Pandemic-Related Innovations in Oncology Nursing Research: Seeking the Positive: lthough COVID-19 was a major setback for completing and initiating projects, it ushered in a new era for investigators

The article focuses on the scientists across industry, academic and healthcare settings that were forced to halt their ongoing research studies because of isolation mandates associated with the management of contagion in the COVID-19 pandemic. Topics include examines for many scientists, this unprecedented stoppage continued for many months and not only disrupted preexisting studies but delayed the development of new work.

Primary Care Research Is Hard to Do During COVID-19: Challenges and Solutions.

Conducting research in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic is hard, due to baseline stresses on primary care, which have been compounded by the pandemic. We acknowledge and validate primary care researchers' frustrations. Using our experience on over 15 individual projects during the pandemic we identify 3 key challenges to conducting primary care research: (1) practice delivery trickle-down effects, (2) limited/changing resources and procedures for research, and (3) a generally tense milieu in US society during the pandemic. We present strategies, informed by a set of questions, to help researchers decide how to address these challenges observed during our studies. In order to overcome and grow from these challenging times we encourage normalization and self-compassion, and encourage researchers and funders to embrace pragmatic and adaptive research designs as the circumstances with COVID-19 evolve over time.

"We're already doing this work": ethical research with community-based organizations.

BACKGROUND: Public health research frequently relies on collaborations with community-based organizations, and these partnerships can be essential to the success of a project. However, while public health ethics and oversight policies have historically focused on ensuring that individual subjects are protected from unethical or unfair practices, there are few guidelines to protect the organizations which facilitate relationships with - and are frequently composed of - these same vulnerable populations. As universities, governments, and donors place a renewed emphasis on the need for community engaged research to address systematic drivers of health inequity, it is vital that the ways in which research is conducted does not uphold the same intersecting systems of gender, race, and class oppression which led to the very same health inequities of interest. METHODS: To understand how traditional notions of public health research ethics might be expanded to encompass partnerships with organizations as well as individuals, we conducted qualitative interviews with 39 staff members (executive directors and frontline) at community-based organizations that primarily serve people who use drugs, Black men who have sex with men, and sex workers across the United States from January 2016 - August 2017. We also conducted 11 in-depth interviews with professional academic researchers with experience partnering with CBOs that serve similar populations. Transcripts were analyzed thematically using emergent codes and a priori codes derived from the Belmont Report. RESULTS: The concepts of respect, beneficence, and justice are a starting point for collaboration with CBOs, but participants deepened them beyond traditional regulatory concepts to consider the ethics of relationships, care, and solidarity. These concepts could and should apply to the treatment of organizations that participate in research just as they apply to individual human subjects, although their implementation will differ when applied to CBOs vs individual human subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Academic-CBO partnerships are likely to be more successful for both academics and CBOs if academic researchers work to center individual-level relationship building that is mutually respectful and grounded in cultural humility. More support from academic institutions and ethical oversight entities can enable more ethically grounded relationships between academic researchers, academic institutions, and community based organizations.

Research interrupted: applying the CONSERVE 2021 Statement to a randomized trial of rehabilitation during critical illness affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

