Demystifying COVID-19 publications: institutions, journals, concepts, and topics.

OBJECTIVE: We analyzed the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19) to understand leading research institutions, collaborations among institutions, major publication venues, key research concepts, and topics covered by pandemic-related research. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive analysis of authors' institutions and relationships, automatic content extraction of key words and phrases from titles and abstracts, and topic modeling and evolution. Data visualization techniques were applied to present the results of the analysis. RESULTS: We found that leading research institutions on COVID-19 included the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the US National Institutes of Health, and the University of California. Research studies mostly involved collaboration among different institutions at national and international levels. In addition to bioRxiv, major publication venues included journals such as The BMJ, PLOS One, Journal of Virology, and The Lancet. Key research concepts included the coronavirus, acute respiratory impairments, health care, and social distancing. The ten most popular topics were identified through topic modeling and included human metapneumovirus and livestock, clinical outcomes of severe patients, and risk factors for higher mortality rate. CONCLUSION: Data analytics is a powerful approach for quickly processing and understanding large-scale datasets like CORD-19. This approach could help medical librarians, researchers, and the public understand important characteristics of COVID-19 research and could be applied to the analysis of other large datasets.

Outbreak of Mycoplasma pneumoniae at a military academy.

In 2019, an outbreak of Mycoplasma pneumoniae occurred at a military academy in China. The attack rate (10.08%,60/595) was significantly different among the units. High-intensity training and crowded environments to which cadets are exposed are the high risk factors for the outbreak of M. pneumoniae. In-time prevention and control measures effectively controlled the spread of the epidemic.

The impact of COVID-19 on academic productivity by female physicians and researchers in transfusion medicine.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have highlighted the disparities in gender equity that exist in different medical specialties. The COVID-19 pandemic has further heightened the inequity faced by female physicians as they are challenged by increasing household and childcare duties in addition to their professional responsibilities. Given these hurdles, fewer women than men have published in various medical disciplines. In this brief report, we wanted to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the academic output of female physicians and researchers in transfusion medicine. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We compared all articles in four transfusion medicine journals published from January 1 to July 31, 2019 with the same time period in 2020. Overall, 1024 articles were reviewed for whether they included women as first or senior authors. RESULTS: Overall, women were first authors in 45.9% (n = 458) of all publications and senior authors in 35% (n = 356) of all publications. There was a statistically significant decrease in the percentage of women as first authors between 2019 (49.1%) and 2020 (42.7%) (p = .04). There was no significant change in the percentage of women as senior authors between 2019 (35.4%) and 2020 (35.5%) (p = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to other medical specialties, the COVID-19 pandemic has further increased the disparities faced by female researchers in transfusion medicine as evidenced by a decrease in publications with women as first authors.

Cancer inpatients with COVID-19: A report from the Brazilian National Cancer Institute.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the demographic and clinical characteristics of cancer inpatients with COVID-19 exploring clinical outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective search in the electronic medical records of cancer inpatients admitted to the Brazilian National Cancer Institute from April 30, 2020 to May 26, 2020 granted identification of 181 patients with COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR. RESULTS: The mean age was 55.3 years (SD ± 21.1). Comorbidities were present in 110 (60.8%) cases. The most prevalent solid tumors were breast (40 [22.1%]), gastrointestinal (24 [13.3%]), and gynecological (22 [12.2%]). Among hematological malignancies, lymphoma (20 [11%]) and leukemia (10 [5.5%]) predominated. Metastatic disease accounted for 90 (49.7%) cases. In total, 63 (34.8%) had recently received cytotoxic chemotherapy. The most common complications were respiratory failure (70 [38.7%]), septic shock (40 [22.1%]) and acute kidney injury (33 [18.2%]). A total of 60 (33.1%) patients died due to COVID-19 complications. For solid tumors, the COVID-19-specific mortality rate was 37.7% (52 out of 138 patients) and for hematological malignancies, 23.5% (8 out of 34). According to the univariate analysis COVID-19-specific mortality was significantly associated with age over 75 years (P = .002), metastatic cancer (p <0.001), two or more sites of metastases (P < .001), the presence of lung (P < .001) or bone metastases (P = .001), non-curative treatment or best supportive care intent (P < .001), higher C-reactive protein levels (P = .002), admission due to COVID-19 (P = .009), and antibiotics use (P = .02). After multivariate analysis, cases with admission due to symptoms of COVID-19 (P = .027) and with two or more metastatic sites (P < .001) showed a higher risk of COVID-19-specific death. CONCLUSION: This is the first Brazilian cohort of cancer patients with COVID-19. The rates of complications and COVID-19-specific death were significantly high.

