Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
1.
Br J Gen Pract ; 73(730): e332-e339, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2277192

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has directly and indirectly had an impact on health service provision owing to surges and sustained pressures on the system. The effects of these pressures on the management of long-term or chronic conditions are not fully understood. AIM: To explore the effects of COVID-19 on the recorded incidence of 17 long-term conditions. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was an observational retrospective population data linkage study on the population of Wales using primary and secondary care data within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. METHOD: Monthly rates of new diagnosis between 2000 and 2021 are presented for each long-term condition. Incidence rates post-2020 were compared with expected rates predicted using time series modelling of pre-2020 trends. The proportion of annual incidence is presented by sociodemographic factors: age, sex, social deprivation, ethnicity, frailty, and learning disability. RESULTS: A total of 5 476 012 diagnoses from 2 257 992 individuals are included. Incidence rates from 2020 to 2021 were lower than mean expected rates across all conditions. The largest relative deficit in incidence was in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease corresponding to 343 (95% confidence interval = 230 to 456) undiagnosed patients per 100 000 population, followed by depression, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, anxiety disorders, and asthma. A GP practice of 10 000 patients might have over 400 undiagnosed long-term conditions. No notable differences between sociodemographic profiles of post- and pre-2020 incidences were observed. CONCLUSION: There is a potential backlog of undiagnosed patients with multiple long-term conditions. Resources are required to tackle anticipated workload as part of COVID-19 recovery, particularly in primary care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Humans , Wales/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Incidence , Retrospective Studies , Pandemics , Secondary Care , Information Storage and Retrieval
3.
International journal of population data science ; 7(3), 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2124999
4.
Lancet ; 400 Suppl 1: S69, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2132740

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic had direct and indirect effects on health. Indirect effects on long term medical conditions (LTCs) are unclear. We examined trends in recorded incidences of LTCs and quantified differences between expected rates and observed rates from 2020 onwards. METHODS: This is a population data linkage study using primary and secondary care data within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank. We included data of Welsh residents diagnosed with any of 17 identified LTCs for the first time between Jan 1, 2000, and Dec 31, 2021. LTC's include mental health conditions, respiratory diseases, and heart conditions among others, generally chosen in line with the Quality and Outcomes Framework. The primary outcome was incidence rates (monthly number of new cases per 100 000 population). For each LTC, we did interrupted time series analysis of incidence rates from 2015 to 2021. Expected rates from between Jan 1, 2020, to Dec 31, 2021, were predicted using overall trends and seasonal patterns from the preceding 5 years and compared with observed rates. FINDINGS: We included 5 476 012 diagnoses from 2 257 992 individuals diagnosed with at least one LTC between Jan 1, 2000, to Dec 31, 2021. Across multiple long-term conditions, there was an abrupt reduction in observed incidence of new diagnoses from March to April 2020, followed by a general increase in incidence towards prepandemic rates. The conditions with the largest percentage difference between the observed and expected incidence rates in 2020 and 2021 were chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (38·4% lower than expected), depression (28·3% lower), hypertension (25·5% lower), and anxiety disorders (24·9% lower). The condition with the largest absolute difference between observed and expected incidence rates was anxiety disorders, with 830 per 100 000 less in 2020 and 2021 compared with observed rates. INTERPRETATION: The reduction in incidence rates of LTCs suggests an underreporting of LTCs, especially during 2020 and early 2021. The emergence of these yet undiagnosed cases could result in a surge of new patients in the near future. FUNDING: This work was supported by the Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre, funded by Health and Care Research Wales.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Incidence , Pandemics , Anxiety Disorders
5.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 16406, 2022 09 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2050525

