Optimisation-based integrated decision model for ambulance routing in response to pandemic outbreaks

Pandemics and sudden disease outbreaks place considerable stress on hospital resources. Their increasing numbers in recent years has necessitated investment in disaster risk management strategies, particularly in the healthcare sector. The sudden surge of patients, particularly in requesting ambulance services, overwhelms hospital systems and compromises health service delivery. Failure of health planners to respond immediately to a sudden disease outbreak can result in insufficient distribution of healthcare services and can thereby exacerbate the death toll dramatically. The current research aims to develop an optimisation-based integrated decision model to assist healthcare decision-makers with immediate and effective planning for ambulances to move critical patients from their residences to hospitals, considering the available capacities of each hospital. Several lemmas for the problem are proposed, and based on these;several local search methods are developed to improve the performance of the proposed optimisation method. To confirm the efficacy of the proposed approach, a comprehensive comparison is conducted. In conclusion, sensitivity analyses are performed to discuss some practical insights. The proposed models can be adopted to develop decision tools that enable hospital system managers to optimize their resources to changing healthcare needs in disease outbreaks.

A review on the progress and research directions of ocean engineering

This paper reviews research in ocean engineering over the last 50+ years with the aim to (I) understand the technological challenges and evolution in the field, (II) investigate whether ocean engineering studies meet present global demands, (III) explore new scientific/engineering tools that may suggest pragmatic solutions to problems, and (IV) identify research and management gaps, and the way forward. Six major research divisions are identified, namely (I) Ocean Hydrodynamics, (II) Risk Assessment and Safety, (III) Ocean Climate and Geophysics: Data and Models, (IV) Control and Automation in the Ocean, (V) Structural Engineering and Manufacturing for the Ocean, and (VI) Ocean Renewable Energy. As much as practically possible research sub-divisions of the field are also identified. It is highlighted that research topics dealing with ocean renewable energy, control and path tracking of ships, as well as computational modelling of wave-induced motions are growing. Updating and forecasting energy resources, developing computational methods for wave generation, and introducing novel methods for the optimised control of energy converters are highlighted as the potential research opportunities. Ongoing studies follow the global needs for environmentally friendly renewable energies, though engineering-based studies often tend to overlook the longer-term potential influence of climate change. Development and exploitation of computational engineering methods with focus on continuum mechanics problems remain relevant. Notwithstanding this, machine learning methods are attracting the attention of researchers. Analysis of COVID-19 transmission onboard is rarely conducted, and 3D printing-based studies still need more attention from researchers.

Trends of research productivity across author gender and research fields: A multidisciplinary and multi-country observational study.

Bibliographic properties of more than 75 million scholarly articles, are examined and trends in overall research productivity are analysed as a function of research field (over the period of 1970-2020) and author gender (over the period of 2006-2020). Potential disruptive effects of the Covid-19 pandemic are also investigated. Over the last decade (2010-2020), the annual number of publications have invariably increased every year with the largest relative increase in a single year happening in 2019 (more than 6% relative growth). But this momentum was interrupted in 2020. Trends show that Environmental Sciences and Engineering Environmental have been the fastest growing research fields. The disruption in patterns of scholarly publication due to the Covid-19 pandemic was unevenly distributed across fields, with Computer Science, Engineering and Social Science enduring the most notable declines. The overall trends of male and female productivity indicate that, in terms of absolute number of publications, the gender gap does not seem to be closing in any country. The trends in absolute gap between male and female authors is either parallel (e.g., Canada, Australia, England, USA) or widening (e.g., majority of countries, particularly Middle Eastern countries). In terms of the ratio of female to male productivity, however, the gap is narrowing almost invariably, though at markedly different rates across countries. While some countries are nearing a ratio of .7 and are well on track for a 0.9 female to male productivity ratio, our estimates show that certain countries (particularly across the Middle East) will not reach such targets within the next 100 years. Without interventional policies, a significant gap will continue to exist in such countries. The decrease or increase in research productivity during the first year of the pandemic, in contrast to trends established before 2020, was generally parallel for male and female authors. There has been no substantial gender difference in the disruption due to the pandemic. However, opposite trends were found in a few cases. It was observed that, in some countries (e.g., The Netherlands, The United States and Germany), male productivity has been more negatively affected by the pandemic. Overall, female research productivity seems to have been more resilient to the disruptive effect of Covid-19 pandemic, although the momentum of female researchers has been negatively affected in a comparable manner to that of males.

Crowd dynamics research in the era of Covid-19 pandemic: Challenges and opportunities.

