The impact of COVID-19 on the value of coastal recreational resource from the perspective of recreational behaviour change: Evident from China.

The Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak took a heavy toll on the global tourism industry in 2020, and affected the value realization of coastal recreational ecosystem service. From the micro perspective, this paper combines travel cost method with contingent behaviour method to obtain residents' actual behaviour and contingent behaviour data, and discusses the impact of the outbreak of COVID-19 on the value realization of coastal recreational resources from the perspective of the change in residents' recreational behaviour in Qingdao, China. Residents are observed to significantly reduce their outdoor activities in response to the COVID-19. The number of visits to the beach decreases by 25.2% when there is an outbreak, and decreases by 0.064% for every 1% increase in the number of confirmed cases, which is used to represent the severity of the epidemic. The asymmetries effects of epidemic situation on residents' recreational behaviour show that the improvements lead to larger and more significant impacts than the deteriorations. The disappearance of the pandemic crisis will provide considerable welfare for the citizens in Qingdao, which reaches to 1.9323 billion CNY/year. If the number of confirmed cases deteriorates to 900, the environmental welfare loss will be 0.3366 billion CNY/year. Additionally, we test the effects of residents' cognitive variables, and find that risk perception can strengthen the negative impacts of COVID-19 cases. Furthermore, the deteriorations in the environmental attributes are found to have stronger impacts on the number of visits than the improvements. This paper provides empirical-support results about the change of coastal recreational value through the evaluation of recreational behaviours in the post-epidemic period, which will give important implications for government's marine ecosystem restoration and coastal management work.

A meta-analysis reveals the effectiveness of probiotics and prebiotics against respiratory viral infection.

Experimental experience suggests that microbial agents including probiotics and prebiotics (representative microbial agents) play a critical role in defending against respiratory virus infection. We aim to systematically examine these agents' effect on respiratory viral infection and encourage research into clinical applications. An electronic literature search was conducted from published data with a combination of a microbial agents search component containing synonyms for microbial agents-related terms and a customized search component for respiratory virus infection. Hazard ratio (HR), risk ratio (RR) and standard deviation (SD) were employed as effect estimates. In 45 preclinical studies, the mortality rates decreased in the respiratory viral infection models that included prebiotics or prebiotics as interventions (HR: 0.70; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.56-0.87; P=0.002). There was a significant decrease in viral load due to improved gut microbiota (SD: -1.22; 95% CI: -1.50 to -0.94; P<0.001). Concentrations of interferon (IFN)-α (SD: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.33-1.77; P=0.004), IFN-γ (SD: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.01-1.65; P=0.05) and interleukin (IL)-12 (SD: 2.42; 95% CI: 0.32-4.52; P=0.02), IL-1ß (SD: 0.01; 95% CI: -0.37 to 0.40; P=0.94) increased, whereas those of TNF-α (SD: -0.58; 95% CI: -1.59 to 0.43; P=0.26) and IL-6 (SD: -0.59; 95% CI: -1.24 to 0.07; P=0.08) decreased. Six clinical studies had lower symptom scores (SD: -0.09; 95% CI: -0.44 to 0.26; P=0.61) and less incidence of infection (RR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.64-1.01; P=0.06). Our research indicates that probiotics and prebiotics pose a defensive possibility on respiratory viral infection and may encourage the clinical application.

Monocular Pedestrian 3D Localization for Social Distance Monitoring.

Social distancing protocols have been highly recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) to curb the spread of COVID-19. However, one major challenge to enforcing social distancing in public areas is how to perceive people in three dimensions. This paper proposes an innovative pedestrian 3D localization method using monocular images combined with terrestrial point clouds. In the proposed approach, camera calibration is achieved based on the correspondences between 2D image points and 3D world points. The vertical coordinates of the ground plane where pedestrians stand are extracted from the point clouds. Then, using the assumption that the pedestrian is always perpendicular to the ground, the 3D coordinates of the pedestrian's feet and head are calculated iteratively using collinear equations. This allows the three-dimensional localization and height determination of pedestrians using monocular cameras, which are widely distributed in many major cities. The performance of the proposed method was evaluated using two different datasets. Experimental results show that the pedestrian localization error of the proposed approach was less than one meter within tens of meters and performed better than other localization techniques. The proposed approach uses simple and efficient calculations, obtains accurate location, and can be used to implement social distancing rules. Moreover, since the proposed approach also generates accurate height values, exclusionary schemes to social distancing protocols, particularly the parent-child exemption, can be introduced in the framework.