RATIONALE: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted non-COVID critical care trials globally as intensive care units (ICUs) prioritized patient care and COVID-specific research. The international randomized controlled trial CYCLE (Critical Care Cycling to Improve Lower Extremity Strength) was forced to halt recruitment at all sites in March 2020, creating immediate challenges. We applied the CONSERVE (CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstance) statement as a framework to report the impact of the pandemic on CYCLE and describe our mitigation approaches. METHODS: On March 23, 2020, the CYCLE Methods Centre distributed a standardized email to determine the number of patients still in-hospital and those requiring imminent 90-day endpoint assessments. We assessed protocol fidelity by documenting attempts to provide the in-hospital randomized intervention (cycling or routine physiotherapy) and collect the primary outcome (physical function 3-days post-ICU discharge) and 90-day outcomes. We advised sites to prioritize data for the study's primary outcome. We sought feedback on pandemic barriers related to trial procedures. RESULTS: Our main Methods Centre mitigation strategies included identifying patients at risk for protocol deviations, communicating early and frequently with sites, developing standardized internal tools focused on high-risk points in the protocol for monitoring patient progress, data entry, and validation, and providing guidance to conduct some research activities remotely. For study sites, our strategies included determining how institutional pandemic research policies applied to CYCLE, communicating with the Methods Centre about capacity to continue any part of the research, and developing contingency plans to ensure the protocol was delivered as intended. From 15 active sites (12 Canada, 2 US, 1 Australia), 5 patients were still receiving the study intervention in ICUs, 6 required primary outcomes, and 17 required 90-day assessments. With these mitigation strategies, we attempted 100% of ICU interventions, 83% of primary outcomes, and 100% of 90-day assessments per our protocol. CONCLUSIONS: We retained all enrolled patients with minimal missing data using several time-sensitive strategies. Although CONSERVE recommends reporting only major modifications incurred by extenuating circumstances, we suggest that it also provides a helpful framework for reporting mitigation strategies with the goal of improving research transparency and trial management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03471247. Registered on March 20, 2018.

The COVID-19 crisis, a strategic change for tourism? Analysis of international research

The global confinement linked to COVID-19 has been conducive to reflections and exchanges between researchers around the world, which this article summarizes. In the short term, the coronavirus crisis will have destructive effects on the tourism industry. However, researchers think and even hope that the crisis will radically transform mobility on a global scale and that tourism will become more responsible and more sustainable. The crisis will not revolutionize the tourism industry overnight, but it will induce operational and strategic changes at several levels.

The experience of non-clinical research staff during the COVID-19 pandemic: key learning points

The COVID-19 pandemic has created and exacerbated many challenges and difficulties, but research departments across the UK were able to adapt and delivery research at an unparalleled rate. This article discusses the work of a large research department and the role that non-clinical staff played in coordinating a considerable research response to the pandemic. The outputs of the team during this time will be discussed, as well as discussion of how individuals adapted and how change management can be used to identify key recommendations and learning points. These learning points should be considered in any future crisis situations when managing non-clinical healthcare teams, both in research and the wider NHS.

EFL learners during and beyond COVID 19 pandemic: advantages, challenges and solutions of online learning

Institutions change their educational processes in a relatively short period of time to solely online with an aim to continue teaching and learning. We examined EFL students' attitudes about online learning, their ability to absorb knowledge, and their usage of E-learning platforms in this respect. A semi-structured questionnaire was used to conduct an online survey.225 students from King Khalid University one of the biggest university in KSA participated in the study. The goal of this study is to investigate the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the EFL learning process both during and after it. The benefits of online learning revealed in previous research appear to be diminishing, while the drawbacks grow more evident. In the context of the pandemic-induced crisis, the hierarchy of difficulties that occur in online learning shifts. The most major difficulties are technological challenges, and the EFL students faced issues at various levels. Students, on the other hand, also attributed the last position to a lack of contact with instructors or inadequate communication with them. The research implications for institutions and researchers are explored considering these findings. The findings also revealed the influence of different locations on students' views about the environment. The students did not show more inquisitiveness to continue online learning, if the universities go back to traditional learning. The co-variance matrix and objective function were also created for all the 30 questions.