ABSTRACT

There is a need for better understanding of the risk of thrombocytopenic, haemorrhagic, thromboembolic disorders following first, second and booster vaccination doses and testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Self-controlled cases series analysis of 2.1 million linked patient records in Wales between 7th December 2020 and 31st December 2021. Outcomes were the first diagnosis of thrombocytopenic, haemorrhagic and thromboembolic events in primary or secondary care datasets, exposure was defined as 0-28 days post-vaccination or a positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2. 36,136 individuals experienced either a thrombocytopenic, haemorrhagic or thromboembolic event during the study period. Relative to baseline, our observations show greater risk of outcomes in the periods post-first dose of BNT162b2 for haemorrhagic (IRR 1.47, 95%CI: 1.04-2.08) and idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (IRR 2.80, 95%CI: 1.21-6.49) events; post-second dose of ChAdOx1 for arterial thrombosis (IRR 1.14, 95%CI: 1.01-1.29); post-booster greater risk of venous thromboembolic (VTE) (IRR-Moderna 3.62, 95%CI: 0.99-13.17) (IRR-BNT162b2 1.39, 95%CI: 1.04-1.87) and arterial thrombosis (IRR-Moderna 3.14, 95%CI: 1.14-8.64) (IRR-BNT162b2 1.34, 95%CI: 1.15-1.58). Similarly, post SARS-CoV-2 infection the risk was increased for haemorrhagic (IRR 1.49, 95%CI: 1.15-1.92), VTE (IRR 5.63, 95%CI: 4.91, 6.4), arterial thrombosis (IRR 2.46, 95%CI: 2.22-2.71). We found that there was a measurable risk of thrombocytopenic, haemorrhagic, thromboembolic events after COVID-19 vaccination and infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Thrombocytopenia , Venous Thromboembolism , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Hemorrhage , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Thrombocytopenia/chemically induced , Thrombocytopenia/epidemiology , Vaccination/adverse effects , Venous Thromboembolism/chemically induced , Wales/epidemiology
6.
Age Ageing ; 51(8)2022 Aug 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1985029

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: falls are common in older people, but associations between falls, dementia and frailty are relatively unknown. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on falls admissions has not been studied. AIM: to investigate the impact of dementia, frailty, deprivation, previous falls and the differences between years for falls resulting in an emergency department (ED) or hospital admission. STUDY DESIGN: longitudinal cross-sectional observational study. SETTING: older people (aged 65+) resident in Wales between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2020. METHODS: we created a binary (yes/no) indicator for a fall resulting in an attendance to an ED, hospital or both, per person, per year. We analysed the outcomes using multilevel logistic and multinomial models. RESULTS: we analysed a total of 5,141,244 person years of data from 781,081 individuals. Fall admission rates were highest in 2012 (4.27%) and lowest in 2020 (4.27%). We found an increased odds ratio (OR [95% confidence interval]) of a fall admission for age (1.05 [1.05, 1.05] per year of age), people with dementia (2.03 [2.00, 2.06]) and people who had a previous fall (2.55 [2.51, 2.60]). Compared with fit individuals, those with frailty had ORs of 1.60 [1.58, 1.62], 2.24 [2.21, 2.28] and 2.94 [2.89, 3.00] for mild, moderate and severe frailty respectively. Reduced odds were observed for males (0.73 [0.73, 0.74]) and less deprived areas; most deprived compared with least OR 0.75 [0.74, 0.76]. CONCLUSIONS: falls prevention should be targeted to those at highest risk, and investigations into the reduction in admissions in 2020 is warranted.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Dementia , Frailty , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Dementia/diagnosis , Dementia/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital , Frailty/diagnosis , Frailty/epidemiology , Hospitals , Humans , Male , Pandemics , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Wales/epidemiology
7.
J R Soc Med ; : 1410768221107119, 2022 Jul 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1916722

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To better understand the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare workers, leading to recommendations for the prioritisation of personal protective equipment, testing, training and vaccination. DESIGN: Observational, longitudinal, national cohort study. SETTING: Our cohort were secondary care (hospital-based) healthcare workers employed by NHS Wales (United Kingdom) organisations from 1 April 2020 to 30 November 2020. PARTICIPANTS: We included 577,756 monthly observations among 77,587 healthcare workers. Using linked anonymised datasets, participants were grouped into 20 staff roles. Additionally, each role was deemed either patient-facing, non-patient-facing or undetermined. This was linked to individual demographic details and dates of positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression models to determine odds ratios (ORs) for the risk of a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. RESULTS: Patient-facing healthcare workers were at the highest risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection with an adjusted OR (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 2.28 (95% CI 2.10-2.47). We found that after adjustment, foundation year doctors (OR 1.83 [95% CI 1.47-2.27]), healthcare support workers [OR 1.36 [95% CI 1.20-1.54]) and hospital nurses (OR 1.27 [95% CI 1.12-1.44]) were at the highest risk of infection among all staff groups. Younger healthcare workers and those living in more deprived areas were at a higher risk of infection. We also observed that infection rates varied over time and by organisation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings have important policy implications for the prioritisation of vaccination, testing, training and personal protective equipment provision for patient-facing roles and the higher risk staff groups.

