Search

Background During the first epidemic wave, COVID-19 surveillance focused on quantifying the magnitude and the escalation of a growing global health crisis. The scientific community first assessed risk through basic indicators, such as the number of cases or rates of new cases and deaths, and later began using other direct impact indicators to conduct more detailed analyses. We aimed at synthesizing the scientific community's contribution to assessing the direct impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on population health through indicators reported in research papers. Methods We conducted a rapid scoping review to identify and describe health indicators included in articles published between January 2020 and June 2021, using one strategy to search PubMed, EMBASE and WHO COVID-19 databases. Sixteen experts from European public health institutions screened papers and retrieved indicator characteristics. We also asked in an online survey how the health indicators were added to and used in policy documents in Europe. Results After reviewing 3891 records, we selected a final sample of 67 articles and 233 indicators. We identified 52 (22.3%) morbidity indicators from 33 articles, 105 severity indicators (45.1%, 27 articles) and 68 mortality indicators (29.2%, 51). Respondents from 22 countries completed 31 questionnaires, and the majority reported morbidity indicators (29, 93.5%), followed by mortality indicators (26, 83.9%). Conclusions The indicators collated here might be useful to assess the impact of future pandemics. Therefore, their measurement should be standardized to allow for comparisons between settings, countries and different populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Dual sensory impairment (DSI), the combination of visual and hearing impairments, is associated with increased risk for age-related cognitive decline and dementia. Administering cognitive tests to individuals with sensory impairment is challenging because most cognitive measures require sufficient hearing and vision. Considering sensory limitations during cognitive test administration is necessary so that the effects of sensory and cognitive abilities on test performance can be differentiated and the validity of test results optimized. Objective To review empirical strategies that researchers have employed to accommodate DSI during cognitive testing of older adults. Methods Seven databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Global Health and the Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews databases) were searched for relevant articles integrating the three concepts of cognitive evaluation, aging, and DSI. Given the inclusion criteria, this scoping review included a total of 67 papers. Results Twenty-eight studies reported five categories of strategies for cognitive testing of older adult participants with DSI: the assistance of experts, the modification of standardized test scoring procedures, the use of communication strategies, environmental modifications, and the use of cognitive tests without visual and/or auditory items. Conclusions The most used strategy reported in the included studies was drawing on the assistance of team members from related fields during the administration and interpretation of cognitive screening measures. Alternative strategies were rarely employed. Future research is needed to explore the knowledge-to-practice gap between research and current clinical practice, and to develop standardized testing strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]