Beliefs about COVID-19 prevention and preferences for virtual nutrition education for the SNAP-Ed program

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Education (SNAP-Ed) staff across Louisiana distributed a survey to their network of potential program participants and partners who work with people eligible for SNAP-Ed. The survey asked participants to report their attitudes about behaviors used to slow the spread of COVID-19 and preferences for the delivery of nutrition education. Participants also reported their race, age and eligibility for the SNAP-Ed program so that researchers could assess whether attitudes and preferences differed across these categories. Of the 458 participants completing the survey, the majority were white (62%), female (91%), aged 18 to 50 (65%) and eligible for SNAP-Ed (57%). Most agreed that it was important to wash their hands (99%) and physically distance from others (95%) to avoid the coronavirus, but a smaller majority felt that it was important to wear face masks in public (79%). Attitudes toward wearing masks were significantly different across categories of race. African Americans were more concerned about the risk posed by in-person programming and more likely to report that they would prefer live virtual lessons, online quizzes and workbooks compared to white participants. Respondents over 50 were significantly more likely to say it was important to wear masks, less likely to feel uncomfortable covering their faces and more likely to prefer a written or workbook format for nutrition lessons compared to participants under 50. SNAP-Ed-eligible participants did not differ significantly from higher-income participants in their attitudes toward virus prevention behaviors but were more likely to say they would prefer online quizzes as part of virtual nutrition education. Results indicate that it may be appropriate for nutrition education conducted by the LSU AgCenter to occur in person because most potential program participants agree with COVID-19 precautions. In addition, the attitudes and preferences expressed by African American participants indicate that nutrition education for African Americans may better reach participants if it is done virtually rather than in-person.

Ethics committee experience during COVID-19 emergency. a brief report

Background: The health crisis caused by COVID-19 required the prompt launch of research in order to generate scientific evidence pertaining to the new disease oriented to control its devastating effects and continuous spread. Therefore, it was essential to adapt the work flow of Research Ethics Committees, to prioritize and to accelerate the evaluation of projects related to this disease.

Comprehensive machine learning analysis on the phenotypes of COVID-19 patients using transcriptome data. (Special issue.)

Purpose: Evolving technologies allow us to measure human molecular data in a wide reach. Those data are extensively used by researchers in many studies and help in advancements of medical field. Transcriptome, proteome, metabolome, and epigenome are few such molecular data. This study utilizes the transcriptome data of COVID-19 patients to uncover the dysregulated genes in the SARS-COV-2. Method: Selected genes are used in machine learning models to predict various phenotypes of those patients. Ten different phenotypes are studied here such as time since onset, COVID-19 status, connection between age and COVID-19, hospitalization status and ICU status, using classification models. Further, this study compares molecular characterization of COVID-19 patients with other respiratory diseases.

Global research evidence on COVID19- and anxiety: a bibliometric analysis. (Special issue.)

Background: The global outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on the overall health and well-being brought fear, anxiety, worry, and mental health issues. Thus, a bibliometric analysis of COVID-19 and anxiety-related publications was performed to examine the current research trends and prospects to support policymakers, funding agencies, and researchers to safeguard the global population from post-COVID-19 psychological impact.

Developing a Framework for a Remote, International Research Collaboration Among Graduate Students: Lessons Learned During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Purpose: This article describes a framework for developing international research collaborations among graduate students. Central to this framework is the utility of institutional and association-based academic mentorship programs in developing collaborative partnerships. We illustrate how the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's Mentoring Academic Research Careers program served as a vehicle for fostering remote collaboration and provided training experiences for graduate students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusions: This model successfully supported doctoral students in developing an ongoing and sustainable research partnership during a challenging time when in-person networking opportunities were unavailable. This partnership provided a unique pathway for professional development that complemented formal academic training. More broadly, international collaboration experiences such as these provide valuable, skill-based training for all students, such that they are better equipped to serve diverse populations and as members of diverse teams. We offer recommendations for others endeavoring to develop international collaboration initiatives for students paired with mentorship.

