Exploring pandemic preparedness in higher education: lessons learnt from students' lived experiences during a critical time.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a marked impact on educational disruption and progression of students. Linked to this, studies have demonstrated increases in depression, anxiety, and stress, with long-term outcomes yet to be understood. Students in Higher Education (HE) were at particular risk due to circumstances such as financial stress from job loss, shifting to online learning and uncertainties about the future, with many international students isolated from social support networks. This study explored lived experiences of determinants for academic disruption in HE students during the COVID-19 pandemic across Germany and the UK. Methods: The study used qualitative secondary data collected from extension and mitigation claim forms from 2019 until 2021 from a university with campuses in the UK and Germany. A phenomenological perspective was utilised to draw out experiences and insights into determinants for mitigation from students to enhance our understanding of real problems encountered during a period of crisis. Thematic data analysis was used to create themes of influence for mitigation of assessments. Results: Themes identified pre and during the COVID-19 pandemic included; pre-COVID: work-related commitments; bereavement; illness of a family member; mental and physical health issues; natural disasters, during 2020/21, themes created were; COVID-19 social impacts; workplace and financial demands; psychological distress; physical illness, with subthemes evolving such as family responsibilities; and caring for others; furlough and its financial impacts; heavy workload for frontline health care workers; mental health impacts; physical abuse and crime, COVID-19 physical symptoms. Conclusion: We suggest an Integrated 'Determinants of Wellbeing Framework' for supporting HE students during critical times such as a pandemic. Our suggested framework was adapted from determining health inequalities and the concept of the 'flourishing student' that maps the relationship between the student, their environment and well-being. It is hoped the framework will serve to inform future theories around disruption to student progression and to explore the relevant impact on educational outcomes in HE thus assisting in appropriate support planning.

Hepcidin-guided screen-and-treat interventions for young children with iron-deficiency anaemia in The Gambia: an individually randomised, three-arm, double-blind, controlled, proof-of-concept, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Iron deficiency is the most prevalent nutritional disorder worldwide. Iron supplementation has modest efficacy, causes gastrointestinal side-effects that limit compliance, and has been associated with serious adverse outcomes in children across low-income settings. We aimed to compare two hepcidin-guided screen-and-treat regimens designed to reduce overall iron dosage by targeting its administration to periods when children were safe and ready to receive iron supplementation, with WHO's recommendation of universal iron supplementation. METHODS: We conducted an individually randomised, three-arm, double-blind, controlled, proof-of-concept, non-inferiority trial in 12 rural communities across The Gambia. Eligible participants were children aged 6-23 months with anaemia. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to either the WHO recommended regimen of one sachet of multiple micronutrient powder (MMP) daily containing 12·0 mg iron as encapsulated ferrous fumarate (control group); to MMP with 12·0 mg per day iron for the next 7 days if plasma hepcidin concentration was less than 5·5 µg/L, or to MMP without iron for the next 7 days if plasma hepcidin concentration was at least 5·5 µg/L (12 mg screen-and-treat group); or to MMP with 6·0 mg per day iron for the next 7 days if plasma hepcidin concentration was less than 5·5 µg/L, or to MMP without iron for the next 7 days if plasma hepcidin concentration was at least 5·5 µg/L (6 mg screen-and-treat group). Randomisation was done by use of a permuted block design (block size of 9), with stratification by haemoglobin and age, using computer-generated numbers. Participants and the research team (except for the data manager) were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was haemoglobin concentration, with a non-inferiority margin of -5 g/L. A per-protocol analysis, including only children who had consumed at least 90% of the supplements (ie, supplement intake on ≥75 days during the study), was done to assess non-inferiority of the primary outcome at day 84 using a one-sided t test adjusted for multiple comparisons. Safety was assessed by use of ex-vivo growth tests of Plasmodium falciparum in erythrocytes and three species of sentinel bacteria in plasma samples from participants. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN07210906. FINDINGS: Between April 23, 2014, and Aug 7, 2015, we prescreened 783 children, of whom 407 were enrolled into the study: 135 were randomly assigned to the control group, 136 to the 12 mg screen-and-treat group, and 136 to the 6 mg screen-and-treat group. 345 (85%) children were included in the per-protocol population: 115 in the control group, 116 in the 12 mg screen-and-treat group, and 114 in the 6 mg screen-and-treat group. Directly observed adherence was high across all groups (control group 94·8%, 12 mg screen-and-treat group 95·3%, and 6 mg screen-and-treat group 95·0%). 82 days of iron supplementation increased mean haemoglobin concentration by 7·7 g/L (95% CI 3·2 to 12·2) in the control group. Both screen-and-treat regimens were significantly less efficacious at improving haemoglobin (-5·6 g/L [98·3% CI -9·9 to -1·3] in the 12 mg screen-and-treat group and -7·8 g/L [98·3% CI -12·2 to -3·5] in the 6 mg screen-and-treat group) and neither regimen met the preset non-inferiority margin of -5 g/L. The 12 mg screen-and-treat regimen reduced iron dosage to 6·1 mg per day and the 6 mg screen-and-treat regimen reduced dosage to 3·0 mg per day. 580 adverse events were observed in 316 participants, of which eight were serious adverse events requiring hospitalisation mainly due to diarrhoeal disease (one [1%] participant in the control group, three [2%] in the 12 mg screen-and-treat group, and four [3%] in the 6 mg screen-and-treat group). The most common causes of non-serious adverse events (n=572) were diarrhoea (145 events [25%]), upper respiratory tract infections (194 [34%]), lower respiratory tract infections (62 [11%]), and skin infections (122 [21%]). No adverse events were deemed to be related to the study interventions. INTERPRETATION: The hepcidin-guided screen-and-treat strategy to target iron administration succeeded in reducing overall iron dosage, but was considerably less efficacious at increasing haemoglobin and combating iron deficiency and anaemia than was WHO's standard of care, and showed no differences in morbidity or safety outcomes. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and UK Medical Research Council.