8.
Age Ageing ; 51(5)2022 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1890851

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccinations have been prioritised for high risk individuals. AIM: Determine individual-level risk factors for care home residents testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. STUDY DESIGN: Longitudinal observational cohort study using individual-level linked data from the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) databank. SETTING: Fourteen thousand seven hundred and eighty-six older care home residents (aged 65+) living in Wales between 1 September 2020 and 1 May 2021. Our dataset consisted of 2,613,341 individual-level daily observations within 697 care homes. METHODS: We estimated odds ratios (ORs [95% confidence interval]) using multilevel logistic regression models. Our outcome of interest was a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. We included time-dependent covariates for the estimated community positive test rate of COVID-19, hospital inpatient status, vaccination status and frailty. Additional covariates were included for age, sex and specialist care home services. RESULTS: The multivariable regression model indicated an increase in age (OR 1.01 [1.00,1.01] per year), community positive test rate (OR 1.13 [1.12,1.13] per percent increase), hospital inpatients (OR 7.40 [6.54,8.36]), and residents in care homes with non-specialist dementia care (OR 1.42 [1.01,1.99]) had an increased odds of a positive test. Having a positive test prior to the observation period (OR 0.58 [0.49,0.68]) and either one or two doses of a vaccine (0.21 [0.17,0.25] and 0.05 [0.02,0.09], respectively) were associated with a decreased odds. CONCLUSIONS: Care providers need to remain vigilant despite the vaccination rollout, and extra precautions should be taken when caring for the most vulnerable. Minimising potential COVID-19 infection for care home residents when admitted to hospital should be prioritised.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Length of Stay , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination , Wales/epidemiology
9.
Int J Popul Data Sci ; 5(4): 1697, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1754159

ABSTRACT

Introduction: COVID-19 risk prediction algorithms can be used to identify at-risk individuals from short-term serious adverse COVID-19 outcomes such as hospitalisation and death. It is important to validate these algorithms in different and diverse populations to help guide risk management decisions and target vaccination and treatment programs to the most vulnerable individuals in society. Objectives: To validate externally the QCOVID risk prediction algorithm that predicts mortality outcomes from COVID-19 in the adult population of Wales, UK. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using routinely collected individual-level data held in the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank. The cohort included individuals aged between 19 and 100 years, living in Wales on 24th January 2020, registered with a SAIL-providing general practice, and followed-up to death or study end (28th July 2020). Demographic, primary and secondary healthcare, and dispensing data were used to derive all the predictor variables used to develop the published QCOVID algorithm. Mortality data were used to define time to confirmed or suspected COVID-19 death. Performance metrics, including R2 values (explained variation), Brier scores, and measures of discrimination and calibration were calculated for two periods (24th January-30th April 2020 and 1st May-28th July 2020) to assess algorithm performance. Results: 1,956,760 individuals were included. 1,192 (0.06%) and 610 (0.03%) COVID-19 deaths occurred in the first and second time periods, respectively. The algorithms fitted the Welsh data and population well, explaining 68.8% (95% CI: 66.9-70.4) of the variation in time to death, Harrell's C statistic: 0.929 (95% CI: 0.921-0.937) and D statistic: 3.036 (95% CI: 2.913-3.159) for males in the first period. Similar results were found for females and in the second time period for both sexes. Conclusions: The QCOVID algorithm developed in England can be used for public health risk management for the adult Welsh population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Algorithms , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Wales/epidemiology , Young Adult
10.
Age Ageing ; 51(5)2022 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1740783

