Scenario design for macrofinancial stress testing

This paper provides a novel empirical approach to scenario design for selecting a stress scenario for international macrofinancial variables. The scenario design framework is composed of several building blocks. First, multiple scenarios on the risk factors are generated by simulating a multi-country large Bayesian vector autoregression. Second, we take the perspective of a representative investor who aims to select a severe-yet-plausible scenario for a set of systematic risk factors following a factor-investing strategy. Moreover, we compare the stress scenarios selected under different approaches to measure plausibility (the Mahalanobis distance and entropy pooling under subjective views with a clear economic narrative). Finally, we compare our scenario design approach with a historical scenario approach in terms of its ability to select a stress scenario in the run-up to a rare adverse event such as the Covid-19 pandemic. We give evidence that our framework is suitable for the selection of a proper forward-looking severe-yet-plausible macrofinancial stress scenario.

Impact of fiscal stimulus on volatility: A cross-country analysis

This study investigates the short-to-medium-term impact of Covid-19-related fiscal stimulus relief packages on reducing investor uncertainty expectations in eight major economies. We use three measures of volatility to assess investor uncertainty: implied volatility, volatility index, and realized kernel volatility of ETFs in each country. The data covers a three-year period from January 2019 to December 2021. Our findings indicate an increase in all three measures of volatility in the post-Covid to pre-stimulus period, which decreases after the announcement of the stimulus packages. The results show that, on average, the stimulus announcements alleviate investor uncertainty and facilitate economic recovery. However, the effectiveness of the stimulus packages varies across countries but not across sectors. Our results remain robust to several checks, including alternate econometric specifications, such as the Arellano-Blundell-Bond estimation for dynamic panel data. © 2023 Elsevier B.V.

Global Imperative of Suicidal Ideation in 10 Countries Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) has had a detrimental impact on individuals' psychological well-being; however, a multi-country comparison on the prevalence of suicidal ideation due to the virus is still lacking. Objectives: To examine the prevalence and correlates of suicidal ideation among the general population across 10 countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and methods: This was a cross-sectional study which used convenience sampling and collected data by conducting an online survey. Participants were sourced from 10 Eastern and Western countries. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) was used to measure the outcome variable of suicidal ideation. Ordinal regression analysis was used to identify significant predictors associated with suicidal ideation. Results: A total of 25,053 participants (22.7% male) were recruited. Results from the analysis showed that the UK and Brazil had the lowest odds of suicidal ideation compared to Macau (p < 0.05). Furthermore, younger age, male, married, and differences in health beliefs were significantly associated with suicidal ideation (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The findings highlight the need for joint international collaboration to formulate effective suicide prevention strategies in a timely manner and the need to implement online mental health promotion platforms. In doing so, the potential global rising death rates by suicide during the pandemic can be reduced.

Evaluation of health system resilience in 60 countries based on their responses to COVID-19.

Introduction: In 2020, the COVID-19 epidemic swept the world, and many national health systems faced serious challenges. To improve future public health responses, it's necessary to evaluate the performance of each country's health system. Methods: We developed a resilience evaluation system for national health systems based on their responses to COVID-19 using four resilience dimensions: government governance and prevention, health financing, health service provision, and health workers. We determined the weight of each index by combining the three-scale and entropy-weight methods. Then, based on data from 2020, we used the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method to rank the health system resilience of 60 countries, and then used hierarchical clustering to classify countries into groups based on their resilience level. Finally, we analyzed the causes of differences among countries in their resilience based on the four resilience dimensions. Results: Switzerland, Japan, Germany, Australia, South Korea, Canada, New Zealand, Finland, the United States, and the United Kingdom had the highest health system resilience in 2020. Eritrea, Nigeria, Libya, Tanzania, Burundi, Mozambique, Republic of the Niger, Benin, Côte d'Ivoire, and Guinea had the lowest resilience. Discussion: Government governance and prevention of COVID-19 will greatly affect a country's success in fighting future epidemics, which will depend on a government's emergency preparedness, stringency (a measure of the number and rigor of the measures taken), and testing capability. Given the lack of vaccines or specific drug treatments during the early stages of the 2020 epidemic, social distancing and wearing masks were the main defenses against COVID-19. Cuts in health financing had direct and difficult to reverse effects on health systems. In terms of health service provision, the number of hospitals and intensive care unit beds played a key role in COVID-19 clinical care. Resilient health systems were able to cope more effectively with the impact of COVID-19, provide stronger protection for citizens, and mitigate the impacts of COVID-19. Our evaluation based on data from 60 countries around the world showed that increasing health system resilience will improve responses to future public health emergencies.

A multi-country study on the impact of sex and age on oral features of COVID-19 infection in adolescents and young adults.

BACKGROUND: Oral diseases are features of COVID-19 infection. There is, however, little known about oral diseases associated with COVID-19 in adolescents and young adults (AYA). Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess oral lesions' association with COVID-19 infection in AYA; and to identify if sex and age will modify these associations. METHODOLOGY: Data was collected for this cross-sectional study between August 2020 and January 2021 from 11-to-23 years old participants in 43-countries using an electronic validated questionnaire developed in five languages. Data collected included information on the dependent variables (the presence of oral conditions- gingival inflammation, dry mouth, change in taste and oral ulcers), independent variable (COVID-19 infection) and confounders (age, sex, history of medical problems and parents' educational level). Multilevel binary logistic regression was used for analysis. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 7164 AYA, with 7.5% reporting a history of COVID-19 infection. A significantly higher percentage of participants with a history of COVID-19 infection than those without COVID-19 infection reported having dry mouth (10.6% vs 7.3%, AOR = 1.31) and taste changes (11.1% vs 2.7%, AOR = 4.11). There was a significant effect modification in the association between COVID-19 infection and the presence of dry mouth and change in taste by age and sex (P = 0.02 and < 0.001). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 infection was associated with dry mouth and change in taste among AYA and the strength of this association differed by age and sex. These oral conditions may help serve as an index for suspicion of COVID-19 infection in AYA.

Safety Culture and the Positive Association of Being a Primary Care Training Practice during COVID-19: The Results of the Multi-Country European PRICOV-19 Study.

The day-to-day work of primary care (PC) was substantially changed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Teaching practices needed to adapt both clinical work and teaching in a way that enabled the teaching process to continue, while maintaining safe and high-quality care. Our study aims to investigate the effect of being a training practice on a number of different outcomes related to the safety culture of PC practices. PRICOV-19 is a multi-country cross-sectional study that researches how PC practices were organized in 38 countries during the pandemic. Data was collected from November 2020 to December 2021. We categorized practices into training and non-training and selected outcomes relating to safety culture: safe practice management, community outreach, professional well-being and adherence to protocols. Mixed-effects regression models were built to analyze the effect of being a training practice for each of the outcomes, while controlling for relevant confounders. Of the participating practices, 2886 (56%) were non-training practices and 2272 (44%) were training practices. Being a training practice was significantly associated with a lower risk for adverse mental health events (OR: 0.83; CI: 0.70-0.99), a higher number of safety measures related to patient flow (Beta: 0.17; CI: 0.07-0.28), a higher number of safety incidents reported (RR: 1.12; CI: 1.06-1.19) and more protected time for meetings (Beta: 0.08; CI: 0.01-0.15). No significant associations were found for outreach initiatives, availability of triage information, use of a phone protocol or infection prevention measures and equipment availability. Training practices were found to have a stronger safety culture than non-training practices. These results have important policy implications, since involving more PC practices in education may be an effective way to improve quality and safety in general practice.

Knowledge deficit and fear of COVID-19 among higher education students during the first wave of the pandemic and implications for public health: a multi-country cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Public health measures such as physical distancing and distance learning have been implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 related knowledge deficit can increase fear that leads to negative mental health and COVID-19, especially among adolescents. Therefore, our study aimed to assess COVID-19 related knowledge deficit and its association with fear among higher education (HE) students during the first wave of COVID-19. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey, COVID-19 International Students Well-being Study (C-19 ISWS) was conducted in 133 Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in 26 countries between April 27 and July 7, 2020. A stratified convenience sampling technique was used. Descriptive, bivariate, mixed-effect logistic regression analyses were conducted using R software. RESULTS: Out of 127,362 respondents, 72.1% were female, and 76.5% did not report a previous history of confirmed COVID-19. The majority of those without the previous infection 81,645 (83.7%) were from 21 European countries while the rest 15,850 (16.3%) were from 5 non-European countries. The most frequent correct response to COVID-19 related knowledge questions among respondents was having the virus without having symptoms (94.3%). Compared to participants with good knowledge, the odds of being afraid of acquiring SARS-COV-2 infection among those with poor knowledge was 1.05 (95%CI:1.03,1.08) and the odds of being afraid of contracting severe COVID-19 was 1.36 (95%CI:1.31,1.40). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 related knowledge was independently associated with both fear of acquiring SARS-COV-2 infection as well as contracting severe COVID-19. Our findings will serve as a basis for public health response for both the current and similar future pandemics by highlighting the need for addressing the COVID-19 knowledge deficit to fight the infodemic and prevent negative mental health outcomes.

Time Trend Analysis of Tuberculosis Treatment While Using Digital Adherence Technologies—An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of Eleven Projects across Ten High Tuberculosis-Burden Countries

Worldwide, non-adherence to tuberculosis (TB) treatment is problematic. Digital adherence technologies (DATs) offer a person-centered approach to support and monitor treatment. We explored adherence over time while using DATs. We conducted a meta-analysis on anonymized longitudinal adherence data for drug-susceptible (DS) TB (n = 4515) and drug-resistant (DR) TB (n = 473) populations from 11 DAT projects. Using Tobit regression, we assessed adherence for six months of treatment across sex, age, project enrolment phase, DAT-type, health care facility (HCF), and project. We found that DATs recorded high levels of adherence throughout treatment: 80% to 71% of DS-TB patients had ≥90% adherence in month 1 and 6, respectively, and 73% to 75% for DR-TB patients. Adherence increased between month 1 and 2 (DS-TB and DR-TB populations), then decreased (DS-TB). Males displayed lower adherence and steeper decreases than females (DS-TB). DS-TB patients aged 15–34 years compared to those >50 years displayed steeper decreases. Adherence was correlated within HCFs and differed between projects. TB treatment adherence decreased over time and differed between subgroups, suggesting that over time, some patients are at risk for non-adherence. The real-time monitoring of medication adherence using DATs provides opportunities for health care workers to identify patients who need greater levels of adherence support.

Operational lessons learned in conducting an international study on pharmacovigilance in pregnancy in resource-constrained settings: The WHO Global Vaccine safety Multi-Country collaboration project.

The WHO Global Vaccine Safety Multi-Country Collaboration study on safety in pregnancy aims to estimate the minimum detectable risk for selected perinatal and neonatal outcomes and assess the applicability of standardized case definitions for study outcomes and maternal immunization in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This paper documents the operational lessons learned from the study. A prospective observational study was conducted across 21 hospitals in seven countries. All births occurring at sites were screened to identify select perinatal and neonatal outcomes from May 2019 to August 2020. Up to 100 cases per outcome were recruited to assess the applicability of standardized case definitions. A multi-pronged study quality assurance plan was implemented. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on site functioning and project implementation was also assessed. Multi-layered ethics and administrative approvals, limited clinical documentation, difficulty in identifying outcomes requiring in-hospital follow-up, and poor quality internet connectivity emerged as important barriers to study implementation. Use of electronic platforms, application of a rigorous quality assurance plan with frequent interaction between the central and site teams helped improve data quality. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted data collection for up to 6 weeks in some sites. Our study succeeded in establishing an international hospital-based surveillance network for evaluating perinatal and neonatal outcomes using common study protocol and procedures in geographically diverse sites with differing levels of infrastructure, clinical and health-utilization practices. The enhanced surveillance capacity of participating sites shall help support future pharmacovigilance efforts for pregnancy interventions.

How did general practices organize care during the COVID-19 pandemic: the protocol of the cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study in 38 countries.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) play a crucial role in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic as the first point of contact for possibly infected patients and are responsible for short and long-term follow-up care of the majority of COVID-19 patients. Nonetheless, they experience many barriers to fulfilling this role. The PRICOV-19 study investigates how GP practices in 38 countries are organized during the COVID-19 pandemic to guarantee safe, effective, patient-centered, and equitable care. Also, the shift in roles and tasks and the wellbeing of staff members is researched. Finally, PRICOV-19 aims to study the association with practice- and health care system characteristics. It is expected that both characteristics of the GP practice and health care system features are associated with how GP practices can cope with these challenges. This paper describes the protocol of the study. METHODS: Using a cross-sectional design, data are collected through an online questionnaire sent to GP practices in 37 European countries and Israel. The questionnaire is developed in multiple phases, including a pilot study in Belgium. The final version includes 53 items divided into six sections: patient flow (including appointments, triage, and management for routine care); infection prevention; information processing; communication; collaboration and self-care; and practice and participant characteristics. In the countries where data collection is already finished, between 13 and 636 GP practices per country participated in the study. Questionnaire data are linked with OECD and HSMR data regarding national policy responses to the pandemic and analyzed using multilevel models considering the system- and practice-level. DISCUSSION: To the best of our knowledge, the PRICOV-19 study is the largest and most comprehensive study that examines how GP practices function during the COVID-19 pandemic. Its results can significantly contribute to better preparedness of primary health care systems across Europe for future major outbreaks of infectious diseases.

Hesitancy in COVID-19 vaccine uptake and its associated factors among the general adult population: a cross-sectional study in six Southeast Asian countries.

BACKGROUND: Vaccines are effective and reliable public health interventions against viral outbreaks and pandemics. However, hesitancy regarding the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccine is evident worldwide. Therefore, understanding vaccination-related behavior is critical in expanding the vaccine coverage to flatten the infection curve. This study explores the public perception regarding COVID-19 vaccination and identifies factors associated with vaccine hesitancy among the general adult populations in six Southeast Asian countries. METHODS: Using a snowball sampling approach, we conducted a descriptive cross-sectional study among 5260 participants in Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam between February and May 2021. Binary logistic regression analysis with a backward conditional approach was applied to identify factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. RESULTS: Of the total, 50.6% were female, and the median age was 30 years (range: 15-83 years). The majority of the participants believed that vaccination effectively prevents and controls COVID-19 (81.2%), and 84.0% would accept COVID-19 vaccines when they become available. They agreed that health providers' advice (83.0%), vaccination convenience (75.6%), and vaccine costs (62.8%) are essential for people to decide whether to accept COVID-19 vaccines. About half (49.3%) expressed their hesitancy to receive the COVID-19 vaccines. After adjustment for other covariates, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was significantly associated with age, residential area, education levels, employment status, and family economic status. Participants from Indonesia, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam were significantly more likely to express hesitancy in receiving COVID-19 vaccines than those from Philippines. CONCLUSIONS: In general, participants in this multi-country study showed their optimistic perception of COVID-19 vaccines' effectiveness and willingness to receive them. However, about half of them still expressed their hesitancy in getting vaccinated. The hesitation was associated with several socioeconomic factors and varied by country. Therefore, COVID-19 vaccination programs should consider these factors essential for increasing vaccine uptake in the populations.

Long-term exposure to air pollution and COVID-19 incidence: A multi-country study.

The study of the impacts of air pollution on COVID-19 has gained increasing attention. However, most of the existing studies are based on a single country, with a high degree of variation in the results reported in different papers. We attempt to inform the debate about the long-term effects of air pollution on COVID-19 by conducting a multi-country analysis using a spatial ecological design, including Canada, Italy, England and the United States. The model allows the residual spatial autocorrelation after accounting for covariates. It is concluded that the effects of PM2.5 and NO2 are inconsistent across countries. Specifically, NO2 was not found to be an important factor affecting COVID-19 infection, while a large effect for PM2.5 in the US is not found in the other three countries. The Population Attributable Fraction for COVID-19 incidence ranges from 3.4% in Canada to 45.9% in Italy, although with considerable uncertainty in these estimates.

Food Insecurity, Safety Nets, and Coping Strategies during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Multi-Country Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected food security across the world. As governments respond in different ways both with regards to containing the pandemic and addressing food insecurity, in parallel detailed datasets are being collected and analysed. To date, literature addressing food insecurity during the pandemic, using these datasets, has tended to focus on individual countries. By contrast, this paper provides the first detailed multi-country cross-sectional snapshot of the social dimensions of food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic across nine African countries (Chad, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Nigeria, South Africa, and Uganda). Econometric analysis reveals that female-headed households, the poor, and the less-formally educated, appear to suffer more in terms of food insecurity during this global pandemic. Importantly, our findings show that the negative consequences of the pandemic are disproportionately higher for lower-income households and those who had to borrow to make ends meet rather than relying on savings; impacts are country-specific; and there is considerable spatial heterogeneity within country food insecurity, suggesting that tailored policies will be required. These nine countries employ both food and cash safety nets, with the evidence suggesting that, at least when these data were collected, cash safety nets have been slightly more effective at reducing food insecurity. Our results provide a baseline that can be used by governments to help design and implement tailored policies to address food insecurity. Our findings can also be used as lessons to reshape policies to tackle the heterogeneous impacts of climate change.

