Are we there yet? The transition from response to recovery for the COVID-19 pandemic.

There is no corner of the planet that has not been impacted by the rapid spread of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. While the COVID-19 pandemic has already had far-reaching socioeconomic consequences commonly associated with natural hazards (such as disruption to society, economic damage, and loss of lives), the response of governments around the world has been unparalleled and unlike anything seen before. Governments are faced with a myriad of multi-dimensional effects of the pandemic, including direct impacts on public health systems and population health and indirect socioeconomic effects including disruption to every single sector of the economy and mass unemployment. There is, additionally, the growing realisation that the timescale associated with this crisis may permanently change the very foundations of societies 'normal' day-to-day life. As the world transitions to recovering from COVID-19, those developing that recovery need support in adjusting and improving their policies and measures. The situation seems dire, the stakes are high. Literature about the transition between the response and recovery phase in relation to pandemics is scarce. Further complication is that the pandemic will not allow countries to simply transition to the full-scale recovery, instead, a rebound from recovery to response phase is expected for a certain period until the immunization is in place. Pandemics indeed force us to think beyond typical emergency management structures; the cycles of the disaster risk management in the case of biological and other natural hazards are not exactly the same and no one-size-fits-all approach may be used. Still, some parallels may be drawn with the efforts to combat natural hazards and some lessons may be used from previous and the current pandemic. Based on these experiences and reflections, this paper provides a set of policy directions to be considered during the transition towards, as well as throughout, this transition phase. It is suggested that meeting this global, multi-dimensional, and complex challenge will require considerable international collaboration (even convention) and macro-scale changes to global and national policies. The recovery issues are mainly going to be dominated by politics, economics and social science. Necessary for an effective recovery, the pandemic response needs to be a holistic response, combined with an improved data ecosystem between the public health system and the community. We should also view this outbreak and our response to it as an opportunity to learn lessons and reaffirm our universal commitment to sustainable development and enhancing wellbeing around the world.

Beyond Binary: (Re)Defining "Gender" for 21st Century Disaster Risk Reduction Research, Policy, and Practice.

The dominant discourse of gender focuses on the binary of woman/man, despite the known additional risks for diverse sexualities and gender minorities in disasters. Given the small but growing body of literature concerning gender minorities in disasters, this paper sets out to explore the place of sex and gender minorities in disasters and to examine whether a binary definition needs to be extended. A five-stage rapid review was undertaken following Arksey and O'Malley's method. Peer-reviewed journal articles in English language were sought that included disaster and gender terms in the title, abstract, and/or body of the article published between January 2015 and March 2019. The search included MEDLINE and Scopus databases. Relevant information from the studies were charted in Microsoft Excel, and results were summarized using a descriptive analytical method. In total, 729 records were identified; 248 that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded and 166 duplicates were removed. A total of 315 records were sourced and their full text was reviewed. Of those, only 12 journal articles included content relative to more than two genders. We also recognized that sex and gender terms were used interchangeably with no clear differentiation between the two. We recommend that disaster scholars and practitioners adopt correct terminology and expand their definition of gender beyond the binary; utilize work on gender fluidity and diversity; and apply this to disaster research, policy, and practice.

Knowing What We Know - Reflections on the Development of Technical Guidance for Loss Data for the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction.

INTRODUCTION: To report on activities aligned with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, national governments will use the Sendai Monitor platform to track progress using a series of indicators that inform seven Global Targets originally agreed in 2015. In February 2017, the UN General Assembly adopted a set of 38 agreed indicators based on work led by an open-ended intergovernmental expert working group (OIEWG) on indicators and terminology relating to disaster risk reduction. In January 2018 the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction released technical guidance documents in advance of the launch of the Sendai Monitor in March 2018. METHODS: This paper discusses several challenges to recording and reporting on loss data under the Sendai Framework. Additional insights to elaborate on discussion build upon commentary and examples raised during a workshop held on developing loss data that was hosted by the United Nations Office of Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR), the Integrated Research on Disaster Risk (IRDR) programme, and Public Health England (PHE) from February 15-17 2017 at the Royal Society in London, United Kingdom. The meeting's purpose was to refine technical guidance notes concerning Global Targets A, B, C, and D, which had been drafted in coordination with the work of the OIEWG. The workshop was attended by representatives from UN Agencies, UN Member States, international scientific bodies, academic bodies, the government of the United Kingdom and the private sector. RESULTS: Global Targets A, B, C and D of the Sendai Framework have common and specific complexities which require acknowledgement and support in recording, reporting and using disaster loss data. Discussions during the February 2017 loss data workshop highlighted a number of complexities and the need for common standards and principles for loss data. Individual target complexities include attribution of health impacts, assessing impacts, consistently calculating economic losses and measuring disruption to critical infrastructure. DISCUSSION: Transparent monitoring is critical to ensure political will, financial efforts and effective evidence support the global shift towards more sustainable development. Data involves common challenges which can undermine accuracy and understanding of reporting across the frameworks that outline the United Nations' 2030 Agenda. Disaster loss data adds further challenges which require support and innovation to ensure stakeholders across sectors in all sectors have appropriate technical guidance that can support useful loss data management processes. The February 2017 workshop highlighted systemic challenges with working with loss data and highlighted several pertinent pathways to progress on the breadth and reliability of disaster loss data across different settings.

