarize responses and test for differences based on gender, age, educational attainment, and household income using chi-squared tests, followed by weighted logistic regression. RESULTS: We collected 1996 eligible questionnaires between April 26th and May 1st, 2020. Respondents mean age was 50 years, 51% were women, 56% had a post-secondary degree, and 72% had a household income <$100,000. Our analysis found differences within the four demographic groups, with age effects most acutely evidenced. Respondents 65 years and older were more likely to perceive the pandemic as very serious, less likely to report declines in overall health, and more likely to intend to get vaccinated, compared to 18-29 year olds. Women overall were more likely to report negative outcomes than men, including stress due to the pandemic, and worsening social, mental/emotional, and spiritual health. Respondents 45 and older were more likely to seek and trust information from traditional Canadian news sources, while 18-29 year olds were more likely to seek and trust information on social media; overall, women and respondents with a post-secondary degree were more likely to access and trust online information from public health sites. CONCLUSION: This study found important demographic differences in how adults living in Canada perceived the COVID-19 pandemic, the impacts on their health, and their preferences for information acquisition. Our results highlight the need to consider demographic characteristics in tailoring the format and information medium to improve large scale acceptance and uptake of mitigation and containment measures.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Canada/epidemiology , Demography , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Public Opinion , Self Report , Surveys and Questionnaires
6.
BMJ Open ; 11(12): e056434, 2021 12 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1591925

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: A high functioning healthcare workforce is a key priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to determine how work and mental health for healthcare workers changed during the COVID-19 pandemic in a universal healthcare system, stratified by gender factors. DESIGN: A mixed-methods study was employed. Phase 1 was an anonymous, internet-based survey (7 May-15 July 2020). Phase 2 was semistructured interviews offered to all respondents upon survey completion to describe how experiences may have differed by gender identity, roles and relations. SETTING: National universal healthcare system (Canada). PARTICIPANTS: 2058 Canadian healthcare worker survey respondents (87% women, 11% men, 1% transgender or Two-Spirit), including 783 health professionals, 673 allied health professionals, 557 health support staff. Of the 63 unique healthcare worker types reported, registered nurses (11.5%), physicians (9.9%) and pharmacists (4.5%) were most common. Forty-six healthcare workers were interviewed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reported pandemic-induced changes to occupational leadership roles and responsibilities, household and caregiving responsibilities, and anxiety levels by gender identity. RESULTS: Men (19.8%) were more likely to hold pandemic leadership roles compared with women (13.4%). Women (57.5%) were more likely to report increased domestic responsibilities than men (45%). Women and those with dependents under the age of 10 years reported the greatest levels of anxiety during the pandemic. Interviews with healthcare workers further revealed a perceived imbalance in leadership opportunities based on gender identity, a lack of workplace supports disproportionately affecting women and an increase in domestic responsibilities influenced by gender roles. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic response has important gendered effects on the healthcare workforce. Healthcare workers are central to effective pandemic control, highlighting an urgent need for a gender-transformative pandemic response strategy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Canada/epidemiology , Child , Female , Gender Identity , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Perception , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 347, 2021 09 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1438304

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Restricted visitation policies in acute care settings because of the COVID-19 pandemic have negative consequences. The objective of this scoping review is to identify impacts of restricted visitation policies in acute care settings, and describe perspectives and mitigation approaches among patients, families, and healthcare professionals. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Healthstar, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on January 01/2021, unrestricted, for published primary research records reporting any study design. We included secondary (e.g., reviews) and non-research records (e.g., commentaries), and performed manual searches in web-based resources. We excluded records that did not report primary data. Two reviewers independently abstracted data in duplicate. RESULTS: Of 7810 citations, we included 155 records. Sixty-six records (43%) were primary research; 29 (44%) case reports or case series, and 26 (39%) cohort studies; 21 (14%) were literature reviews and 8 (5%) were expert recommendations; 54 (35%) were commentary, editorial, or opinion pieces. Restricted visitation policies impacted coping and daily function (n = 31, 20%) and mental health outcomes (n = 29, 19%) of patients, families, and healthcare professionals. Participants described a need for coping and support (n = 107, 69%), connection and communication (n = 107, 69%), and awareness of state of well-being (n = 101, 65%). Eighty-seven approaches to mitigate impact of restricted visitation were identified, targeting families (n = 61, 70%), patients (n = 51, 59%), and healthcare professionals (n = 40, 46%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients, families, and healthcare professionals were impacted by restricted visitation polices in acute care settings during COVID-19. The consequences of this approach on patients and families are understudied and warrant evaluation of approaches to mitigate their impact. Future pandemic policy development should include the perspectives of patients, families, and healthcare professionals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020221662) and a protocol peer-reviewed prior to data extraction.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Critical Care , Family , Health Policy , Inpatients , Physical Distancing , Visitors to Patients , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/transmission , Communication , Family/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Inpatients/psychology , Mental Health Services , Pandemics , Psychological Distress , SARS-CoV-2 , Telephone , Visitors to Patients/psychology
8.
BMJ Open ; 11(9): e048227, 2021 09 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1438083