Effect of a genetically engineered interferon-alpha versus traditional interferon-alpha in the treatment of moderate-to-severe COVID-19: a randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: There are few effective therapies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) upon the outbreak of the pandemic. To compare the effectiveness of a novel genetically engineered recombinant super-compound interferon (rSIFN-co) with traditional interferon-alpha added to baseline antiviral agents (lopinavir-ritonavir or umifenovir) for the treatment of moderate-to-severe COVID-19. METHOD: In this multicenter randomized (1:1) trial, patients hospitalized with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 received either rSIFN-co nebulization or interferon-alpha nebulization added to baseline antiviral agents for no more than 28 days. The primary endpoint was the time to clinical improvement. Secondary endpoints included the overall rate of clinical improvement assessed on day 28, the time to radiological improvement and virus nucleic acid negative conversion. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients were included in the safety set (46 patients assigned to rSIFN-co group, 48 to interferon-alpha group). The time to clinical improvement was 11.5 days versus 14.0 days (95% CI 1.10 to 2.81, p = .019); the overall rate of clinical improvement on day 28 was 93.5% versus 77.1% (difference, 16.4%; 95% CI 3% to 30%); the time to radiological improvement was 8.0 days versus 10.0 days (p = .002), the time to virus nucleic acid negative conversion was 7.0 days versus 10.0 days (p = .018) in the rSIFN-co and interferon alpha arms, respectively. Adverse events were balanced with no deaths among groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: rSIFN-co was associated with a shorter time of clinical improvement than traditional interferon-alpha in the treatment of moderate-to-severe COVID-19 when combined with baseline antiviral agents. rSIFN-co therapy alone or combined with other antiviral therapy is worth to be further studied.Key messagesThere are few effective therapies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) upon the outbreak of the pandemic. Interferon alphas, by inducing both innate and adaptive immune responses, have shown clinical efficacy in treating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus.In this multicenter, head-to-head, randomized, clinical trial which included 94 participants with moderate-to-severe COVID-19, the rSIFN-co plus antiviral agents (lopinavir-ritonavir or umifenovir) was associated with a shorter time of clinical improvement than interferon-alpha plus antiviral agents.

Development of a quantitative segmentation model to assess the effect of comorbidity on patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has brought a global disaster. Quantitative lesions may provide the radiological evidence of the severity of pneumonia and further to assess the effect of comorbidity on patients with COVID-19. METHODS: 294 patients with COVID-19 were enrolled from February, 24, 2020 to June, 1, 2020 from six centers. Multi-task Unet network was used to segment the whole lung and lesions from chest CT images. This deep learning method was pre-trained in 650 CT images (550 in primary dataset and 100 in test dataset) with COVID-19 or community-acquired pneumonia and Dice coefficients in test dataset were calculated. 50 CT scans of 50 patients (15 with comorbidity and 35 without comorbidity) were random selected to mark lesions manually. The results will be compared with the automatic segmentation model. Eight quantitative parameters were calculated based on the segmentation results to evaluate the effect of comorbidity on patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: Quantitative segmentation model was proved to be effective and accurate with all Dice coefficients more than 0.85 and all accuracies more than 0.95. Of the 294 patients, 52 (17.7%) patients were reported having at least one comorbidity; 14 (4.8%) having more than one comorbidity. Patients with any comorbidity were older (P < 0.001), had longer incubation period (P < 0.001), were more likely to have abnormal laboratory findings (P < 0.05), and be in severity status (P < 0.001). More lesions (including larger volume of lesion, consolidation, and ground-glass opacity) were shown in patients with any comorbidity than patients without comorbidity (all P < 0.001). More lesions were found on CT images in patients with more comorbidities. The median volumes of lesion, consolidation, and ground-glass opacity in diabetes mellitus group were largest among the groups with single comorbidity that had the incidence rate of top three. CONCLUSIONS: Multi-task Unet network can make quantitative CT analysis of lesions to assess the effect of comorbidity on patients with COVID-19, further to provide the radiological evidence of the severity of pneumonia. More lesions (including GGO and consolidation) were found in CT images of cases with comorbidity. The more comorbidities patients have, the more lesions CT images show.

Clinical and CT findings of COVID-19: differences among three age groups.

