Perspectives of (/memorandum for) systems thinking on COVID-19 pandemic and pathology.

Is data-driven analysis sufficient for understanding the COVID-19 pandemic and for justifying public health regulations? In this paper, we argue that such analysis is insufficient. Rather what is needed is the identification and implementation of over-arching hypothesis-related and/or theory-based rationales to conduct effective SARS-CoV2/COVID-19 (Corona) research. To that end, we analyse and compare several published recommendations for conceptual and methodological frameworks in medical research (e.g., public health, preventive medicine and health promotion) to current research approaches in medical Corona research. Although there were several efforts published in the literature to develop integrative conceptual frameworks before the COVID-19 pandemic, such as social ecology for public health issues and systems thinking in health care, only a few attempts to utilize these concepts can be found in medical Corona research. For this reason, we propose nested and integrative systemic modelling approaches to understand Corona pandemic and Corona pathology. We conclude that institutional efforts for knowledge integration and systemic thinking, but also for integrated science, are urgently needed to avoid or mitigate future pandemics and to resolve infection pathology.

[S1 Guideline Post-COVID/Long-COVID]. / S1-Leitlinie Post-COVID/Long-COVID.

The German Society of Pneumology initiated the AWMFS1 guideline Post-COVID/Long-COVID. In a broad interdisciplinary approach, this S1 guideline was designed based on the current state of knowledge.The clinical recommendation describes current post-COVID/long-COVID symptoms, diagnostic approaches, and therapies.In addition to the general and consensus introduction, a subject-specific approach was taken to summarize the current state of knowledge.The guideline has an expilcit practical claim and will be continuously developed and adapted by the author team based on the current increase in knowledge.

To stress or not to stress: Brain-behavior-immune interaction may weaken or promote the immune response to SARS-CoV-2.

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to strongly affect people with health disadvantages, creating a heavy burden on medical systems and societies worldwide. Research is growing rapidly and recently revealed that stress-related factors such as socio-economic status, may also play a pivotal role. However, stress research investigating the underlying psychoneuroimmune interactions is missing. Here we address the question whether stress-associated neuroendocrine-immune mechanisms can possibly contribute to an increase in SARS-CoV-2 infections and influence the course of COVID-19 disease. Additionally, we discuss that not all forms of stress (e.g. acute versus chronic) are detrimental and that some types of stress could attenuate infection-risk and -progression. The overall aim of this review is to motivate future research efforts to clarify whether psychosocial interventions have the potential to optimize neuroendocrine-immune responses against respiratory viral infections during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. The current state of research on different types of stress is summarized in a comprehensive narrative review to promote a psychoneuroimmune understanding of how stress and its mediators cortisol, (nor)adrenaline, neuropeptides and neurotrophins can shape the immune defense against viral diseases. Based on this understanding, we describe how people with high psychosocial stress can be identified, which behaviors and psychosocial interventions may contribute to optimal stress management, and how psychoneuroimmune knowledge can be used to improve adequate care for COVID-19 and other patients with viral infections.