Prevalence and risk factors of schistosomiasis among primary school children in four selected regions of The Gambia.

BACKGROUND: The Gambia initiated a control programme for schistosomiasis in 2015. In light of this, recent and comprehensive data on schistosomiasis is required to effectively guide the control programme. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and associated risk factors of schistosomiasis among primary school children in The Gambia. METHODS: We utilised data from a previous study conducted in 2015 in 4 regions of The Gambia: North Bank Region (NBR), Lower River Region (LRR), Central River Region (CRR) and Upper River Region (URR). In the parent study, ten schools were selected randomly from each region. Urine and stool samples collected from 25 boys and 25 girls (7-14 years) in each school were examined for urinary schistosomiasis (Schistosoma haematobium infection) and intestinal schistosomiasis (Schistosoma mansoni infection) using urine filtration, dipstick and Kato-Katz methods. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Urinary schistosomiasis had an overall prevalence of 10.2% while intestinal schistosomiasis had a prevalence of 0.3% among the sampled school children. Prevalence of urinary schistosomiasis was significantly different among regions (χ 2 = 279.958, df = 3, p < 0.001), with CRR (27.6%) being the most endemic region, followed by URR (12.0%), then LRR (0.6%), and NBR (0.0%). Prevalence of intestinal schistosomiasis was also significantly variable among regions, with 4 of the 5 positive cases detected in CRR and 1 case in URR. Every school sampled in CRR had at least one student infected with S. haematobium, 50% of schools in URR had S. haematobium infection, and just one school in LRR had S. haematobium infection. While S. haematobium infection was significantly higher in boys (χ 2 = 4.440, df = 1, p = 0.035), no significant difference in infection rate was observed among age groups (χ 2 = 0.882, df = 2, p = 0.643). Two of the 5 students infected with S. mansoni were boys and 3 were girls. Four of these 5 students were in the 10-12 years age group and 1 was in the 7-9 years age group. Macrohaematuria and microhaematuria were found to be statistically associated with presence of S. haematobium eggs in urine. Being a male was a risk factor of S. haematobium infection. Bathing, playing and swimming in water bodies were found to pose less risk for S. haematobium infection, indicating that the true water contact behaviour of children was possibly underrepresented. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study provide invaluable information on the prevalence of schistosomiasis in The Gambia. This was useful for the schistosomiasis control efforts of the country, as it guided mass drug administration campaigns in eligible districts in the study area. More studies on S. mansoni and its intermediate snail hosts are required to establish its true status in The Gambia. As children sometimes tend to provide responses that potentially please the research or their teacher, data collection frameworks and approaches that ensure true responses in studies involving children should be devised and used.

Respiratory infections drive hepcidin-mediated blockade of iron absorption leading to iron deficiency anemia in African children.

Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is the most prevalent nutritional condition worldwide. We studied the contribution of hepcidin-mediated iron blockade to IDA in African children. We measured hepcidin and hemoglobin weekly, and hematological, inflammatory, and iron biomarkers at baseline, 7 weeks, and 12 weeks in 407 anemic (hemoglobin < 11 g/dl), otherwise healthy Gambian children (6 to 27 months). Each child maintained remarkably constant hepcidin levels (P < 0.0001 for between-child variance), with half consistently maintaining levels that indicate physiological blockade of iron absorption. Hepcidin was strongly predicted by nurse-ascribed adverse events with dominant signals from respiratory infections and fevers (all P < 0.0001). Diarrhea and fecal calprotectin were not associated with hepcidin. In multivariate analysis, C-reactive protein was the dominant predictor of hepcidin and contributed to iron blockade even at very low levels. We conclude that even low-grade inflammation, especially associated with respiratory infections, contributes to IDA in African children.

Hepcidin-guided screen-and-treat interventions against iron-deficiency anaemia in pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial in The Gambia.

BACKGROUND: WHO recommends daily iron supplementation for pregnant women, but adherence is poor because of side-effects, effectiveness is low, and there are concerns about possible harm. The iron-regulatory hormone hepcidin can signal when an individual is ready-and-safe to receive iron. We tested whether a hepcidin-guided screen-and-treat approach to combat iron-deficiency anaemia could achieve equivalent efficacy to universal administration, but with lower exposure to iron. METHODS: We did a three-arm, randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial in 19 rural communities in the Jarra West and Kiang East districts of The Gambia. Eligible participants were pregnant women aged 18-45 years at between 14 weeks and 22 weeks of gestation. We randomly allocated women to either WHO's recommended regimen (ie, a daily UN University, UNICEF, and WHO international multiple-micronutrient preparation [UNIMMAP] containing 60 mg iron), a 60 mg screen-and-treat approach (ie, daily UNIMMAP containing 60 mg iron for 7 days if weekly hepcidin was <2·5 µg/L or UNIMMAP without iron if hepcidin was ≥2·5 µg/L), or a 30 mg screen-and-treat approach (ie, daily UNIMMAP containing 30 mg iron for 7 days if weekly hepcidin was <2·5 µg/L or UNIMMAP without iron if hepcidin was ≥2·5 µg/L). We used a block design stratified by amount of haemoglobin at enrolment (above and below the median amount of haemoglobin on every enrolment day) and stage of gestation (14-18 weeks vs 19-22 weeks). Participants and investigators were unaware of the random allocation. The primary outcome was the amount of haemoglobin at day 84 and was measured as the difference in haemoglobin in each screen-and-treat group compared with WHO's recommended regimen; the non-inferiority margin was set at -5·0 g/L. The primary outcome was assessed in the per-protocol population, which comprised all women who completed the study. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN21955180. FINDINGS: Between June 16, 2014, and March 3, 2016, 498 participants were randomised, of whom 167 were allocated to WHO's recommended regimen, 166 were allocated to the 60 mg per day screen-and-treat approach, and 165 were allocated to the 30 mg per day screen-and-treat approach. 78 participants were withdrawn or lost to follow-up during the study; thus, the per-protocol population comprised 140 women assigned to WHO's recommended regimen, 133 allocated to the 60 mg screen-and-treat approach, and 147 allocated to the 30 mg screen-and-treat approach. The screen-and-treat approaches did not exceed the non-inferiority margin. Compared with WHO's recommended regimen, the difference in the amount of haemoglobin at day 84 was -2·2 g/L (95% CI -4·6 to 0·1) with the 60 mg screen-and-treat approach and -2·7 g/L (-5·0 to -0·5) with the 30 mg screen-and-treat approach. Adherence, reported side-effects, and adverse events were similar between the three groups. The most frequent side-effect was stomachache, which was similar in the 60 mg screen-and-treat group (82 cases per 1906 person-weeks) and with WHO's recommended regimen (81 cases per 1974 person-weeks; effect 1·0, 95% CI 0·7 to 1·6); in the 30 mg screen-and-treat group the frequency of stomachache was slightly lower than with WHO's recommended regimen (58 cases per 2009 person-weeks; effect 0·7, 95% CI 0·5 to 1·1). No participants died during the study. INTERPRETATION: The hepcidin-guided screen-and-treat approaches had no advantages over WHO's recommended regimen in terms of adherence, side-effects, or safety outcomes. Our results suggest that the current WHO policy for iron administration to pregnant women should remain unchanged while more effective approaches continue to be sought. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the UK Medical Research Council.