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus pneumonia (coronavirus disease 2019, COVID-19) has spread around the world. We aimed to recapitulate the clinical and CT imaging features of COVID-19 and their differences in three age groups. METHODS: The clinical and CT data of patients with COVID-19 (n = 307) that had been divided into three groups (Group 1: < 40 years old; Group 2: 40 ≤ age < 60 years old; Group 3: ≥ 60 years old) according to age were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: Of all patients, 114 (37.1%) had histories of epidemiological exposure, 48 (15.6%) were severe/critical cases, 31 had hypertension (10.1%), 15 had diabetes mellitus (4.9%), 3 had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, 1%). Among the three groups, severe/critical type, hypertension and diabetes occurred more commonly in the elderly group compared with Group 1&2 (P < 0.05, respectively). Cough and chest tightness/pain were more commonly appeared in Group 2&3 compared with Group 1 (P < 0.05, respectively). Compared with Group 1 and 2, there were more abnormal laboratory examination indexes (including CRP increase, abnormal percentage of lymphocytes, neutrophils and monocytes) in Group 3 (P < 0.05, respectively). CT images revealed that more lobes were affected and more subpleural lesions were involved in the elderly group, besides, crazy paving sign, bronchodilatation and pleural thickening were more commonly seen in the elderly group, with significant difference between Group 1&2, Group 2&3 (P < 0.05, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 presented representative clinical manifestations, laboratory examinations and CT findings, but three age groups possessed their own specific characteristics. Grasping the clinical and CT features stratified by age will be helpful for early definite diagnosis of COVID-19.

Effect of Convalescent Plasma Therapy on Time to Clinical Improvement in Patients With Severe and Life-threatening COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Convalescent plasma is a potential therapeutic option for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but further data from randomized clinical trials are needed. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of convalescent plasma therapy for patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Open-label, multicenter, randomized clinical trial performed in 7 medical centers in Wuhan, China, from February 14, 2020, to April 1, 2020, with final follow-up April 28, 2020. The trial included 103 participants with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 that was severe (respiratory distress and/or hypoxemia) or life-threatening (shock, organ failure, or requiring mechanical ventilation). The trial was terminated early after 103 of a planned 200 patients were enrolled. Intervention: Convalescent plasma in addition to standard treatment (n = 52) vs standard treatment alone (control) (n = 51), stratified by disease severity. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was time to clinical improvement within 28 days, defined as patient discharged alive or reduction of 2 points on a 6-point disease severity scale (ranging from 1 [discharge] to 6 [death]). Secondary outcomes included 28-day mortality, time to discharge, and the rate of viral polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results turned from positive at baseline to negative at up to 72 hours. Results: Of 103 patients who were randomized (median age, 70 years; 60 [58.3%] male), 101 (98.1%) completed the trial. Clinical improvement occurred within 28 days in 51.9% (27/52) of the convalescent plasma group vs 43.1% (22/51) in the control group (difference, 8.8% [95% CI, -10.4% to 28.0%]; hazard ratio [HR], 1.40 [95% CI, 0.79-2.49]; P = .26). Among those with severe disease, the primary outcome occurred in 91.3% (21/23) of the convalescent plasma group vs 68.2% (15/22) of the control group (HR, 2.15 [95% CI, 1.07-4.32]; P = .03); among those with life-threatening disease the primary outcome occurred in 20.7% (6/29) of the convalescent plasma group vs 24.1% (7/29) of the control group (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.30-2.63]; P = .83) (P for interaction = .17). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (15.7% vs 24.0%; OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.22-1.59]; P = .30) or time from randomization to discharge (51.0% vs 36.0% discharged by day 28; HR, 1.61 [95% CI, 0.88-2.95]; P = .12). Convalescent plasma treatment was associated with a negative conversion rate of viral PCR at 72 hours in 87.2% of the convalescent plasma group vs 37.5% of the control group (OR, 11.39 [95% CI, 3.91-33.18]; P < .001). Two patients in the convalescent plasma group experienced adverse events within hours after transfusion that improved with supportive care. Conclusion and Relevance: Among patients with severe or life-threatening COVID-19, convalescent plasma therapy added to standard treatment, compared with standard treatment alone, did not result in a statistically significant improvement in time to clinical improvement within 28 days. Interpretation is limited by early termination of the trial, which may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000029757.