The Role of Remote Sensing and Geospatial Analysis for Understanding COVID-19 Population Severity: A Systematic Review

Remote sensing (RS), satellite imaging (SI), and geospatial analysis have established themselves as extremely useful and very diverse domains for research associated with space, spatio-temporal components, and geography. We evaluated in this review the existing evidence on the application of those geospatial techniques, tools, and methods in the coronavirus pandemic. We reviewed and retrieved nine research studies that directly used geospatial techniques, remote sensing, or satellite imaging as part of their research analysis. Articles included studies from Europe, Somalia, the USA, Indonesia, Iran, Ecuador, China, and India. Two papers used only satellite imaging data, three papers used remote sensing, three papers used a combination of both satellite imaging and remote sensing. One paper mentioned the use of spatiotemporal data. Many studies used reports from healthcare facilities and geospatial agencies to collect the type of data. The aim of this review was to show the use of remote sensing, satellite imaging, and geospatial data in defining features and relationships that are related to the spread and mortality rate of COVID-19 around the world. This review should ensure that these innovations and technologies are instantly available to assist decision-making and robust scientific research that will improve the population health diseases outcomes around the globe.

The Role of Remote Sensing and Geospatial Analysis for Understanding COVID-19 Population Severity: A Systematic Review.

Remote sensing (RS), satellite imaging (SI), and geospatial analysis have established themselves as extremely useful and very diverse domains for research associated with space, spatio-temporal components, and geography. We evaluated in this review the existing evidence on the application of those geospatial techniques, tools, and methods in the coronavirus pandemic. We reviewed and retrieved nine research studies that directly used geospatial techniques, remote sensing, or satellite imaging as part of their research analysis. Articles included studies from Europe, Somalia, the USA, Indonesia, Iran, Ecuador, China, and India. Two papers used only satellite imaging data, three papers used remote sensing, three papers used a combination of both satellite imaging and remote sensing. One paper mentioned the use of spatiotemporal data. Many studies used reports from healthcare facilities and geospatial agencies to collect the type of data. The aim of this review was to show the use of remote sensing, satellite imaging, and geospatial data in defining features and relationships that are related to the spread and mortality rate of COVID-19 around the world. This review should ensure that these innovations and technologies are instantly available to assist decision-making and robust scientific research that will improve the population health diseases outcomes around the globe.

Antimicrobial resistance from a One Health perspective in Zambia: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is widely acknowledged as a global health problem, yet its extent is not well evaluated, especially in low-middle income countries. It is challenging to promote policies without focusing on healthcare systems at a local level, therefore a baseline assessment of the AMR occurrence is a priority. This study aimed to look at published papers relating to the availability of AMR data in Zambia as a means of establishing an overview of the situation, to help inform future decisions. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Libraries, Medical Journal of Zambia and African Journals Online databases were searched from inception to April 2021 for articles published in English in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Retrieval and screening of article was done using a structured search protocol with strict inclusion/exclusion criteria. RESULTS: A total of 716 articles were retrieved, of which 25 articles met inclusion criteria for final analysis. AMR data was not available for six of the ten provinces of Zambia. Twenty-one different isolates from the human health, animal health and environmental health sectors were tested against 36 antimicrobial agents, across 13 classes of antibiotics. All the studies showed a degree of resistance to more than one class of antimicrobials. Majority of the studies focused on antibiotics, with only three studies (12%) highlighting antiretroviral resistance. Antitubercular drugs were addressed in only five studies (20%). No studies focused on antifungals. The most common organisms tested, across all three sectors, were Staphylococcus aureus, with a diverse range of resistance patterns found; followed by Escherichia coli with a high resistance rate found to cephalosporins (24-100%) and fluoroquinolones (20-100%). CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights three important findings. Firstly, AMR is understudied in Zambia. Secondly, the level of resistance to commonly prescribed antibiotics is significant across the human, animal, and environmental sectors. Thirdly, this review suggests that improved standardization of antimicrobial susceptibility testing in Zambia could help to better delineate AMR patterns, allow comparisons across different locations and tracking of AMR evolution over time.

Remote observational research for MS: a natural experiment

Background: Prospective, deeply phenotyped research cohorts monitoring people with multiple sclerosis (MS) depend on careful participant engagement that was threatened by COVID19- related restrictions to in-clinic visits. Coincidentally, there was forced adoption of televideo-enabled care. Objective(s): To leverage a natural experiment of "going virtual" during the pandemic to evaluate two hypotheses pertaining to remote MS research: that (1) global costs of remote visits are lower, and (2) disability evaluations are non-inferior. Method(s): Between 3/2020 and 12/2021, 207 UCSF EPIC/ ORIGINS MS cohort participants underwent hybrid in-clinic and virtual research visits. Among these, 96 contributed 100 'matched visits', i.e. in-clinic (Neurostatus, NS-EDSS) and remote (televideo-, tele-EDSS;electronic patient-reported, ePR-EDSS) evaluations within 14 days. Clinical and socio/ demographic characteristics were collected. First, visit costs were compared. Then, the quality of data extracted was compared using non-inferiority design with NS-EDSS as primary outcome. Result(s): The 96 participants contributing 100 matched visits had mean age 41.4 years (SD 11.7) and MS duration 1.4 years (SD 3.4);69% were female and 72% White, 8% lived in lowincome zip codes;median driving distance was 70 miles (mean 545). The costs of remote visits to participants (travel, caregiver time), to research (facilities, personnel, parking, participant compensation), and carbon footprint were all lower than in-person visits (p<0.05 for each). Median cohort EDSS was similar, whether evaluated using NS-EDSS (2), tele-EDSS (1.5) or ePREDSS (2), with range 0-6.5. Utilizing a TOST for Non-inferiority, both remote evaluations were non-inferior to NS-EDSS within+/-0.5 EDSS point (p<0.01 for each). Year-to-year, the % of participants with worsening/stable/improved EDSS scores was similar, whether the annual evaluations both used NS-EDSS, or whether the annual evaluation switched from NS-EDSS to tele-EDSS. Discussion(s): "Going virtual" during the pandemic represented a natural experiment in which to test hypotheses about remote research visits. These visits lowered costs for investigators and participants. Further, remote assessments were non-inferior to NS-EDSS and for more precision, could be supplemented with biosensors. Together, these insights support the conduct of research that is more inclusive to participants regardless of geography, race, income, opportunity costs or ability level.

Correction: Psychological impacts from COVID-19 among university students: Risk factors across seven states in the United States.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245327.].

"Messy transitions": Students' perspectives on the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on higher education.

The COVID-19 pandemic affected every area of students' lives, especially their education. Limited research has explored students' experiences during the pandemic. This study documents how students across seven United States universities viewed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their educational experiences and how these students reacted to these impacts. We present qualitative data from an online survey conducted between March and May 2020 that resulted in 1267 respondents with relevant data. Conventional content analysis with an inductive approach was used to analyze open-ended responses to the question, "We are interested in the ways that the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has changed how you feel and behave. What are the first three ways that come to mind?" Six categories emerged from the data: changes in instruction delivery mode, changes in schedule and everyday life, increased technology use, decreased academic opportunities and resources, negative reaction to the changes in higher education, and positive reactions to changes in higher education. Among our recommendations for practice are personalized approaches to material delivery and evaluation, synchronous classes and opportunities to connect with professors and students, and convenient support services.

Self-reported participation in outdoor and nature-based recreation before and during the COVID-19 pandemic supports psychological health and well-being.

Restrictions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic significantly altered daily lives and affected human health and well-being. Outdoor and nature-based activities could potentially mitigate some of these negative impacts. To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on outdoor recreation and subjective well-being, we combined two samples of U.S. adults collected from April 30th - June 15th, 2020 and from August 7th - August 26th, 2020 (total n = 2178) using Qualtrics XM. During the pandemic, participation in outdoor activities declined by 35%, participation in nature-based activities declined by 33%, and subjective well-being declined by 24%. Participation in outdoor activities and nature activities prior to the pandemic and during the pandemic predicted smaller declines in subjective well-being. Results highlight the importance of outdoor recreation for building resilience to changes in subjective well-being before and during global crises like the COVID-19 pandemic.

Political polarization of conservation issues in the era of COVID-19: An examination of partisan perspectives and priorities in the United States.

As a zoonotic disease with unprecedented global impacts, COVID-19 may influence how people prioritize issues related to wildlife conservation. Using a nationally representative sample of US residents, we investigated: (1) how COVID-19 affected the relative importance of conservation issues among adults with different political ideologies, and (2) how the pandemic affected political polarization of conservation issues during the 2020 general election in the United States. Conservation issues such as endangered species and controlling zoonotic disease ranked low in importance among the 14 policy issues considered, even lower than environmental issues such as climate change and environmental protection; however, the importance of all conservation issues increased as a result of COVID-19. Political polarization surrounding the perceived importance of conservation issues also increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, with Democrats reporting larger increases in importance than Republicans. Polarization was driven by the most conservative Republicans and the most liberal Democrats. But this polarization was less extreme than it was for other issues such as climate change and healthcare. Findings highlight the need for communicating links between zoonotic disease and human interactions with wildlife and the environment. Acting quickly may be critical in areas where conservation issues are primed to succumb to political polarization.

