Search

Not all COVID-19 deaths are officially reported, and particularly in low-income and humanitarian settings, the magnitude of reporting gaps remains sparsely characterized. Alternative data sources, including burial site worker reports, satellite imagery of cemeteries, and social media–conducted surveys of infection may offer solutions. By merging these data with independently conducted, representative serological studies within a mathematical modeling framework, we aim to better understand the range of underreporting using examples from three major cities: Addis Ababa (Ethiopia), Aden (Yemen), and Khartoum (Sudan) during 2020. We estimate that 69 to 100%, 0.8 to 8.0%, and 3.0 to 6.0% of COVID-19 deaths were reported in each setting, respectively. In future epidemics, and in settings where vital registration systems are limited, using multiple alternative data sources could provide critically needed, improved estimates of epidemic impact. However, ultimately, these systems are needed to ensure that, in contrast to COVID-19, the impact of future pandemics or other drivers of mortality is reported and understood worldwide.

Funder: Community Jameel and the Imperial President’s Excellence Fund, Funder: NIHR Academic Clinical Lecturer, Funder: NIHR CV220-111, Funder: NIHR Imperial College Biomedical Research Centre, The early transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 in the UK are unknown but their investigation is critical to aid future pandemic planning. We tested over 11,000 anonymised, stored historic antenatal serum samples, given at two north-west London NHS trusts in 2019 and 2020, for total antibody to SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain (anti-RBD). Estimated prevalence of seroreactivity increased from 1% prior to mid-February 2020 to 17% in September 2020. Our results show higher prevalence of seroreactivity to SARS-CoV-2 in younger, non-white ethnicity, and more deprived groups. We found no significant interaction between the effects of ethnicity and deprivation. Derived from prevalence, the estimated incidence of seroreactivity reflects the trends observed in daily hospitalisations and deaths in London that followed 10 and 13 days later, respectively. We quantified community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in London, which peaked in late March / early April 2020 with no evidence of community transmission until after January 2020. Our study was not able to determine the date of introduction of the SARS-CoV-2 virus but demonstrates the value of stored antenatal serum samples as a resource for serosurveillance during future outbreaks.

This paper shows how heavy minerals and single-grain varietal studies can be conducted on silt (representing c. 50% of world’s sediments) sediments to obtain quantitative data as efficiently as for sand-sized sediments. The analytical workflows include heavy mineral separation using a wide grain-size window (15–355 μ) analysed through integrated optical analysis, Raman spectroscopy, QEMSCAN microscopy andU–Pb dating of detrital zircon. Upper Jurassic–Cretaceous silt-sized sediments from the Mandawa Basin of central-southern Tanzania have been selected for the scope of this research. Raman-aided heavy mineral analysis reveals garnet and apatite to be the most common minerals together with durable zircon, tourmaline and subordinate rutile. Accessory but diagnostic phases are titanite, staurolite, epidote and monazite. Etch pits on garnet and cockscomb features on staurolite document the significant effect of diagenesis on the pristine heavy mineral assemblage. Multivariate statistical analysis highlights a close association among durable minerals (zircon, tourmaline and rutile, ZTR) while garnet and apatite plot alone reflecting independence between the three groups of variables with garnet increasing in Jurassic samples. Raman data for garnet end-member analysis document different associations between Jurassic (richer in A, Bi and Bii types) and Cretaceous (dominant A, Ci and Cii types) samples. U–Pb dating of detrital zircon and their statistical integration with the above-mentioned datasets provide further insights into changes in provenance and/or drainage systems. Metamorphic rocks of the early and late Pan-African orogeny terranes of the Mozambique Belt and those of the Irumide Belt acted as main source of sediment during the Jurassic. Cretaceous sediments record a broadening of the drainage system reaching as far as the Usagran–Ubendian Belt and the Tanzanian Archean Craton.

Background: In the United Kingdom, suicide risk is assessed in the emergency department (ED) in a face-to-face assessment with psychiatric liaison practitioners. This study aimed to explore patient experiences of psychosocial assessment after presenting with self-harm/suicidality. \ud \ud Method: A total of 28 patients were interviewed within 2 weeks of ED attendance for self-harm/suicidality. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. \ud \ud Results: People described two different experiences. A therapeutic interaction was about the "person" and made people feel their life mattered and instilled hope for the future. This was characterized by: unscripted conversation; warmth promoting disclosure; psychological exploration of feelings; validation of distress; and a coproduced care plan. A formulaic assessment was about the "risk" and made people feel their life did not matter and hopeless about the future. This was characterized by: feeling judged and not worthy of help; a focus on risk and form filling; a trivial treatment plan; and loss of trust in services.\ud \ud Limitations: Our study comprised a single ED and used a non-diverse sample. \ud \ud Conclusion: Psychosocial assessment in the ED impacts on hope for people in crisis. A focus on therapeutic communication that is about the person, as well as the risk, improves patient experience, decreases distress, and instills hope that life is worth living.

People presenting to the emergency department with self-harm or thoughts of suicide undergo a psychosocial assessment involving recommendations for e.g. contact with other practitioners, charity helplines or coping strategies. In these assessments, patients frequently adopt a negative stance towards potential recommendations. Analysing 35 video-recorded liaison psychiatry psychosocial assessments from an emergency department in England (2018-2019), we ask how these practitioners transform this negative stance into acceptance. We show that practitioners use three steps to anticipate and address negative stance (1) asking questions about the patient's experience/understanding that help the patient to articulate a negative stance (e.g., "what do you think about that"); (2) accepting or validating the reasons underlying the negative stance (e.g., "that's a very real fear and thought to have"); and (3) showing the patient that their reasons were incorporated in the recommendation (e.g., "it's telephone support if you're a bit more uncomfortable with face to face"). These steps personalise the recommendation based on the patient's specific experiences and understanding. When practitioners followed all three of these steps, the patient moved from a negative stance to acceptance in 84% of cases. When practitioners made a recommendation but did not follow all three steps, the patient moved from a negative stance to acceptance in only 14% of cases. It is not the case that each communication practice works on its own to promote patient acceptance, rather Steps 1 and 2 build on each other sequentially to develop and demonstrate shared understanding of the patient's negative stance. In this way, acceptance and validation play an indispensable role in addressing a patient's concerns about treatment.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed enormous strain on intensive care units (ICUs) in Europe. Ensuring access to care, irrespective of COVID-19 status, in winter 2020–2021 is essential. Methods: An integrated model of hospital capacity planning and epidemiological projections of COVID-19 patients is used to estimate the demand for and resultant spare capacity of ICU beds, staff and ventilators under different epidemic scenarios in France, Germany and Italy across the 2020–2021 winter period. The effect of implementing lockdowns triggered by different numbers of COVID-19 patients in ICUs under varying levels of effectiveness is examined, using a ‘dual-demand’ (COVID-19 and non-COVID-19) patient model. Results: Without sufficient mitigation, we estimate that COVID-19 ICU patient numbers will exceed those seen in the first peak, resulting in substantial capacity deficits, with beds being consistently found to be the most constrained resource. Reactive lockdowns could lead to large improvements in ICU capacity during the winter season, with pressure being most effectively alleviated when lockdown is triggered early and sustained under a higher level of suppression. The success of such interventions also depends on baseline bed numbers and average non-COVID-19 patient occupancy. Conclusion: Reductions in capacity deficits under different scenarios must be weighed against the feasibility and drawbacks of further lockdowns. Careful, continuous decision-making by national policymakers will be required across the winter period 2020–2021.