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: defining features of the COVID-19 pandemic in many countries were the tragic extent to which care home residents were affected and the difficulty in preventing the introduction and subsequent spread of infection. Management of risk in care homes requires good evidence on the most important transmission pathways. One hypothesised route at the start of the pandemic, prior to widespread testing, was the transfer of patients from hospitals that were experiencing high levels of nosocomial events. METHODS: we tested the hypothesis that hospital discharge events increased the intensity of care home cases using a national individually linked health record cohort in Wales, UK. We monitored 186,772 hospital discharge events over the period from March to July 2020, tracking individuals to 923 care homes and recording the daily case rate in the homes populated by 15,772 residents. We estimated the risk of an increase in case rates following exposure to a hospital discharge using multi-level hierarchical logistic regression and a novel stochastic Hawkes process outbreak model. FINDINGS: in regression analysis, after adjusting for care home size, we found no significant association between hospital discharge and subsequent increases in care home case numbers (odds ratio: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.82, 1.90). Risk factors for increased cases included care home size, care home resident density and provision of nursing care. Using our outbreak model, we found a significant effect of hospital discharge on the subsequent intensity of cases. However, the effect was small and considerably less than the effect of care home size, suggesting the highest risk of introduction came from interaction with the community. We estimated that approximately 1.8% of hospital discharged patients may have been infected. INTERPRETATION: there is growing evidence in the UK that the risk of transfer of COVID-19 from the high-risk hospital setting to the high-risk care home setting during the early stages of the pandemic was relatively small. Although access to testing was limited to initial symptomatic cases in each care home at this time, our results suggest that reduced numbers of discharges, selection of patients and action taken within care homes following transfer all may have contributed to the mitigation. The precise key transmission routes from the community remain to be quantified.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitals , Humans , Nursing Homes , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Discharge , United Kingdom/epidemiology
11.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0264023, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1714774

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: School-based COVID-19 mitigation strategies have greatly impacted the primary school day (children aged 3-11) including: wearing face coverings, two metre distancing, no mixing of children, and no breakfast clubs or extra-curricular activities. This study examines these mitigation measures and association with COVID-19 infection, respiratory infection, and school staff wellbeing between October to December 2020 in Wales, UK. METHODS: A school staff survey captured self-reported COVID-19 mitigation measures in the school, participant anxiety and depression, and open-text responses regarding experiences of teaching and implementing measures. These survey responses were linked to national-scale COVID-19 test results data to examine association of measures in the school and the likelihood of a positive (staff or pupil) COVID-19 case in the school (clustered by school, adjusted for school size and free school meals using logistic regression). Linkage was conducted through the SAIL (Secure Anonymised Information Linkage) Databank. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 353 participants from 59 primary schools within 15 of 22 local authorities. Having more direct non-household contacts was associated with a higher likelihood of COVID-19 positive case in the school (1-5 contacts compared to none, OR 2.89 (1.01, 8.31)) and a trend to more self-reported cold symptoms. Staff face covering was not associated with a lower odds of school COVID-19 cases (mask vs. no covering OR 2.82 (1.11, 7.14)) and was associated with higher self-reported cold symptoms. School staff reported the impacts of wearing face coverings on teaching, including having to stand closer to pupils and raise their voices to be heard. 67.1% were not able to implement two metre social distancing from pupils. We did not find evidence that maintaining a two metre distance was associated with lower rates of COVID-19 in the school. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing, adhering to and evaluating COVID-19 mitigation guidelines is challenging in primary school settings. Our findings suggest that reducing non-household direct contacts lowers infection rates. There was no evidence that face coverings, two metre social distancing or stopping children mixing was associated with lower odds of COVID-19 or cold infection rates in the school. Primary school staff found teaching challenging during COVID-19 restrictions, especially for younger learners and those with additional learning needs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Physical Distancing , SARS-CoV-2 , Schools , Students , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Wales/epidemiology
12.
Vaccine ; 40(8): 1180-1189, 2022 02 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1621088

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: While population estimates suggest high vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection, the protection for health care workers, who are at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure, is less understood. METHODS: We conducted a national cohort study of health care workers in Wales (UK) from 7 December 2020 to 30 September 2021. We examined uptake of any COVID-19 vaccine, and the effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA (Pfizer-BioNTech) against polymerase chain reaction (PCR) confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We used linked and routinely collected national-scale data within the SAIL Databank. Data were available on 82,959 health care workers in Wales, with exposure extending to 26 weeks after second doses. RESULTS: Overall vaccine uptake was high (90%), with most health care workers receiving theBNT162b2 vaccine (79%). Vaccine uptake differed by age, staff role, socioeconomic status; those aged 50-59 and 60+ years old were 1.6 times more likely to get vaccinated than those aged 16-29. Medical and dental staff, and Allied Health Practitioners were 1.5 and 1.1 times more likely to get vaccinated, compared to nursing and midwifery staff. The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine was found to be strong and consistent across the characteristics considered; 52% three to six weeks after first dose, 86% from two weeks after second dose, though this declined to 53% from 22 weeks after the second dose. CONCLUSIONS: With some variation in rate of uptake, those who were vaccinated had a reduced risk of PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared to those unvaccinated. Second dose has provided stronger protection for longer than first dose but our study is consistent with waning from seven weeks onwards.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , BNT162 Vaccine , Cohort Studies , Health Personnel , Humans , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Wales/epidemiology , Young Adult
13.
Age Ageing ; 51(1)2022 01 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1545894