With the issues of crowd control and physical distancing becoming central to disease prevention measures, one would expect that crowd research should become a focus of attention during the Covid-19 pandemic era. However, I will show, based on a variety of metrics, that not only has this not been the case, but also, the first two years of the pandemic have posed an undisputable setback to the development and growth of crowd science. Without intervention, this could potentially aggravate further and cause a long-lasting recession in this field. This article, in addition to documenting and highlighting this issue, aims to outline potential avenues through which crowd research can reshape itself in the era of Covid-19 pandemic, maintain its pre-pandemic momentum and even further expand the diversity of its topics. Despite significant changes that the pandemic has brought to human life, issues related to congregation and mobility of pedestrians, building fires, crowd incidents, rallying crowds and the like have not disappeared from societies and remain relevant. Moreover, the diversity of pandemic-related problems itself creates a rich ground for making novel scientific discoveries. This could provide grounds for establishing fresh dimensions in crowd dynamics research. These potential new dimensions extend to all areas of this field including numerical and experimental investigations, crowd psychology and applications of computer vision and artificial intelligence methods in crowd management. The Covid-19 pandemic may have posed challenges to crowd researchers but has also created ample potential opportunities. This is further evidenced by reviewing efforts taken thus far in pandemic-related crowd research.

Applications of discrete choice experiments in COVID-19 research: Disparity in survey qualities between health and transport fields.

Published choice experiments linked to various aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic are analysed in a rapid review. The aim is to (i) document the diversity of topics as well as their temporal and geographical patterns of emergence, (ii) compare various elements of design quality across different sectors of applied economics, and (iii) identify potential signs of convergent validity across findings of comparable experiments. Of the N = 43 published choice experiments during the first two years of the pandemic, the majority identifies with health applications (n = 30), followed by transport-related applications (n = 10). Nearly 100,000 people across the world responded to pandemic-related discrete choice surveys. Within health applications, while the dominant theme, up until June 2020, was lockdown relaxation and tracing measures, the focus shifted abruptly to vaccine preference since then. Geographical origins of the health surveys were not diverse. Nearly 50% of all health surveys were conducted in only three countries, namely US, China and The Netherlands. Health applications exhibited stronger pre-testing and larger sample sizes compared to transport applications. Limited signs of convergent validity were identifiable. Within some applications, issues of temporal instability as well as hypothetical bias attributable to social desirability, protest response or policy consequentiality seemed likely to have affected the findings. Nevertheless, very few of the experiments implemented measures of hypothetical bias mitigation and those were limited to health studies. Our main conclusion is that swift administration of pandemic-related choice experiments has overall resulted in certain degrees of compromise in study quality, but this has been more so the case in relation to transport topics than health topics.

Climate change and COVID-19: Interdisciplinary perspectives from two global crises.

The repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change - two major current global crises - are far-reaching, the parallels between the two are striking, and their influence on one another are significant. Based on the wealth of evidence that has emerged from the scientific literature during the first two years of the pandemic, this study argues that these two global crises require holistic multisectoral mitigation strategies. Despite being different in nature, neither crisis can be effectively mitigated without considering their interdependencies. Herein, significant interactions between these two crises are highlighted and discussed. Major implications related to the economy, energy, technology, environment, food systems and agriculture sector, health systems, policy, management, and communities are detailed via a review of existing joint literature. Based on these outcomes, practical recommendations for future research and management are provided. While the joint timing of these crises has created a global conundrum, the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated opportunities and lessons for devising sustainable recovery plans in relation to the climate crisis. The findings indicated that governments should work collaboratively to develop durable and adjustable strategies in line with long-term, global decarbonisation targets, promote renewable energy resources, integrate climate change into environmental policies, prioritise climate-smart agriculture and local food systems, and ensure public and ecosystem health. Further, differences in geographic distributions of climate change and COVID-19 related death cases revealed that these crises pose different threats to different parts of the world. These learnings provide insights to address the climate emergency - and potential future global problems with similar characteristics - if international countries act urgently and collectively.

Temporal evolution, most influential studies and sleeping beauties of the coronavirus literature.

