ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to gain a preliminary, broad-level understanding of how the first lockdown impacted post-secondary students, faculty, and staff worldwide. METHODS: The data were obtained via a global online cross-sectional questionnaire survey using a mixed-method design and disseminated to university students, faculty, and staff from April to November 2020. The data were categorized in four themes/categories: (1) social life and relationships, (2) access to services, (3) health experiences, and (4) impact on mental health well-being. RESULTS: The survey included 27,804 participants from 121 countries and 6 continents. The majority of participants were from Europe (73.6%), female (59.2%), under 30 years of age (64.0%), living in large urban areas (61.3%), %), and from middle-income families (66.7%). Approximately 28.4% of respondents reported that the lockdown negatively impacted their social life, while 21.2% reported the lockdown had a positive impact. A total of 39.2% reported having issues accessing products or services, including essentials, such as groceries, or medical services. In addition, respondents reported an increase in stress and anxiety levels and a decrease in quality of life during the first 2 weeks of the lockdown. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown measures had an evident impact on the lives of post-secondary students, faculty, and staff. Further research is required to inform and improve policies to support these populations at both institutional and national levels.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To assess the extent and type of data redaction in all active technology appraisals (TA) and highly specialised technology (HST) evaluations issued by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) from its conception of the institute to September 2019. To propose policy recommendations for transparency. METHODS: Structured audit to establish extent of data redaction-proportion of appraisals and specific data categories and assess redaction by: indication, appraisal process, manufacturer, type of data-price, adverse events (AEs), clinical (excluding AEs), incremental quality-adjusted life-years. Longitudinal analysis over 20 years. RESULTS: All TAs with available documentation and active recommendations (n=408) and HSTs (n=10) published from March 2000 to 11 September 2019 have been assessed for data redaction. Overall, 333 TAs (81.6%) have data redaction, 86 (25.8%) of them are heavily redacted. Clinical data (excluding AEs) are redacted in 268 (65.7%) appraisals, AE data in 128 (31.4%), price in 238 (58.3%). In total, 87% of oncology appraisals have redacted data vs 78% of non-oncology appraisals. 91% of single TAs have redacted data vs 59% of multiple TAs. 25% of final guidance documents (e.g. Final Appraisal Determination - FAD) do not report one or more instance of clinical data. Data redaction increased substantially over time, and is currently at its highest level with 100% of TAs having at least some data redaction in 2019/2020, 96% of appraisals in 2018/2019% and 94% of appraisals in 2017/2018. All 10 HST evaluations have redacted data, with 4 of them being heavily redacted. CONCLUSIONS: Documents supporting NICE TA and HST recommendations are significantly redacted, thereby concealing clinical and economic data of importance to patients, clinicians and researchers. Documents remain redacted on the NICE website for years. Policy change is required to ensure transparency of data underpinning NICE's decisions.