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: vaccinations for COVID-19 have been prioritised for older people living in care homes. However, vaccination trials included limited numbers of older people. AIM: we aimed to study infection rates of SARS-CoV-2 for older care home residents following vaccination and identify factors associated with increased risk of infection. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: we conducted an observational data-linkage study including 14,104 vaccinated older care home residents in Wales (UK) using anonymised electronic health records and administrative data. METHODS: we used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for the risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection following vaccination, after landmark times of either 7 or 21 days post-vaccination. We adjusted HRs for age, sex, frailty, prior SARS-CoV-2 infections and vaccination type. RESULTS: we observed a small proportion of care home residents with positive polymerase chain reaction (tests following vaccination 1.05% (N = 148), with 90% of infections occurring within 28 days. For the 7-day landmark analysis we found a reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection for vaccinated individuals who had a previous infection; HR (95% confidence interval) 0.54 (0.30, 0.95). For the 21-day landmark analysis, we observed high HRs for individuals with low and intermediate frailty compared with those without; 4.59 (1.23, 17.12) and 4.85 (1.68, 14.04), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: increased risk of infection after 21 days was associated with frailty. We found most infections occurred within 28 days of vaccination, suggesting extra precautions to reduce transmission risk should be taken in this time frame.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Cohort Studies , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Wales/epidemiology
14.
Seizure ; 94: 39-42, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1537076

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has increased mortality worldwide and those with chronic conditions may have been disproportionally affected. However, it is unknown whether the pandemic has changed mortality rates for people with epilepsy. We aimed to compare mortality rates in people with epilepsy in Wales during the pandemic with pre-pandemic rates. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study using individual-level linked population-scale anonymised electronic health records. We identified deaths in people with epilepsy (DPWE), i.e. those with a diagnosis of epilepsy, and deaths associated with epilepsy (DAE), where epilepsy was recorded as a cause of death on death certificates. We compared death rates in 2020 with average rates in 2015-2019 using Poisson models to calculate death rate ratios. RESULTS: There were 188 DAE and 628 DPWE in Wales in 2020 (death rates: 7.7/100,000/year and 25.7/100,000/year). The average rates for DAE and DPWE from 2015 to 2019 were 5.8/100,000/year and 23.8/100,000/year, respectively. Death rate ratios (2020 compared to 2015-2019) for DAE were 1.34 (95%CI 1.14-1.57, p<0.001) and for DPWE were 1.08 (0.99-1.17, p = 0.09). The death rate ratios for non-COVID deaths (deaths without COVID mentioned on death certificates) for DAE were 1.17 (0.99-1.39, p = 0.06) and for DPWE were 0.96 (0.87-1.05, p = 0.37). CONCLUSIONS: The significant increase in DAE in Wales during 2020 could be explained by the direct effect of COVID-19 infection. Non-COVID-19 deaths have not increased significantly but further work is needed to assess the longer-term impact.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Epilepsy , Cause of Death , Epilepsy/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Wales/epidemiology
15.
Javnost-The Public ; : 1-19, 2021.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-1455048

ABSTRACT

Quality deliberation is essential for societies to address the challenges presented by the coronavirus pandemic effectively and legitimately. Critics of deliberative and participatory democracy are highly skeptical that most citizens can engage with such complex issues in good circumstances and these are far from ideal circumstances. The need for rapid action and decision-making is a challenge for inclusivity and quality of deliberation. Additionally, policy responses to the virus need to be even more co-ordinated than usual, which intensifies their complexity. The digitalisation of the public sphere may be seen as a further challenge to deliberating. Furthermore, these are stressful and emotional times, making a considered judgement on these issues potentially challenging. We employ a modified version of the Discourse Quality Index to assess the deliberative quality in two facilitated synchronous digital platforms to consider aspects of data use in light of COVID 19. Our study is the first to perform a comprehensive, systematic and in-depth analysis of the deliberative capacity of citizens in a pandemic. Our evidence indicates that deliberation can be resilient in a crisis. The findings will have relevance to those interested in pandemic democracy, deliberative democracy in a crisis, data use and digital public spheres. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Javnost-The Public is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

