The perception of risk in contracting and spreading COVID-19 amongst individuals, households and vulnerable groups in England: a longitudinal qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Social distancing restrictions to manage the COVID-19 pandemic were put in place from March 2020 in the United Kingdom (UK), with those classed as "highly clinically vulnerable" advised to shield entirely and remain at home. However, personal risk perception has been shown to comprise of various elements beyond those outlined in the national pandemic guidance. It is unclear whether those deemed COVID-19 vulnerable identified as high-risk to COVID-19 and thus complied with the relevant advice. The aim of this research is to explore the perception of risk in catching and spreading COVID-19, amongst individuals from individual households, and vulnerable groups in a region of the UK. METHODS: Two individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted, four-weeks apart, with adults living in households in the Liverpool City Region. At the follow-up interview, participants were given the option of using photo-elicitation to guide the discussion. Reflexive thematic analysis was employed to conceptualise themes. The qualitative analysis was underpinned with symbolic interactionism. RESULTS: Twenty-seven participants (13:14 males:females, and 20 with a vulnerable risk factor to COVID-19) completed a baseline interview, and 15 of these completed a follow-up interview four-weeks later. Following thematic analysis, two overarching themes were conceptualised, with subthemes discussed: theme 1) Confusion and trust in the risk prevention guidance; and theme 2) Navigating risk: compliance and non-compliance with public health guidance. CONCLUSION: Participants developed their own understanding of COVID-19 risk perception through personal experience and comparison with others around them, irrespective of vulnerability status. COVID-19 guidance was not complied with as intended by the government, and at times even rejected due to lack of trust. The format in which future pandemic guidance is conveyed must be carefully considered, and take into account individuals' experiences that may lead to non-compliance. The findings from our study can inform future public health policy and interventions for COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Engaging communities in addressing air quality: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Exposure to air pollution has a detrimental effect on health and disproportionately affects people living in socio-economically disadvantaged areas. Engaging with communities to identify concerns and solutions could support organisations responsible for air quality control, improve environmental decision-making, and widen understanding of air quality issues associated with health. This scoping review aimed to provide an overview of approaches used to engage communities in addressing air quality and identify the outcomes that have been achieved. METHODS: Searches for studies that described community engagement in air quality activities were conducted across five databases (Academic Search Complete, CABI, GreenFILE, MEDLINE, Web of Science). Data on study characteristics, community engagement approach, and relevant outcomes were extracted. The review process was informed by a multi-stakeholder group with an interest in and experience of community engagement in air quality. Thirty-nine papers from thirty studies were included in the final synthesis. CONCLUSION: A range of approaches have been used to engage communities in addressing air quality, most notably air quality monitoring. Positive outcomes included increased awareness, capacity building, and changes to organisational policy and practice. Longer-term projects and further exploration of the impact of community engagement on improving air quality and health are needed as reporting on these outcomes was limited.

The soybean (Glycine max L.) cytokinin oxidase/dehydrogenase multigene family; Identification of natural variations for altered cytokinin content and seed yield.

Cytokinins (CKs) play a fundamental role in regulating dynamics of organ source/sink relationships during plant development, including flowering and seed formation stages. As a result, CKs are key drivers of seed yield. The cytokinin oxidase/dehydrogenase (CKX) is one of the critical enzymes responsible for regulating plant CK levels by causing their irreversible degradation. Variation of CKX activity is significantly correlated with seed yield in many crop species while in soybean (Glycine max L.), the possible associations between CKX gene family members (GFMs) and yield parameters have not yet been assessed. In this study, 17 GmCKX GFMs were identified, and natural variations among GmCKX genes were probed among soybean cultivars with varying yield characteristics. The key CKX genes responsible for regulating CK content during seed filling stages of reproductive development were highlighted using comparative phylogenetics, gene expression analysis and CK metabolite profiling. Five of the seventeen identified GmCKX GFMs, showed natural variations in the form of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). The gene GmCKX7-1, with high expression during critical seed filling stages, was found to have a non-synonymous mutation (H105Q), on one of the active site residues, Histidine 105, previously reported to be essential for co-factor binding to maintain structural integrity of the enzyme. Soybean lines with this mutation had higher CK content and desired yield characteristics. The potential for marker-assisted selection based on the identified natural variation within GmCKX7-1, is discussed in the context of hormonal control that can result in higher soybean yield.