Social Media Perceptions of Surgical Cancer Care in the Era of COVID-19: A Global Cross-Sectional Study.

PURPOSE: The rapid dissemination of information through social media renders a profound lens to evaluate perceptions of emerging topics, especially in the context of a global pandemic. The primary objective of this cross-sectional study was to elucidate trends on social media in the setting of surgical cancer care affected by the COVID-19 pandemic across the globe. METHODS: A public search of Twitter from April 1 to 30, 2020, was conducted, which yielded 996 posts related to COVID-19 and cancer. Two authors (E.J.K. and H.S.) individually reviewed all posts and recorded the post category, engagement, author category, and geographic location. Data were then analyzed through descriptive analyses. Only English-language posts were included, and any noncancer- or non-COVID-related posts were excluded from the analysis. RESULTS: A total of 734 unique authors from 26 different countries wrote 996 relevant posts that averaged 12.0 likes, 4.7 retweets, and 0.5 hashtags per post. Only 2.3% (23 of 996) of posts included a video. Authors of the included tweets most frequently were friends and families of patients (183; 18.4%), academic institutions or organizations (182; 18.3%), and physicians (138; 13.9%). Topics of importance were cancellations of surgeries (299; 40.1%), COVID-19 education (211; 121.2%), and research studies (93; 9.3%). The United Kingdom and the United States made up 81.5% of the cohort, followed by Canada (6.6%) and India (2.4%). Of posts where a specific type of surgery was identified (196), the most common type mentioned was breast cancer (50; 25.5%), followed by lung cancer (37; 18.9%) and urologic cancer (22; 11.2%). CONCLUSION: This analysis provides insight into the resulting impacts of COVID-19 on the global discussion of surgical cancer care.

To evaluate the effect of COVID-19 pandemic and national lockdown on patient care at a tertiary-care ophthalmology institute.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of COVID-19 pandemic and national lockdown on patient care at a tertiary-care ophthalmology institute. METHODS: Records of all the patients who presented from March 25th to May 3rd, 2020 were scanned to evaluate the details regarding the presenting complaints, diagnosis, advised treatment and surgical interventions. RESULTS: The number of outpatient department visits, retinal laser procedures, intravitreal injections and cataract surgeries during this lockdown decreased by 96.5%, 96.5%, 98.7% and 99.7% respectively compared from the corresponding time last year. Around 38.8% patients could be triaged as non-emergency cases based on history alone while 59.5% patients could be triaged as non-emergency cases after examination. Only eighty-four patients opted for video-consultation from April 15th to May 3rd, 2020. Nine patients presented with perforated corneal ulcer, but could not undergo penetrating keratoplasty due to the lack to available donor corneal tissue. One of these patients had to undergo evisceration due to disease progression. Two patients with open globe injury presented late after trauma and had to undergo enucleation. Around 9% patients could not undergo the advised urgent procedure due to logistical issues related to the lockdown. CONCLUSION: A significant number of patients could not get adequate treatment during the lockdown period. Hospitals need to build capacity to cater to the expected patient surge post-COVID-19-era, especially those requiring immediate in-person attention. A large number of patients can be classified as non-emergency cases. These patients need to be encouraged to follow-up via video-consultation to carve adequate in-person time for the high-risk patients.