An Evaluation of Global Hazard Communication with Ethical Considerations.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the large number of hazards occurring every year, it is often only the most catastrophic and rapidly occurring hazards that are covered in detail by major news outlets. This can result in an under-reporting of smaller or slowly evolving hazards such as drought. Furthermore, the type or country in which the hazard occurs may have a bearing on whether it receives media coverage. The Public Health England (PHE) global weekly hazards bulletin is designed to inform subscribers of hazards occurring in the world in a given week regardless of location or type of natural hazard. This paper will aim to examine whether the bulletin is reporting these events in a way that matches a number of international disaster databases.  It will also seek to answer if biases within media outlets reporting of an event is impacting on the types of hazards and events being covered.  Through the analysis of data collected, it is hoped to be able to consider the ethical implications of such a bulletin service and provide recommendations on how the service might be improved in the future. METHODS: The study used a year's worth of global hazards bulletins sent by Public Health England.  These bulletins aim to communicate hazards in the form of compiled articles from news outlets around the world. Data from these bulletins was collected and analysed by hazard type and the country in which hazards occurred.  It was then compared to recognised hazard databases to assess similarities and differences in the hazards being reported via media or through dedicated hazard databases. The recognised hazard databases were those run by the Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT), European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO) and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) respectively. RESULTS: The PHE bulletin overall was found to be comparable to other global hazard or disaster databases in terms of hazards included by both country and type of hazard. The PHE bulletin covered a greater number of unique hazard events than the other databases and also covered more types of hazard. It also gave more frequent coverage to the United Kingdom and Canada than the other databases, with other countries appearing less frequently. More generally, the PHE bulletin and the databases it was compared to appear to focus more on hazards either occurring in developed countries or fast-onset ones such as landslides or floods. On the other hand, slow-onset hazards such as drought or those occurring in developing countries appear to be under-reported and are given less importance in both the bulletin and databases. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: We recommend that the resources compared review their inclusion criteria and assess whether the discrepancies in hazard type and country can be ratified through changes in how hazards are assessed for inclusion. More research should be undertaken to assess whether similar findings arise when comparing databases in other areas within the remit of public health.

Highly stretchable hydrogels from complex coacervation of natural polyelectrolytes.

The controlled complex coacervation of oppositely charged hyaluronic acid (Mw ≈ 800-1000 kg mol-1) and chitosan (Mw ≈ 160 kg mol-1, degree of acetylation = 15%) led to hydrogels with controllable properties in terms of elasticity and strength. In this work, we performed desalting by dialysis of high ionic strength solutions of mixed polyelectrolytes and showed that the control of the pH during the polyelectrolyte assembly greatly impacts the mechanical properties of the hydrogel. First, for pHs from 5.5 to 7.5, a slight coacervation was observed due to low chitosan protonation and poor polyelectrolyte associations. Then, for pHs from 3.0 to 5.5, coacervation and syneresis led to free-standing and easy to handle hydrogels. Finally, for pHs from 2.0 to 3.0 (close to the pKa of the hyaluronic acid), we observed the unusual stretchability of these hydrogels that could arise from the pre-folding of hyaluronic acid chains while physical crosslinking was achieved by hyaluronic acid/chitosan polyelectrolyte complexation.

Assessing thrombosis risk in patients with idiopathic, diabetic, and postsurgical gastroparesis.

Patients with severe gastrointestinal motility disorders are often found to have intravenous access clots or deep venous thrombosis. It has previously been reported that many patients who have intravenous access thrombosis have concomitant thrombotic risk factors. In this study, the goal was to determine the underlying prevalence of hypercoagulable risk in a series of patients with documented gastroparesis. Investigators studied 62 consecutive patients (52 female; mean age, 42 y) who had symptoms of gastroparesis. All patients were evaluated for placement of a gastric neural stimulation device, or they had had one placed previously. Patients underwent a hematologic interview and standardized coagulation measures of thrombotic risk. Laboratory studies measured acquired elevations of Factor VII, Factor VIII, fibrinogen, lupus anticoagulant panel, antiphospholipid antibody panel, homocysteine (in the setting of kidney disease), and activated protein resistance. Investigators also measured congenital factors: Factor VIII (with C-reactive protein levels), antithrombin III, protein C, protein S (total and free), Factor II mutation, Factor V Leiden, methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase, and homocysteine. Fifty-five patients (89%) were found to have detectable hypercoagulable risk factors. Twenty-five of the 62 patients (40%) had a documented history of abnormal clotting, including deep venous thrombosis, intravenous access thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism. All patients with a previous history of thrombosis had detectable clotting abnormalities. Of 56 patients, 40 (71%) had hypercoagulability and did not have diabetes (P=.036), and 20 (36%) had hypercoagulability and no known history of infection. However, this value was not statistically significant when infection and hypercoagulability were compared (P=.408). A high prevalence of acquired and congenital hypercoagulable defects has been observed in patients with gastroparesis, which may predispose them to arterial and venous clots. This unique finding warrants consideration of coagulation evaluation in patients with severe gastroparesis, especially when these patients are placed in high-risk thrombophilic situations, such as hospitalization, prolonged intravenous access, and surgery.