Is the SARS-cov2 evolved in human being: a prospective genetic analysis

COVID-19 is the deadly respiratory disease of the century caused by new type unknown origin Coronavirus. The recent effort of the word researchers is toward finding the origin of the virus. The current study investigated the extent of molecular similarity and divergence between SARS-CoV2 and other related Coronavirus. An attempt has been made to investigate the epidemiological study of this new contagious virus using molecular biology techniques. The phylogenetic trees for all human coronaviruses with the novel Coronavirus have been built using a several complete amino acid sequences of the four known structural proteins, S (spike), E (envelope), M (membrane), and N (nucleocapsid). The result of the study revealed that the SARS-CoV2 is related to human SARS-CoV isolated from different countries very cloely, especially those strains recovered from China in recent times, 2020. The evolutionary changes observed in the inserted 23 amino acids in the RNA binding domain (RBD) of the coronvirus spike glycoprotein which cannot be detected in any other human coronavirus. Moreover, the 2019-nCoV is not closely related to other alpha, beta and gamma human Coronavirus, including MERS-CoV. The current study concluded that 2019-nCoV is more likely believed to originated from SARS-CoV. The probability is more vital to be originated from the strain isolated in China in 2020, which is coincident with the spraed of COVID-19 in the same country. The phyloepidemiologic analyses suggested that the coronaviruses are circulating in human hosts evolving gradually by times in response to the different environment stimuli facing the virus inside the host in different geographical areas. Furthermore, the analysis showed the flow of transmission, and evolutionary changes of SARS-CoV2 which may be directed from the transmission of SARS-CoV from human to Bat and Pangolin then jumped to human again in the crowded market Wuhan city in China.

Immunological approaches and different strategies for vaccine development against SARS-CoV-2

Globally, SARS-CoV-2 outbreak is considered as pandemic viral infection by the World Health Organization (WHO). In the immunological response aspect, a very limited understanding has been progressed, mainly innate and adaptive immunity responses toward the virus. SARS-COV-2 causes severe respiratory disease and sometimes ended with the death. The body of the patients has ability to develop the immunity to cure the patient and more importantly both humoral and cellular immunity have studied against SARS-COV-2. There are different immune responses against the viral infection as it has seen in other previous diseases such as SARS-COV and MESR. On the base on immune response detected in recovered patients, scientists have started to develop the vaccines. Moreover, there are different strategies that used by researchers and pharmacological companies to develop vaccines including attenuated or killed viruses, RNA of a spike protein, and vector expressing a particular protein of the virus. The common antibodies have detected to work against SARS-COV-2 in sera of infected or recovered patients are immunoglobin G (IgG) and immunoglobin M (IgM). The sera of patients recovered from COVID-19, after tittering of immunoglobulins (IgG titer) can be used for either treatment of disease or prophylaxis of infection by SARS-COV-2. This study gives an update on the current immunological approaches and vaccination strategies for the emerging SARS-COV-2, and discusses the challenges and hurdles to overcome for developing efficacious vaccines against this dangerous pathogen.

Ethical Inclusion of Health Care Workers in Covid-19 Research.

Employees are often considered a vulnerable research population due to concerns about consent and confidentiality, but there is insufficient guidance regarding their ethical inclusion in research. In the context of Covid-19, frontline health care workers comprise a particularly relevant research population in light of their risks of viral exposure and psychological strain, among other factors. They may therefore be targeted for research conducted at their place of employment and benefit from participating in such research. Beyond Covid-19, there are other circumstances in which health care workers may be considered for inclusion in research conducted by or with the involvement of their colleagues and employers. As investigators, sponsors, institutional review boards, and others assess the ethical permissibility of these scenarios, as well as relevant protections, we recommend systematic consideration of social and scientific value, validity, fairness, risks and benefits, voluntary consent, respect, and independent review. There is often good reason to specifically target health care workers for inclusion in Covid-19 research (beyond convenience), and they should not be excluded from research offering the prospect of direct benefit. However, additional safeguards may be necessary in employer-based research to avoid scientific bias, promote voluntariness, and solicit stakeholder input. Research personnel should be permitted to enroll in their own Covid-19 studies only when participation offers them the prospect of unique benefits.