Greenspace and park use associated with less emotional distress among college students in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively affected many people's psychological health. Impacts may be particularly severe among socially vulnerable populations such as college students, a group predisposed to mental health problems. Outdoor recreation and visits to greenspaces such as parks offer promising pathways for addressing the mental health challenges associated with COVID-19. During the early stages of the pandemic (March-May 2020), we surveyed 1280 college students at four large public universities across the United States (U.S.) to assess how, and why, outdoor recreation and park use changed since the emergence of COVID-19. We also measured students' self-reported levels of emotional distress (a proxy for psychological health) and assessed potential demographic and contextual correlates of distress, including county-level per capita park area and greenness, using generalized linear models. We found that 67% of students reported limiting outdoor activities and 54% reported reducing park use during the pandemic. Students who reduced their use of outdoor spaces cited structural reasons (e.g., lockdowns), concerns about viral transmission, and negative emotions that obstructed active lifestyles. Students who maintained pre-pandemic park use levels expressed a desire to be outdoors in nature, often with the explicit goal of improving mental and physical health. Emotional distress among students was widespread. Models showed higher levels of emotional distress were associated with reducing park use during the pandemic and residing in counties with a smaller area of parks per capita. This study of U.S. college students supports the value of park-based recreation as a health promotion strategy for diverse populations of young adults during a time of crisis.

Connection to Nature Boosts Adolescents’ Mental Well-Being during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Growing evidence suggests that connection to nature may be linked to mental health and well-being. Behavioral changes brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic could negatively affect adolescents’ connection to nature, subsequently impacting health and well-being. We explored the relationship between connection to nature and well-being before and during the pandemic through a nationally representative survey of adolescents across the United States (n = 624) between April and June 2020. Survey items focused on connection to nature, mental well-being, and participation in outdoor activities before and during the pandemic. Paired-sample t-tests revealed declines in connection to nature, mental well-being, and participation in outdoor activities during the pandemic. Multiple linear regression analyses examining connection to nature’s mediating role between outdoor activity participation and mental well-being indicated that connection to nature fueled higher levels of mental well-being at both time intervals. Z scores comparing connection to nature’s mediating role between outdoor activity participation and mental well-being between time intervals indicate that during the pandemic, the direct effect of outdoor activities on mental well-being increased, generating a greater impact than before the pandemic. This study illustrates how the health and well-being benefits associated with adolescents’ outdoor activities are reinforced when those activities also foster a stronger connection to nature.

Outdoor Activity Participation Improves Adolescents' Mental Health and Well-Being during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

COVID-19 is reshaping human interactions with the natural environment, potentially generating profound consequences for health and well-being. To assess the effects of COVID-19 on the outdoor recreation participation and subjective well-being of adolescents, as well as how participation in outdoor activities may mitigate declines in subjective well-being, we used a Qualtrics XM panel to conduct a nationally representative survey of youth ages 10-18 across the United States (n = 624) between 30 April and 15 June 2020. Survey questions focused on frequency of participation in outdoor activities before and during the pandemic, as well as changes in subjective well-being. Paired t-tests revealed decreases in both outdoor recreation participation (64% reported declines) and subjective well-being (52% reported declines). A regression model examining correlates of changes in subjective well-being (R2 = 0.42) revealed strong associations with changes in outdoor play (B = 0.44, p < 0.001) and nature-based (B = 0.21, p = 0.016) activities. Adolescents' from all backgrounds who participated in these activities during the pandemic reported smaller declines in subjective well-being. Results highlight the critical role that time outdoors and time in nature play in bolstering adolescents' resilience to stressors such as the COVID-19 pandemic and underscore the need to facilitate outdoor recreation opportunities for youth during times of crisis.

Psychological impacts from COVID-19 among university students: Risk factors across seven states in the United States.

BACKGROUND: University students are increasingly recognized as a vulnerable population, suffering from higher levels of anxiety, depression, substance abuse, and disordered eating compared to the general population. Therefore, when the nature of their educational experience radically changes-such as sheltering in place during the COVID-19 pandemic-the burden on the mental health of this vulnerable population is amplified. The objectives of this study are to 1) identify the array of psychological impacts COVID-19 has on students, 2) develop profiles to characterize students' anticipated levels of psychological impact during the pandemic, and 3) evaluate potential sociodemographic, lifestyle-related, and awareness of people infected with COVID-19 risk factors that could make students more likely to experience these impacts. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were collected through web-based questionnaires from seven U.S. universities. Representative and convenience sampling was used to invite students to complete the questionnaires in mid-March to early-May 2020, when most coronavirus-related sheltering in place orders were in effect. We received 2,534 completed responses, of which 61% were from women, 79% from non-Hispanic Whites, and 20% from graduate students. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis on close-ended responses resulted in two latent constructs, which we used to identify profiles of students with latent profile analysis, including high (45% of sample), moderate (40%), and low (14%) levels of psychological impact. Bivariate associations showed students who were women, were non-Hispanic Asian, in fair/poor health, of below-average relative family income, or who knew someone infected with COVID-19 experienced higher levels of psychological impact. Students who were non-Hispanic White, above-average social class, spent at least two hours outside, or less than eight hours on electronic screens were likely to experience lower levels of psychological impact. Multivariate modeling (mixed-effects logistic regression) showed that being a woman, having fair/poor general health status, being 18 to 24 years old, spending 8 or more hours on screens daily, and knowing someone infected predicted higher levels of psychological impact when risk factors were considered simultaneously. CONCLUSION: Inadequate efforts to recognize and address college students' mental health challenges, especially during a pandemic, could have long-term consequences on their health and education.