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Flexible visitation policies in hospitals are an important component of care that contributes to reduced stress and increased satisfaction among patients and their family members. Early evidence suggests restricted visitation policies enacted in hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic are having unintended consequences on patients, family members and healthcare providers. There is a need for a comprehensive summary of the impacts of restricted visitation policies on key stakeholders and approaches to mitigate that impact. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a scoping review as per the Arksey-O'Malley 5-stage scoping review method and the Scoping Review Methods Manual by the Joanna Briggs Institute. We will search relevant electronic databases (eg, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO), grey literature and preprint repositories. We will include all study designs including qualitative and quantitative methodologies (excluding protocols) as well as reports, opinions and editorials, to identify the broad impact of restricted hospital visitation policies due to the COVID-19 pandemic on patients, family members or healthcare providers of hospitalised patients, and approaches taken or proposed to mitigate this impact. Two reviewers will calibrate the screening criteria and data abstraction form and will independently screen studies and abstract the data. Narrative synthesis with thematic analysis will be performed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not applicable as this review will be conducted on published literature only. This scoping review will identify, describe and categorise impacts of restricted hospital visitation policies due to the COVID-19 pandemic on patients, family members and healthcare providers of hospitalised patients, and approaches that have been taken to mitigate impact. We will provide a comprehensive synthesis by developing a framework of restricted visitation policies and associated impacts. Our results will inform the development of consensus statements on restricted visitation policies to be implemented in future pandemics. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020221662.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Family , Health Personnel , Hospitals , Humans , Policy , Research Design , Review Literature as Topic , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Can J Public Health ; 111(6): 980-983, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1080392

ABSTRACT

An understanding of the influence of sex (biological attributes) and gender (socially constructed roles, behaviours, expressions, identities) factors on the risk of infection, hospitalization and death is of urgent importance in the COVID-19 pandemic response effort. Despite similar global rates of infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic), hospitalizations and mortality are higher in men than in women. Females may be less vulnerable to viral infection due to sex-based differences in immune responses and renin-angiotensin system activity. The response and side effects of currently studied potential therapies for COVID-19, such as hydroxychloroquine, likely differ by sex. Women form the majority of the health care workforce and a uniform approach to sizing of personal protective equipment may provide differing levels of protection from viral infection to health care workers of varying shapes and sizes. Important gender differences exist in the response to public health measures to prevent and contain spread of COVID-19, as well as presentation for testing and medical care, which may inadvertently propagate viral spread. Targeted approaches that consider both sex and gender, as well as measures of intersectionality, are urgently needed in the response efforts against COVID-19.


RéSUMé: Il est d'une importance primordiale, pour riposter à la pandémie de COVID-19, de comprendre l'influence des facteurs liés au sexe (les attributs biologiques) et au genre (les rôles, comportements, expressions et identités socialement construits) sur les risques d'infection, d'hospitalisation et de décès. Malgré la similarité mondiale des taux d'infection par le coronavirus du syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère 2 (SRAS-Cov-2, le virus responsable de la pandémie de COVID-19), les hospitalisations et la mortalité sont plus élevées chez les hommes que chez les femmes. Celles-ci pourraient être moins vulnérables à l'infection virale en raison de différences sexuelles dans les réponses immunitaires et dans l'activité du système rénine-angiotensine. Les réactions et les effets secondaires aux traitements possibles de la COVID-19 actuellement à l'étude, comme l'hydroxychloroquine, diffèrent probablement selon le sexe. Comme les femmes composent la majorité de la main-d'œuvre des soins de santé, les tailles uniformes de l'équipement de protection individuelle offrent peut-être des niveaux de protection inégaux contre l'infection virale aux travailleurs de la santé de formes et de tailles différentes. Il existe des différences importantes entre les genres dans les réactions aux mesures de santé publique visant à prévenir et à contenir la propagation de la COVID-19 et dans la présentation aux tests et aux soins médicaux, ce qui pourrait par inadvertance favoriser la propagation virale. Dans la riposte à la COVID-19, il devient urgent d'adopter des approches ciblées, qui tiennent compte à la fois du sexe et du genre, ainsi que des mesures de l'intersectionnalité.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Gender Identity , Pandemics , Sex Factors , COVID-19/mortality , Canada/epidemiology , Female , Health Behavior , Humans , Male , Personal Protective Equipment
10.
PLoS One ; 15(10): e0241259, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-890194

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Efforts to mitigate the global spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causing Corona Virus Disease-19 (COVID-19) have largely relied on broad compliance with public health recommendations yet navigating the high volume of evolving information can be challenging. We assessed self-reported public perceptions related to COVID-19 including, beliefs (e.g., severity, concerns, health), knowledge (e.g., transmission, information sources), and behaviors (e.g., physical distancing) to understand perspectives in Canada and to inform future public health initiatives. METHODS: We administered a national online survey aiming to obtain responses from 2000 adults in Canada. Respondent sampling was stratified by age, sex, and region. We used descriptive statistics to summarize responses and tested for regional differences using chi-squared tests, followed by weighted logistic regression. RESULTS: We collected 1,996 eligible questionnaires between April 26th and May 1st, 2020. One-fifth (20%) of respondents knew someone diagnosed with COVID-19, but few had tested positive themselves (0.6%). Negative impacts of pandemic conditions were evidenced in several areas, including concerns about healthcare (e.g. sufficient equipment, 52%), pandemic stress (45%), and worsening social (49%) and mental/emotional (39%) health. Most respondents (88%) felt they had good to excellent knowledge of virus transmission, and predominantly accessed (74%) and trusted (60%) Canadian news television, newspapers/magazines, or non-government news websites for COVID-19 information. We found high compliance with distancing measures (80% reported self-isolating or always physical distancing). We identified associations between region and self-reported beliefs, knowledge, and behaviors related to COVID-19. DISCUSSION: We found that information about COVID-19 is largely acquired through domestic news sources, which may explain high self-reported compliance with prevention measures. The results highlight the broader impact of a pandemic on the general public's overall health and wellbeing, outside of personal infection. The study findings should be used to inform public health communications during COVID-19 and future pandemics.


Subject(s)
Attitude to Health , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Health Behavior , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Public Opinion , Self Report , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 , Canada/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Information Dissemination , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Media , Television , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL