Search

Background: Human communities suffered a vast socioeconomic burden in dealing with the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) globally. Real-word data about these burdens can inform governments about evidence-based resource allocation and prioritization. The aim of this scoping review was to map the cost-of-illness (CoI) studies associated with COVID-19. Methods: This scoping review was conducted from January 2019 to December 2021. We searched cost-of-illness papers published in English within Web of Sciences, PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Science Direct and ProQuest. For each eligible study, extracted data included country, publication year, study period, study design, epidemiological approach, costing method, cost type, cost identification, sensitivity analysis, estimated unit cost and national burden. All of the analyses were applied in Excel software. Results: 2352 records were found after the search strategy application, finally 28 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Most of the studies were done in the United States, Turkey, and China. The prevalence-based approach was the most common in the studies, and most of studies also used Hospital Information System data (HIS). There were noticeable differences in the costing methods and the cost identification. The average cost of hospitalization per patient per day ranged from 101$ in Turkey to 2,364$ in the United States. Among the studies, 82.1% estimated particularly direct medical costs, 3.6% only indirect costs, and 14.3% both direct and indirect costs. Conclusion: The economic burden of COVID-19 varies from country to country. The majority of CoI studies estimated direct medical costs associated with COVID-19 and there is a paucity of evidence for direct non-medical, indirect, and intangible costs, which we recommend for future studies. To create homogeneity in CoI studies, we suggest researchers follow a conceptual framework and critical appraisal checklist of cost-of-illness (CoI) studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Team science refers to research initiatives considered in collaboration with scientists from different disciplines or fields. This paper presents a bibliometric analysis for visualization of global research activity concerning the combination of cancer and the COVID-19 pandemic using a team science approach. A bibliometric study was implemented using Web of Science from 2019 to 2021. We analyzed citations to identify description and citations analysis of results, most prolific countries, international research collaboration, most prolific institutions, research areas, most cited papers, and most productive journals. The preliminary data of 2,313 studies that adopted a team science approach were recorded and analyzed. Team science is becoming progressively popular in cancer research. The United States was the most active country, followed by Italy and China. The United States, the United Kingdom, and Italy had the highest level of cooperation with other countries. The most prolific institution was Harvard University, followed by University of London and the University of Texas System. Head and Neck Journal for the Sciences and Specialties of the Head and Neck, Frontiers in Oncology, and eCancerMedicalScience were the most productive journals. Governments, organizations, policymakers, and researchers should pay attention to team science approach at times of disasters such as cancer and COVID-19 to achieve the best strategies for controlling cancer that is currently a world problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

China has been contributing to new approaches to global governance. The Health Silk Road (HSR), a significant component of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), was proposed by China in 2016. This paper claims that HSR is a new institution introduced alongside the existing WHO-led multilateral health system, and its relationship with the existing system can be described as layering. Having explored the new development of HSR during COVID-19, this paper further argues that while HSR has its unique strength in making contributions to global health governance and economic recovery, it faces a prominent issue of securitisation in the context of China-U.S. strategic competition, suspicion of the quality of medical products and sectoral fragmentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The emergence of COVID-19 has provided a new vigor to addressed global health issues. In this regard, global health diplomacy initiatives have seen a considerable surge. Countries around the world are using the opportunity to harness the potential of global health diplomacy in cultivating relations with several countries and also building a soft power projection. A case in point is how China has been spearheading global health efforts to improve relations while projecting a soft power about how China aims to act as global savior. Chinese efforts were able to gain significant traction owing to the fact that the United States under the administration of President Trump suspended its global leadership role, the first such instance in the post-World War-II era. This paper explains the concept of global health diplomacy by conducting a comparative analysis of the global health efforts and policies undertaken by both the United States and China by following qualitative research technique and secondary sources to explain the phenomenon. The study found that China led the response to COVID-19 not only domestically but globally as well. The U.S. lagged but gradually started to compete China in health diplomacy. There is an evident struggle for dominance in health sector between China and the U.S., however, it is not expected to lead into hard power struggle. The paper has concluded that it is important for both countries to work together in future in case of pandemic to spearhead an international effort against such crises. Moreover, it recommends Chinese authorities to include health corridor as a component with Belt and Road Initiative. On the other hand, the United States under the administration of President Joe Biden should invest in multilateral efforts so to empower global health institutions to better prepare for future health crises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the wake of COVID-19, mental health providers and treatment programs are adapting rapidly to the challenges in engaging people and delivering treatment with limited guidance. This paper will explore the challenges associated with delivering treatment within coordinated specialty care (CSC) programs for people with first episode psychosis. Suggestions for treatment will take into consideration experiences with stress, changes to the pursuit of work and school, and increased time spent with families. Drawing on the experience of several CSC programs in the United States, Israel, and China, we describe the impact and modifications to the core treatment elements in CSC including medication, family interactions, supported employment and education, individual therapy, peer support and the way they are delivered. The paper includes recommendations based on experiences from CSC programs to help staff members, participants, and family members better identify, prepare, cope and respond to the unique new challenges and suggests modifications that can be made during various stages of the coronavirus pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates the possibility of the implementation of Genetic Programming (GP) algorithm on a publicly available COVID-19 data set, in order to obtain mathematical models which could be used for estimation of confirmed, deceased, and recovered cases and the estimation of epidemiology curve for specific countries, with a high number of cases, such as China, Italy, Spain, and USA and as well as on the global scale. The conducted investigation shows that the best mathematical models produced for estimating confirmed and deceased cases achieved R2 scores of 0.999, while the models developed for estimation of recovered cases achieved the R2 score of 0.998. The equations generated for confirmed, deceased, and recovered cases were combined in order to estimate the epidemiology curve of specific countries and on the global scale. The estimated epidemiology curve for each country obtained from these equations is almost identical to the real data contained within the data set [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to understand whether a catastrophic and urgent event, such as the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, accelerates or reverses trends in international collaboration, especially in and between China and the United States. A review of research articles produced in the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic shows that COVID-19 research had smaller teams and involved fewer nations than pre-COVID-19 coronavirus research. The United States and China were, and continue to be in the pandemic era, at the center of the global network in coronavirus related research, while developing countries are relatively absent from early research activities in the COVID-19 period. Not only are China and the United States at the center of the global network of coronavirus research, but they strengthen their bilateral research relationship during COVID-19, producing more than 4.9% of all global articles together, in contrast to 3.6% before the pandemic. In addition, in the COVID-19 period, joined by the United Kingdom, China and the United States continued their roles as the largest contributors to, and home to the main funders of, coronavirus related research. These findings suggest that the global COVID-19 pandemic shifted the geographic loci of coronavirus research, as well as the structure of scientific teams, narrowing team membership and favoring elite structures. These findings raise further questions over the decisions that scientists face in the formation of teams to maximize a speed, skill trade-off. Policy implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]