Following the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 disease, within less than 8 months, the 50 years-old scholarly literature of coronaviruses grew to nearly three times larger than its size prior to 2020. Here, temporal evolution of the coronavirus literature over the last 30 years (N = 43,769) is analysed along with its subdomain of SARS-CoV-2 articles (N = 27,460) and the subdomain of reviews and meta-analytic studies (N = 1027). The analyses are conducted through the lenses of co-citation and bibliographic coupling of documents. (1) Of the N = 1204 review and meta-analytical articles of the coronavirus literature, nearly 88% have been published and indexed during the first 8 months of 2020, marking an unprecedented attention to reviews and meta-analyses in this domain, prompted by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. (2) The subset of 2020 SARS-CoV-2 articles is bibliographically distant from the rest of this literature published prior to 2020. Individual articles of the SARS-CoV-2 segment with a bridging role between the two bodies of articles (i.e., before and after 2020) are identifiable. (3) Furthermore, the degree of bibliographic coupling within the 2020 SARS-CoV-2 cluster is much poorer compared to the cluster of articles published prior to 2020. This could, in part, be explained by the higher diversity of topics that are studied in relation to SARS-CoV-2 compared to the literature of coronaviruses published prior to the SARS-CoV-2 disease. (4) The analyses on the subset of SARS-CoV-2 literature identified studies published prior to 2020 that have now proven highly instrumental in the development of various clusters of publications linked to SARS-CoV-2. In particular, the so-called "sleeping beauties" of the coronavirus literature with an awakening in 2020 were identified, i.e., previously published studies of this literature that had remained relatively unnoticed for several years but gained sudden traction in 2020 in the wake of the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. This work documents the historical development of the literature on coronaviruses as an event-driven literature and as a domain that exhibited, arguably, the most exceptional case of publication burst in the history of science. It also demonstrates how scholarly efforts undertaken during peace time or prior to a disease outbreak could suddenly play a critical role in prevention and mitigation of health disasters caused by new diseases. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11192-021-04036-4.

Covid-19 pandemic and the unprecedented mobilisation of scholarly efforts prompted by a health crisis: Scientometric comparisons across SARS, MERS and 2019-nCoV literature.

During the current century, each major coronavirus outbreak has triggered a quick and immediate surge of academic publications on its respective topic. The spike in research publications following the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (Covid-19) outbreak, however, has been like no other. The global crisis caused by the Covid-19 pandemic has mobilised scientific efforts at an unprecedented scale. In less than 5 months, more than 12,000 research items and in less than seven months, more than 30,000 items were indexed, while it is projected that the number could exceed 80,000 by the end of 2020, should the current trend continues. With the health crisis affecting all aspects of life, research on Covid-19 seems to have become a focal point of interest across many academic disciplines. Here, scientometric aspects of the Covid-19 literature are analysed and contrasted with those of the two previous major coronavirus diseases, i.e., Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS). The focus is on the co-occurrence of key-terms, bibliographic coupling and citation relations of journals and collaborations between countries. Interesting recurring patterns across all three literatures were discovered. All three outbreaks have commonly generated three distinct cohorts of studies: (i) studies linked to public health response and epidemic control, (ii) studies on chemical constitution of the virus; and (iii) studies related to treatment, vaccine and clinical care. While studies affiliated with category (i) seem to have been relatively earliest to emerge, they have overall received relatively smaller number of citations compared to publications the two other categories. Covid-19 studies seem to have been disseminated across a broader variety of journals and across a more diverse range of subject areas. Clear links are observed between the geographical origins of each outbreak as well as the local geographical severity of each outbreak and the magnitude of research originated from regions. Covid-19 studies also display the involvement of authors from a broader variety of countries compared to SARS and MERS. Considering the speed at which the Covid-19-related literature is accumulating, an interesting dimension that warrants further exploration could be to assess if the quality and rigour of these publications have been affected.

The scientific literature on Coronaviruses, COVID-19 and its associated safety-related research dimensions: A scientometric analysis and scoping review.

The COVID-19 global pandemic has generated an abundance of research quickly following the outbreak. Within only a few months, more than a thousand studies on this topic have already appeared in the scientific literature. In this short review, we analyse the bibliometric aspects of these studies on a macro level, as well as those addressing Coronaviruses in general. Furthermore, through a scoping analysis of the literature on COVID-19, we identify the main safety-related dimensions that these studies have thus far addressed. Our findings show that across various research domains, and apart from the medical and clinical aspects such as the safety of vaccines and treatments, issues related to patient transport safety, occupational safety of healthcare professionals, biosafety of laboratories and facilities, social safety, food safety, and particularly mental/psychological health and domestic safety have thus far attracted most attention of the scientific community in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our analysis also uncovers various potentially significant safety problems caused by this global health emergency which currently have attracted only limited scientific focus but may warrant more attention. These include matters such as cyber safety, economic safety, and supply-chain safety. These findings highlight why, from an academic research perspective, a holistic interdisciplinary approach and a collective scientific effort is required to help understand and mitigate the various safety impacts of this crisis whose implications reach far beyond the bio-medical risks. Such holistic safety-scientific understanding of the COVID-19 crisis can furthermore be instrumental to be better prepared for a future pandemic.