Mental Health Condition among University Students of Bangladesh during the Critical COVID-19 Period.

Bangladesh's education sector has been in a state of flux since COVID-19. During the pandemic, all university campuses were closed. There was a mental health issue among the students. This study aims to examine the mental health condition and the determinants that contribute to adverse mental health conditions among university students of Bangladesh. A survey was performed online among university students in Bangladesh, in mid-June 2020 when averaging 3345 affected cases of the population daily. The convenience sampling technique was used and the survey gathered data from 365 university students. The relationship between general information and Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale 21 (DASS-21) subscales of university students was determined. The questionnaire was administered to respondents during the pandemic, which ensured fast replies. Linear regression models were used for statistical analysis. University students indicated normal levels of depression (30.41%), anxiety (43.29%), and stress (47.40%). However, a disproportionate number of extremely depressed, anxious, and stressed university students suggested a mental health status of concern. There were significant connections between the individual's opinion of social satisfaction, mental health concerns, and the present location's safety with an undesirable mental health condition. Female students were shown to be much more anxious and stressed than male students. Capital Dhaka city students were more depressed and anxious than students outside of Dhaka. Financial and psychological support for students may help mitigate the psychological impact. Authorities should make effective efforts to reduce mental health problems among these students. This research may aid organizations, health care providers, and social workers in their attempts to prepare for and respond to pandemics.

Drivers and barriers of virtual reality adoption in UK AEC industry

Purpose>Virtual reality (VR) offers unique features of a three-dimensional (3D) model during early design stages in the virtual environment with immersive functions. Although the potential of VR is to increase the effectiveness and productivity of the project phases from initial concept design to detailed design preparation. VR adoption in the United Kingdom (UK) Architectural Engineering and Construction (AEC) sector is slow compared to other sectors. This research focuses on ascertaining the drivers and barriers of VR in construction projects in the UK.Design/methodology/approach>The study adopts an online survey design. It uses Bristol Online Survey (BOS) to create a structured questionnaire that is used to assess UK construction professionals using a convenience sampling technique. Therefore, researcher uses descriptive and inferential technique for data analysis and presentation based on Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) to analyze the questionnaire.Findings>The research findings revealed the most significant barriers to VR adoption in UK construction industry were lack of skills/expertise and cultural change. Hence, the main drivers of VR adoption as rated by the professionals in the UK construction industry are improved safety, improved quality and improved productivity.Practical implications>The identification and assessment of the drivers and barriers to VR adoption could advance VR adoption among construction professionals and other stakeholders of the UK AEC sector. This could also be extended to developing countries, given the status of VR as being in the developing stage.Originality/value>This study provides valuable insights to construction professionals and stakeholders to plan actions that could enhance the drivers and mitigate the barriers of VR. This study's main contribution is to group and classify various drivers and barriers into easily understood categories, in order to potentiate the drivers and reduce the barriers effectively. The groupings could be used as benchmarks in similar studies in developing countries.

COVID-19 coronavirus research has overall low methodological quality thus far: case in point for chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine.

OBJECTIVES/BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Prior epidemics of high-mortality human coronaviruses, such as the acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV or SARS-1) in 2003, have driven the characterization of compounds that could be possibly active against the currently emerging novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). Presently, no approved treatment or prophylaxis is available for COVID-19. We comment on the existing COVID-19 research methodologies in general and the published reporting. Given the media attention and claims of effectiveness, we chose chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, in combination with azithromycin, as an area of COVID-19 research to examine. METHODS/STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: MEDLINE and EMBASE electronic databases were searched from 2019 to present (April 3rd, 2020) using a mix of keywords such as COVID-19 and chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine. We also searched the largest clinical medicine preprint repository, medRxiv.org. RESULTS: We found 6 studies, 3 randomized control trials and 3 observational studies, focusing on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine (with azithromycin). We critically appraised the evidence. CONCLUSION: We found that the COVID-19 research methodology is very poor in the area of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine research. In screening the literature, we observed the same across COVID-19 research in relation to potential treatments. The reporting is very poor and sparse, and patient-important outcomes needed to discern decision-making priorities are not reported. We do understand the barriers to perform rigorous research in health care settings overwhelmed by a novel deadly disease. However, this emergency pandemic situation does not transform flawed methods and data into credible results. The adequately powered, comparative, and robust clinical research that is needed for optimal evidence-informed decision-making remains absent in COVID-19.

Vertical transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the third trimester: a systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Studies on COVID-19 infection in pregnancy thus far have largely focused on characterizing maternal and neonatal clinical characteristics. However, another evolving focus is assessing and mitigating the risk of vertical transmission amongst COVID-19-positive mothers. The objective of this review was to summarize the current evidence on the vertical transmission potential of COVID-19 infection in the third trimester and its effects on the neonate. METHODS: OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial (CENTRAL) were searched from January 2020 to May 2020, with continuous surveillance. RESULTS: 18 studies met the inclusion criteria, consisting of 157 mothers and 160 neonates. The mean age of the pregnant patients was 30.8 years and the mean gestational period was 37 weeks and 1 d. Currently, there is currently no conclusive evidence to suggest that vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 occurs. Amongst 81 (69%) neonates who were tested for SARS-CoV-2, 5 (6%) had a positive result. However, amongst these 5 neonates, the earliest test was performed at 16 h after birth, and only 1 neonate was positive when they were later re-tested. However, this neonate initially tested negative at birth, suggesting that the SARS-CoV-2 infection was likely hospital-acquired rather than vertically transmitted. 13 (8%) neonates had complications or symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this rapid descriptive review based on early clinical evidence suggest that vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from mother to neonate/newborn did not occur. Future studies are needed to determine the optimal management of neonates born to COVID-19-positive mothers.