16.
BMJ Paediatr Open ; 5(1): e001049, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1238538

ABSTRACT

Background: Better understanding of the role that children and school staff play in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is essential to guide policy development on controlling infection while minimising disruption to children's education and well-being. Methods: Our national e-cohort (n=464531) study used anonymised linked data for pupils, staff and associated households linked via educational settings in Wales. We estimated the odds of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection for staff and pupils over the period August- December 2020, dependent on measures of recent exposure to known cases linked to their educational settings. Results: The total number of cases in a school was not associated with a subsequent increase in the odds of testing positive (staff OR per case: 0.92, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00; pupil OR per case: 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.02). Among pupils, the number of recent cases within the same year group was significantly associated with subsequent increased odds of testing positive (OR per case: 1.12, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.15). These effects were adjusted for a range of demographic covariates, and in particular any known cases within the same household, which had the strongest association with testing positive (staff OR: 39.86, 95% CI 35.01 to 45.38; pupil OR: 9.39, 95% CI 8.94 to 9.88). Conclusions: In a national school cohort, the odds of staff testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection were not significantly increased in the 14-day period after case detection in the school. However, pupils were found to be at increased odds, following cases appearing within their own year group, where most of their contacts occur. Strong mitigation measures over the whole of the study period may have reduced wider spread within the school environment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Child , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Schools , Semantic Web , Wales/epidemiology
17.
Int J Med Inform ; 149: 104400, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1051694

ABSTRACT

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for robust data linkage systems and methods for identifying outbreaks of disease in near real-time. Objectives The primary objective of this study was to develop a real-time geospatial surveillance system to monitor the spread of COVID-19 across the UK. Methods Using self-reported app data and the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank, we demonstrate the use of sophisticated spatial modelling for near-real-time prediction of COVID-19 prevalence at small-area resolution to inform strategic government policy areas. Results We demonstrate that using a combination of crowd-sourced app data and sophisticated geo-statistical techniques it is possible to predict hot spots of COVID-19 at fine geographic scales, nationally. We are also able to produce estimates of their precision, which is an important pre-requisite to an effective control strategy to guard against over-reaction to potentially spurious features of 'best guess' predictions. Conclusion In the UK, important emerging risk-factors such as social deprivation or ethnicity vary over small distances, hence risk needs to be modelled at fine spatial resolution to avoid aggregation bias. We demonstrate that existing geospatial statistical methods originally developed for global health applications are well-suited to this task and can be used in an anonymised databank environment, thus preserving the privacy of the individuals who contribute their data.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom/epidemiology
18.
Age Ageing ; 50(1): 25-31, 2021 01 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1026910

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: mortality in care homes has had a prominent focus during the COVID-19 outbreak. Care homes are particularly vulnerable to the spread of infectious diseases, which may lead to increased mortality risk. Multiple and interconnected challenges face the care home sector in the prevention and management of outbreaks of COVID-19, including adequate supply of personal protective equipment, staff shortages and insufficient or lack of timely COVID-19 testing. AIM: to analyse the mortality of older care home residents in Wales during COVID-19 lockdown and compare this across the population of Wales and the previous 4 years. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: we used anonymised electronic health records and administrative data from the secure anonymised information linkage databank to create a cross-sectional cohort study. We anonymously linked data for Welsh residents to mortality data up to the 14th June 2020. METHODS: we calculated survival curves and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for the risk of mortality. We adjusted HRs for age, gender, social economic status and prior health conditions. RESULTS: survival curves show an increased proportion of deaths between 23rd March and 14th June 2020 in care homes for older people, with an adjusted HR of 1.72 (1.55, 1.90) compared with 2016. Compared with the general population in 2016-2019, adjusted care home mortality HRs for older adults rose from 2.15 (2.11, 2.20) in 2016-2019 to 2.94 (2.81, 3.08) in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: the survival curves and increased HRs show a significantly increased risk of death in the 2020 study periods.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19 , Homes for the Aged/statistics & numerical data , Infection Control , Nursing Homes/statistics & numerical data , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19 Testing/standards , Female , Health Status Disparities , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/organization & administration , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Male , Mortality , Needs Assessment , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Wales/epidemiology , Workload/standards
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL