Impact of Biomedical Engineering on Human & social Dynamics: A Review on Recent Approaches Through Bioengineering from Recent Past to Post-Covid-19

INTRODUCTION: The paper aims to discuss the various issues/ problems that people face in day to day life. Using diverse scenarios ranging from mental health issues to common grafting procedures, the author here strives to link these issues to bioengineering and how they are being impacted by modern technology. Most methods and procedures discussed attempt to utilize day-to-day activities and ease of access. The paper has adopted rapid review method. For literature collection, Google scholar database has been used with a scope of specific keywords and time frame of 5 weeks to complete the study © COPYRIGHT RED FLOWER PUBLICATIONS PVT LTD

The impact of COVID-19 mitigation measures on sexual and reproductive health in low- and middle-income countries: a rapid review.

Pandemic mitigation measures can have a negative impact on access and provision of essential healthcare services including sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services. This rapid review looked at the literature on the impact of COVID-19 mitigation measures on SRH and gender-based violence (GBV) on women in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) using WHO rapid review guidance. We looked at relevant literature published in the English language from January 2020 to October 2021 from LMICs using WHO rapid review methods. A total of 114 articles were obtained from PubMed, Google Scholar and grey literature of which 20 met the eligible criteria. Our review found that there was an overall reduction in; (a) uptake of services as shown by lower antenatal, postnatal and family planning clinic attendance, (b) service delivery as shown by reduced health facility deliveries, and post abortion care services and (c) reproductive health outcomes as shown by an increase in incidence of GBV especially intimate partner violence. COVID-19 mitigation measures negatively impact SRH of women in LMICs. Findings from this review could inform policy makers in the health sector to recognise the potential adverse effects of COVID-19 responses on SRH in the country, and therefore implement mitigation measures.

Searching for evidence in public health emergencies: a white paper of best practices.

Objectives: Information professionals have supported medical providers, administrators and decision-makers, and guideline creators in the COVID-19 response. Searching COVID-19 literature presented new challenges, including the volume and heterogeneity of literature and the proliferation of new information sources, and exposed existing issues in metadata and publishing. An expert panel developed best practices, including recommendations, elaborations, and examples, for searching during public health emergencies. Methods: Project directors and advisors developed core elements from experience and literature. Experts, identified by affiliation with evidence synthesis groups, COVID-19 search experience, and nomination, responded to an online survey to reach consensus on core elements. Expert participants provided written responses to guiding questions. A synthesis of responses provided the foundation for focus group discussions. A writing group then drafted the best practices into a statement. Experts reviewed the statement prior to dissemination. Results: Twelve information professionals contributed to best practice recommendations on six elements: core resources, search strategies, publication types, transparency and reproducibility, collaboration, and conducting research. Underlying principles across recommendations include timeliness, openness, balance, preparedness, and responsiveness. Conclusions: The authors and experts anticipate the recommendations for searching for evidence during public health emergencies will help information specialists, librarians, evidence synthesis groups, researchers, and decision-makers respond to future public health emergencies, including but not limited to disease outbreaks. The recommendations complement existing guidance by addressing concerns specific to emergency response. The statement is intended as a living document. Future revisions should solicit input from a broader community and reflect conclusions of meta-research on COVID-19 and health emergencies.

The impact of technology systems and level of support in digital mental health interventions: a secondary meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The majority of people with a chronic disease (e.g., diabetes, hypertension, COPD) have more than one concurrent condition and are also at higher risk for developing comorbidities in mental health, including anxiety and depression. There is an urgent need for more relevant and accurate data on digital interventions in this area to prepare for an increase demand for mental health services. The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis of the digital mental health interventions for people with comorbid physical and mental chronic diseases to compare the effect of technology systems and level of support. METHODS: This secondary meta-analysis follows a rapid review of systematic reviews, a virtual workshop with knowledge users to identify research questions and a modified Delphi study to guide research methods: What types of digital health interventions (according to a recognized categorization) are the most effective for the management of concomitant mental health and chronic disease conditions in adults? We conducted a secondary analysis of the primary studies identified in the rapid review. Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts and applied inclusion criteria: RCT design using a digital mental health intervention in a population of adults with another chronic condition, published after 2010 in French or English, and including an outcome measurement of anxiety or depression. RESULTS: Seven hundred eight primary studies were extracted from the systematic reviews and 84 primary studies met the inclusion criteria Digital mental health interventions were significantly more effective than in-person care for both anxiety and depression outcomes. Online messaging was the most effective technology to improve anxiety and depression scores; however, all technology types were effective. Interventions partially supported by healthcare professionals were more effective than self-administered. CONCLUSIONS: While our meta-analysis identifies digital intervention's characteristics are associated with better effectiveness, all technologies and levels of support could be used considering implementation context and population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this review is registered in the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT) COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Service (ID 75).

[Evidence syntheses in public health: An overview]. / Evidenzsynthesen in Public Health: ein Überblick.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a high demand for rapid evidence syntheses to answer urgent public health questions. This article provides an overview of different types of reviews for public health questions and a synthesis of existing recommendations for the preparation of reviews. The aim is to support the planning of one's own review and the critical evaluation of published reviews. METHODS: The basis of this summary is an extensive search for guidelines and recommendations for different review types. Furthermore, internal journal clubs were held to determine knowledge needs and to critically discuss the various review types. For results dissemination, fact sheets were developed for the individual review types including the most important information, prerequisites and work steps, as well as a decision tree for identifying the appropriate review type for the respective question. RESULTS: Of the review types identified, Systematic, Rapid, Scoping, Umbrella, and Narrative Reviews were considered in more detail because they are particularly relevant to public health issues. Together with scoping and umbrella reviews, systematic reviews have the highest resource requirements due to the demands for extensive, systematic evidence synthesis and reproducibility. Rapid methods can accelerate the review process, for example by a very narrowly formulated question, a limited literature search, or the execution of certain steps by one instead of two persons. DISCUSSION: Systematic Reviews may be considered as the gold standard, but they were developed primarily for clinical questions relating to interventions. Instead, this article was focused on review types that consider the diversity of questions as well as the predominant use of quantitative methods in the field of public health. The fact sheets developed and the decision tree should enable low-threshold access to reviews while linking the perspectives of research and resource planning. They complement existing guidelines and recommendations. CONCLUSION: To answer the diverse spectrum of public health questions, various types of reviews with various requirements and approaches are available. Given this diversity, a systematic introduction can be helpful for researchers planning or assessing a review.

The mental health of laboratory and rehabilitation specialists during COVID-19: A rapid review.

Backgrounds: Healthcare workers have experienced considerable stress and burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic. Among these healthcare workers are medical laboratory professionals and rehabilitation specialists, specifically, occupational therapists, and physical therapists, who all perform critical services for the functioning of a healthcare system. Purpose: This rapid review examined the impact of the pandemic on the mental health of medical laboratory professionals (MLPs), occupational therapists (OTs) and physical therapists (PTs) and identified gaps in the research necessary to understand the impact of the pandemic on these healthcare workers. Methods: We systematically searched "mental health" among MLPs, OTs and PTs using three databases (PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and CINAHL). Results: Our search yielded 8887 articles, 16 of which met our criteria. Our results revealed poor mental health among all occupational groups, including burnout, depression, and anxiety. Notably, MLPs reported feeling forgotten and unappreciated compared to other healthcare groups. In general, there is a dearth of literature on the mental health of these occupational groups before and during the pandemic; therefore, unique stressors are not yet uncovered. Conclusions: Our results highlight poor mental health outcomes for these occupational groups despite the dearth of research. In addition to more research among these groups, we recommend that policymakers focus on improving workplace cultures and embed more intrinsic incentives to improve job retention and reduce staff shortage. In future emergencies, providing timely and accurate health information to healthcare workers is imperative, which could also help reduce poor mental health outcomes.

Digital interventions for substance use disorders in young people: rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Young people are disproportionately more likely than other age groups to use substances. The rise in substance use and related harms, including overdose, during the Covid-19 pandemic has created a critical need for more innovative and accessible substance use interventions. Digital interventions have shown effectiveness and can provide more engaging, less stigmatizing, and accessible interventions that meet the needs of young people. This review provides an overview of recent literature on the nature of recently published digital interventions for young people in terms of technologies used, substances targeted, intended outcomes and theoretical or therapeutic models employed. METHODS: Rapid review methodology was used to identify and assess the literature on digital interventions for young people. An initial keyword search was conducted using MEDLINE the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Health Technology Assessment Database (HTA) and PROSPERO for the years 2015-2020, and later updated to December 2021. Following a title/abstract and full-text screening of articles, and consensus decision on study inclusion, the data extraction process proceeded using an extraction grid developed for the study. Data synthesis relied on an adapted conceptual framework by Stockings, et al. that involved a three-level treatment spectrum for youth substance use (prevention, early intervention, and treatment) for any type of substance. RESULTS: In total, the review identified 43 articles describing 39 different digital interventions. Most were early interventions (n = 28), followed by prevention interventions (n = 6) and treatment interventions (n = 5). The identified digital technologies included web-based (n = 14), game-based (n = 10), mobile-based (n = 7), and computer-based (n = 5) technologies, and virtual reality (n = 3). Most interventions targeted alcohol use (n = 20) followed by tobacco/nicotine (n = 5), cannabis (n = 2), opioids (n = 2), ketamine (1) and multiple, or any substances (n = 9). Most interventions used a personalized or normative feedback approach and aimed to effect behaviour change as the intended outcome. Interestingly, a harm reduction approach guided only one of the 39 interventions. CONCLUSIONS: While web-based interventions represented the most common type of technology, more recently developed immersive and interactive technologies such as virtual reality and game-based interventions call for further exploration. Digital interventions focused mainly on alcohol use, reflecting less concern for tobacco, cannabis, co-occurring substance use, and illicit drug use. Specifically, the recent exacerbation in the opioid crisis throughout North American underlines the urgent need for more prevention-oriented digital interventions for opioid use. The uptake of digital interventions among youth also depends on the incorporation of harm reduction approaches.

Changes in mental health in the German child and adolescent population during the COVID-19 pandemic - Results of a rapid review.

Background: This rapid review examines changes in the mental health of the German child and adolescent population during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The basis are 39 publications, which were identified by means of systematic literature search (until 19.11.2021) and manual search. The databases of the included publications were systematized with regard to their representativeness for the general population, and the indicators used were categorized with regard to the depicted constructs and their reliability. Results: The large majority of the studies took place at the beginning of the pandemic until the summer plateau 2020. Representative studies mainly reported high levels of pandemic-related stress, increases in mental health problems, and negative impacts on the quality of life. Non-representative studies showed mixed results. Vulnerable groups could only be identified to a limited extent. Both routine and care-related data showed declines in the outpatient and inpatient service utilisation during the various waves of the pandemic followed by catch-up effects. Children and adolescents turned out to be more vulnerable during the pandemic compared to adults, but their stress levels varied with the waves of the pandemic and the related containment measures. Conclusions: A future forward-looking crisis and pandemic management requires a close-knit and continuous surveillance of the mental health of children as well as an improved identification of risk groups.

Rapid antigen-based and rapid molecular tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2: a rapid review with network meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.

BACKGROUND: The global spread of COVID-19 created an explosion in rapid tests with results in < 1 hour, but their relative performance characteristics are not fully understood yet. Our aim was to determine the most sensitive and specific rapid test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Design: Rapid review and diagnostic test accuracy network meta-analysis (DTA-NMA). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies assessing rapid antigen and/or rapid molecular test(s) to detect SARS-CoV-2 in participants of any age, suspected or not with SARS-CoV-2 infection. INFORMATION SOURCES: Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, up to September 12, 2021. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity and specificity of rapid antigen and molecular tests suitable for detecting SARS-CoV-2. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment: Screening of literature search results was conducted by one reviewer; data abstraction was completed by one reviewer and independently verified by a second reviewer. Risk of bias was not assessed in the included studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Random-effects meta-analysis and DTA-NMA. RESULTS: We included 93 studies (reported in 88 articles) relating to 36 rapid antigen tests in 104,961 participants and 23 rapid molecular tests in 10,449 participants. Overall, rapid antigen tests had a sensitivity of 0.75 (95% confidence interval 0.70-0.79) and specificity of 0.99 (0.98-0.99). Rapid antigen test sensitivity was higher when nasal or combined samples (e.g., combinations of nose, throat, mouth, or saliva samples) were used, but lower when nasopharyngeal samples were used, and in those classified as asymptomatic at the time of testing. Rapid molecular tests may result in fewer false negatives than rapid antigen tests (sensitivity: 0.93, 0.88-0.96; specificity: 0.98, 0.97-0.99). The tests with the highest sensitivity and specificity estimates were the Xpert Xpress rapid molecular test by Cepheid (sensitivity: 0.99, 0.83-1.00; specificity: 0.97, 0.69-1.00) among the 23 commercial rapid molecular tests and the COVID-VIRO test by AAZ-LMB (sensitivity: 0.93, 0.48-0.99; specificity: 0.98, 0.44-1.00) among the 36 rapid antigen tests we examined. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid molecular tests were associated with both high sensitivity and specificity, while rapid antigen tests were mainly associated with high specificity, according to the minimum performance requirements by WHO and Health Canada. Our rapid review was limited to English, peer-reviewed published results of commercial tests, and study risk of bias was not assessed. A full systematic review is required. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021289712.

From Centuries to Hours: The Journey of Research into Practice

COVID-19 has made the research-policy nexus visible as never before. Public health officials, doctors and scientists are standing alongside political and other leaders all around the world to promote research-informed health behaviors to ‘flatten the curve' of this global pandemic. Proper hand hygiene, physical distancing and use of masks are now either recommended or mandated everyday public health behaviors across the world. Obviously, application of research to public problem solving is not new. However, the pace of the journey from research to policy and practice has shortened at a similar exponential rate as the spread of the virus. This paper provides a historical overview of research-informed policy and practice. In doing so, it aims to build an understanding of how research is able to address COVID-related policy questions in almost real-time;how the demand-side consequences of this global pandemic have advanced research-informed policy and practice;and how policymakers can harness research to solve public policy problems in the future. © 2022 Copyright held by the owner/author(s).

Closed Endotracheal Suction Systems for COVID-19: Rapid Review.

BACKGROUND: The increase in admissions to intensive care units (ICUs) in 2020 and the morbidity and mortality associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection pose a challenge to the analysis of evidence of health interventions carried out in ICUs. One of the most common interventions in patients infected with the virus and admitted to ICUs is endotracheal aspiration. Endotracheal suctioning has also been considered one of the most contaminating interventions. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to analyze the benefits and risks of endotracheal suctioning using closed suction systems (CSS) in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: A rapid review was carried out using the following databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, LILACS, the Cochrane Library, and IBECS. The data search included articles in English and Spanish, published between 2010 and 2020, concerning adult patients, and using the key words "endotracheal," "suction," and "closed system." RESULTS: A total of 15 articles were included. The benefits and risks were divided into 3 categories: patient, care, and organization. Relating to the patient, we found differences in cardiorespiratory variables and changes in the ventilator, for example, improvement in patients with elevated positive and end-expiratory pressure due to maladaptation and alveolar collapse. Relating to care, we found a shorter suctioning time, by up to 1 minute. Relating to organization, we found fewer microorganisms on staff gloves. Other conflicting results between studies were related to ventilator-associated pneumonia, bacterial colonization, or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Aside from the need for quality research comparing open suction systems and CSS as used to treat COVID-19 patients, closed endotracheal suctioning has benefits in terms of shorter stay in the ICU and reduced environmental contamination, preventing ventilator disconnection from the patient, reducing the suctioning time-though it does produce the greatest number of mucosal occlusions-and preventing interpatient and patient-staff environmental contamination. New evidence in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is required in order to compare results and establish new guidelines.

A Rapid Systematic Review on the Experiences of Cancer Survivors Residing in Rural Areas during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused considerable disruption to cancer care and may have exacerbated existing challenges already faced by cancer survivors from rural areas. This has created a need for a rapid evidence synthesis to inform the development of tailored interventions that address the specific needs of rural cancer survivors who continue to be affected by the pandemic. The review was conducted following guidance from the Cochrane Rapid Review Methods Group. Database searches were performed via the EBSCOHost interface (includes MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO) on 25 May 2022 and supplemented with searches on Google Scholar. Peer-reviewed articles published after March 2020 that reported primary data on the experiences of cancer survivors residing in rural and remote settings during the pandemic were included. Findings were tabulated and written up narratively. Fourteen studies were included. The COVID-19 pandemic had a mostly detrimental impact on the experiences of rural cancer survivors. People's individual coping mechanisms were challenging for a range of reasons. Specifically, the pandemic impacted on their ability to access testing, treatment, check-ups and supportive care, their ability to maintain and access social support with close friends and family, as well as negative consequences to their finances and emotional wellbeing with some reporting feelings of psychological distress including depression and anxiety. This review provides important insight into the experiences of rural cancer survivors that may help inform tailored support in line with the needs and challenges faced because of the pandemic.

'We are all in the same storm but not in the same boat': the COVID pandemic and the Further Education Sector

The quotation in the title from a college leader is a stark reflection of the experience of the Further Education (FE) Sector during the COVID pandemic (2020–21). Traditionally regarded as a poor relation of the English education system, evidence from Sector sources suggest that the five COVID harms identified through a scoping review of the latest research closely mirror the main social and educational features of English general FE colleges. The pandemic has led to longer-term harms on vocational learning, with major disruptions to college-based courses and to apprenticeships, a stagnation situation captured in the metaphor 'educational long-COVID'. The analysis conceptualises the impact of the pandemic on FE provision and learners as leading to a 'COVID learning and skills equilibrium';whereas effective mitigations are conceptualised through the idea of 'COVID recovery ecosystems'. Rapid review evidence suggests that the most effective way of addressing system-wide disruption is the development of integrated, strategic actions at local and regional levels to address vocational learning losses, facilitate greater entry-to-employment and to create more job opportunities for young people. Without these longer-term measures it is likely that the negative effects of the pandemic on the FE Sector could become further entrenched. [ FROM AUTHOR]

Developing a Rapid Response Single IRB Model for Conducting Research During a Public Health Emergency.

Research is foundational for evidence-based management of patients. Clinical research, however, takes time to plan, conduct, and disseminate-a luxury that is rarely available during a public health emergency. The University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC) developed a single institutional review board (IRB), with a vision to establish a rapid review resource for a network focused on clinical research of emerging pathogens in the United States. A core aspect of successful initiation of research during a pandemic or epidemic is the ability to operationalize an approach for rapid ethical review of human subject research and conduct those reviews at multiple sites-without losing any of the substantive aspects of ethics review. This process must be cultivated in anticipation of a public health emergency. US guidance for operationalizing IRB review for multisite research in a public health emergency is not well studied and processes are not well established. UNMC sought to address operational gaps and identify the unique procedural needs of rapid response single IRB (RR-sIRB) review of multisite research by conducting a series of preparedness exercises to develop and test the RR-sIRB model. For decades, emergency responder, healthcare, and public health organizations have conducted emergency preparedness exercises to test requirements for emergency response. In this article, we describe 2 types of simulation exercises conducted by UNMC: workshops and tabletops. This effort represents a unique use of emergency preparedness exercises to develop, refine, and test rapid review functions for an sIRB and to validate readiness of regulatory research processes. Such processes are crucial for conducting rapid, ethical, and sound clinical research in public health emergencies.

A rapid review investigating the potential impact of a pandemic on the mental health of young people aged 12-25 years.

OBJECTIVES: In March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic. Adolescence and early adulthood are peak times for the onset of mental health difficulties. Exposure to a pandemic during this vulnerable developmental period places young people at significant risk of negative psychological experiences. The objective of this research was to summarise existing evidence on the potential impact of a pandemic on the mental health of 12-25 year olds. METHODS: A rapid review of the published peer-reviewed literature, published between 1985 and 2020, using PsycINFO (Proquest) and Medline (Proquest) was conducted. Narrative synthesis was used across studies to identify key themes and concepts. RESULTS: This review found 3,359 papers, which was reduced to 12 papers for data extraction. Results regarding the prevalence of psychological difficulties in youth were mixed, with some studies finding this group experience heightened distress during an infectious disease outbreak, and others finding no age differences or higher distress among adults. Gender, coping, self-reported physical health and adoption of precautionary measures appear to play a role in moderating the psychological impact of an infectious disease outbreak. Most studies were conducted after the peak of an epidemic/pandemic or in the recovery period. CONCLUSIONS: More longitudinal research with young people, particularly adolescents in the general population, before and during the early stages of an infectious disease outbreak is needed to obtain a clear understanding of how best to support young people during these events.

Priority III: top 10 rapid review methodology research priorities identified using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

OBJECTIVES: A rapid review is a form of evidence synthesis considered a resource-efficient alternative to the conventional systematic review. Despite a dramatic rise in the number of rapid reviews commissioned and conducted in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, published evidence on the optimal methods of planning, doing, and sharing the results of these reviews is lacking. The Priority III study aimed to identify the top 10 unanswered questions on rapid review methodology to be addressed by future research. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A modified James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership approach was adopted. This approach used two online surveys and a virtual prioritization workshop with patients and the public, reviewers, researchers, clinicians, policymakers, and funders to identify and prioritize unanswered questions. RESULTS: Patients and the public, researchers, reviewers, clinicians, policymakers, and funders identified and prioritized the top 10 unanswered research questions about rapid review methodology. Priorities were identified throughout the entire review process, from stakeholder involvement and formulating the question, to the methods of a systematic review that are appropriate to use, through to the dissemination of results. CONCLUSION: The results of the Priority III study will inform the future research agenda on rapid review methodology. We hope this will enhance the quality of evidence produced by rapid reviews, which will ultimately inform decision-making in the context of healthcare.

Factors that influence mental health of university and college students in the UK: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Worsening mental health of students in higher education is a public policy concern and the impact of measures to reduce transmission of COVID-19 has heightened awareness of this issue. Preventing poor mental health and supporting positive mental wellbeing needs to be based on an evidence informed understanding what factors influence the mental health of students. OBJECTIVES: To identify factors associated with mental health of students in higher education. METHODS: We undertook a systematic review of observational studies that measured factors associated with student mental wellbeing and poor mental health. Extensive searches were undertaken across five databases. We included studies undertaken in the UK and published within the last decade (2010-2020). Due to heterogeneity of factors, and diversity of outcomes used to measure wellbeing and poor mental health the findings were analysed and described narratively. FINDINGS: We included 31 studies, most of which were cross sectional in design. Those factors most strongly and consistently associated with increased risk of developing poor mental health included students with experiences of trauma in childhood, those that identify as LGBTQ and students with autism. Factors that promote wellbeing include developing strong and supportive social networks. Students who are prepared and able to adjust to the changes that moving into higher education presents also experience better mental health. Some behaviours that are associated with poor mental health include lack of engagement both with learning and leisure activities and poor mental health literacy. CONCLUSION: Improved knowledge of factors associated with poor mental health and also those that increase mental wellbeing can provide a foundation for designing strategies and specific interventions that can prevent poor mental health and ensuring targeted support is available for students at increased risk.

COVID-19 and family violence: A rapid review of literature published up to 1 year after the pandemic declaration.

Background: After the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic on March 11, 2020, public health restrictions were introduced to slow COVID-19 transmission and prevent health systems overload globally. Work-from-home requirements, online schooling, and social isolation measures required adaptations that may have exposed parents and children to family violence, including intimate partner violence and child abuse and neglect, especially in the early days of the pandemic. Thus, we sought to: (1) examine the occurrence of family violence; (2) identify factors associated with family violence; and (3) identify relevant recommendations, from COVID-19 literature published up to 1 year after the pandemic declaration. Methods: This review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021241622), employed rapid review methods, and extracted data from eligible papers in medical and health databases published between December 1, 2019 and March 11, 2021 in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Embase. Findings: 28 articles including 29 studies were included in the rapid review. While many studies of families/households revealed rises in family violence incidence, official justice, police, and emergency department records noted declines during the pandemic. Parental stress, burnout, mental distress (i.e. depression), difficulty managing COVID-19 measures, social isolation, and financial and occupational losses were related to increases in family violence. Health services should adopt approaches to prevent family violence, treat victims in the context of public health restrictions, and increase training for digital service usage by health and educational professionals. Interpretation: Globally, restrictions aimed to limit the spread of COVID-19 may have increased the risk factors and incidence of family violence in communities. Official records of family violence may be biased toward under-reporting in the context of pandemics and should be interpreted with caution. Funding: RESOLVE Alberta, Canada and the Emerging Leaders in the Americas Program (ELAP), Global Affairs Canada.

Text Messages in the Field of Mental Health: Rapid Review of the Reviews.

Background: While mental health problems constitute a worldwide concern contributing to the global rates of morbidity and mortality, conventional mental healthcare services do not meet the current needs. Text messages (TM) represent a live model that incorporates technology into health services, spanning a large number of health conditions and playing different roles that may support the current healthcare system. Objective: To examine the TM services in the field of mental health, regarding their effectiveness, feasibility, acceptability, and economic evaluation in different contexts of mental health diagnoses and during critical times, when provided to individuals with mental health symptoms/disorders. Methods: This rapid review was conducted through an online search in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and Medline databases. The review targeted the review studies which examined online or mobile addiction and mental health services, utilizing TM services. The search was run from the inception up to September 30, 2021. Results: Sixty review articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. All reviews were published over the last decade. The results showed that people of a young age were fairly represented, and most reviews were run over substance use disorders (SUD), including Alcohol. Most reviews examined the effectiveness outcomes of the texting service, while to a lesser extent the acceptability and feasibility, among others. Texting services were reported as effective in psychotic disorders and SUD. However, the results related to depression and anxiety were mixed. Most reviews reported a considerably high risk of bias among their included studies. High satisfaction and acceptability of the texting services were reported for patients with various mental health conditions, including those with severe mental illness. Conclusions: This rapid review highlighted the applications, usability, benefits, and satisfaction with the TM in the field of mental health. For a higher quality of evidence, future studies should consider TM interventions in the contexts with mixed results or a dearth of literature, and during critical times, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Policy- and decision-makers, therefore, need to further support text-based services with guided investments in interventions that were evidenced to be accepted, economic and feasible.

Lessons learnt: Undertaking rapid reviews on public health and social measures during a global pandemic.

Public health and social measures (PHSM) have been central to the COVID-19 response. Consequently, there has been much pressure on decision-makers to make evidence-informed decisions and on researchers to synthesize the evidence regarding these measures. This article describes our experiences, responses and lessons learnt regarding key challenges when planning and conducting rapid reviews of PHSM during the COVID-19 pandemic. Stakeholder consultations and scoping reviews to obtain an overview of the evidence inform the scope of reviews that are policy-relevant and feasible. Multiple complementary reviews serve to examine the benefits and harms of PHSM across different populations and contexts. Conceiving reviews of effectiveness as adaptable living reviews helps to respond to evolving evidence needs and an expanding evidence base. An appropriately skilled review team and good planning, coordination and communication ensures smooth and rigorous processes and efficient use of resources. Scientific rigor, the practical implications of PHSM-related complexity and likely time savings should be carefully weighed in deciding on methodological shortcuts. Making the best possible use of modeling studies represents a particular challenge, and methods should be carefully chosen, piloted and implemented. Our experience raises questions regarding the nature of rapid reviews and regarding how different types of evidence should be considered in making decisions about PHSM during a global pandemic. We highlight the need for readily available protocols for conducting studies on the effectiveness, unintended consequences and implementation of PHSM in a timely manner, as well as the need for rapid review standards tailored to "rapid" versus "emergency" mode reviewing.