Did the COVID-19 pandemic change the willingness to pay for an early warning system for infectious diseases in Europe?

The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the need for effective infectious disease outbreak prevention. This could entail installing an integrated, international early warning system, aiming to contain and mitigate infectious diseases outbreaks. The amount of resources governments should spend on such preventive measures can be informed by the value citizens attach to such a system. This was already recognized in 2018, when a contingent valuation willingness to pay (WTP) experiment was fielded, eliciting the WTP for such a system in six European countries. We replicated that experiment in the spring of 2020 to test whether and how WTP had changed during an actual pandemic (COVID-19), taking into account differences in infection rates and stringency of measures by government between countries. Overall, we found significant increases in WTP between the two time points, with mean WTP for an early warning system increasing by about 50% (median 30%), from around €20 to €30 per month. However, there were marked differences between countries and subpopulations, and changes were only partially explained by COVID-19 burden. We discuss possible explanations for and implication of our findings.

Mental Health among Adults during the COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown: A Cross-Sectional Multi-Country Comparison.

Despite the global impact of COVID-19, studies comparing the effects of COVID-19 on population mental health across countries are sparse. This study aimed to compare anxiety and depression symptoms during the COVID-19 lockdown among adults from 11 countries and to examine their associations with country-level COVID-19 factors and personal COVID-19 exposure. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among adults (≥18 years) in 11 countries (Brazil, Bulgaria, China, India, Ireland, North Macedonia, Malaysia, Singapore, Spain, Turkey, United States). Mental health (anxiety, depression, resilient coping, hope) and other study data were collected between June-August 2020. Of the 13,263 participants, 62.8% were female and 51.7% were 18-34 years old. Participants living in Brazil had the highest anxiety and depression symptoms while participants living in Singapore had the lowest. Greater personal COVID-19 exposure was associated with increased anxiety and depression symptoms, but country-level COVID-19 factors were not. Higher levels of hope were associated with reduced anxiety and depression; higher levels of resilient coping were associated with reduced anxiety but not depression. Substantial variations exist in anxiety and depression symptoms across countries during the COVID-19 lockdown, with personal COVID-19 exposure being a significant risk factor. Strategies that mitigate COVID-19 exposure and enhance hope and resilience may reduce anxiety and depression during global emergencies.

Hand-Washing Practices among Adolescents Aged 12-15 Years from 80 Countries.

The objectives were to (1) assess the prevalence of hand-washing practices across 80 countries and (2) assess frequency of hand-washing practice by economic status (country income and severe food insecurity), in a global representative sample of adolescents. Cross-sectional data from the Global School-based Student Health Survey 2003-2017 were analyzed. Data on age, sex, hand-washing practices in the past 30 days, and severe food insecurity (i.e., proxy of socioeconomic status) were self-reported. Multivariable logistic regression and meta-analysis with random effects based on country-wise estimates were conducted to assess associations. Adolescents (n = 209,584) aged 12-15 years [mean (SD) age 13.8 (1.0) years; 50.9% boys] were included in the analysis. Overall, the prevalence of hand-washing practices were as follows: never/rarely washing hands before eating (6.4%), after using toilet (5.6%), or with soap (8.8%). The prevalence of never/rarely washing hands after using the toilet (10.8%) or with soap (14.3%) was particularly high in low-income countries. Severe food insecurity was associated with 1.34 (95%CI = 1.25-1.43), 1.61 (95%CI = 1.50-1.73), and 1.44 (95%CI = 1.35-1.53) times higher odds for never/rarely washing hands before eating, after using the toilet, and with soap, respectively. A high prevalence of inadequate hand washing practices was reported, particularly in low-income countries and those with severe food insecurity. In light of the present COVID-19 pandemic and the rapid expansion being observed in low- and middle-income locations, interventions that disseminate good hand-washing practices are urgently required. Such interventions may also have cross-over benefits in relation to other poor sanitation-related diseases.