COVID-19: urgent actions, critical reflections and future relevance of 'WaSH': lessons for the current and future pandemics.

The COVID-19 pandemic placed hygiene at the centre of disease prevention. Yet, access to the levels of water supply that support good hand hygiene and institutional cleaning, our understanding of hygiene behaviours, and access to soap are deficient in low-, middle- and high-income countries. This paper reviews the role of water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH) in disease emergence, previous outbreaks, combatting COVID-19 and in preparing for future pandemics. We consider settings where these factors are particularly important and identify key preventive contributions to disease control and gaps in the evidence base. Urgent substantial action is required to remedy deficiencies in WaSH, particularly the provision of reliable, continuous piped water on-premises for all households and settings. Hygiene promotion programmes, underpinned by behavioural science, must be adapted to high-risk populations (such as the elderly and marginalised) and settings (such as healthcare facilities, transport hubs and workplaces). WaSH must be better integrated into preparation plans and with other sectors in prevention efforts. More finance and better use of financing instruments would extend and improve WaSH services. The lessons outlined justify no-regrets investment by government in response to and recovery from the current pandemic; to improve day-to-day lives and as preparedness for future pandemics.

Public involvement in health research: what does 'good' look like in practice?

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY: Background Patient and public involvement means researchers working with members of the public, patients or carers to jointly plan and carry out research.Aim This article is written by members of three involvement groups, and the university employees that they work with. We wanted to jointly reflect on what enables our collaborative work, and what the challenges are for everyone involved.What we did and how we did it We wanted to establish what the literature defines as 'good' public involvement and compare this with processes and practices in our involvement groups. We therefore carried out a literature review and each group met separately to discuss what characterises good involvement, and what the challenges are. From these discussions we developed a set of descriptions about each group. We compared the literature review findings with what came out of the discussions within the involvement groups.Findings Some of the involvement principles from the literature were similar to the priorities of the involvement groups. In addition, the groups identified characteristics of 'good' involvement practice that were not reported in the literature: passion and enthusiasm, informal and welcoming meeting spaces, and opportunities to share lived experiences. In this article we present examples of how principles for good involvement are practiced in these groups, and difficulties we have experienced. ABSTRACT: Background Patient and public involvement is important for producing relevant and accessible health research. Evidence of impact from involvement is growing, but there is also a need for research on how to create conditions for meaningful collaborations between researchers and public advisers.Objective We report on a co-produced self-reflective evaluation of involvement practices in three UK research programmes.Methods A structured review identified research-based principles for 'good' public involvement in research. In parallel, members of three involvement groups co-developed statements on how the groups work, and enablers and challenges to collaborative research. The author team analysed these statements using the findings from the review.Results We identified 11 international articles reporting research-based principles for involvement published between 2013 and 2017. We identified five 'values' and seven 'practice principles' for 'good' involvement. There was convergence between these principles and the priorities of the involvement groups. But the groups also identified additional good involvement practice that were not reported by the literature: passion, enthusiasm, informal and welcoming meeting spaces, and opportunities to share lived experiences. We present examples of how principles for good involvement are practiced in these groups, and highlight principles that have been challenging to implement.Conclusions Ongoing appraisal of public involvement is crucial. We present a process for self-evaluation, illuminate what 'good' means to researchers and public advisers involved in research, and identify areas for improvement. We conclude that provision of resources that enable support to public advisers in turn enable universities and research teams to implement other principles of good involvement.