Mental disorders, COVID-19-related life-saving measures and mortality in France: A nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses have shown that preexisting mental disorders may increase serious Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes, especially mortality. However, most studies were conducted during the first months of the pandemic, were inconclusive for several categories of mental disorders, and not fully controlled for potential confounders. Our study objectives were to assess independent associations between various categories of mental disorders and COVID-19-related mortality in a nationwide sample of COVID-19 inpatients discharged over 18 months and the potential role of salvage therapy triage to explain these associations. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We analysed a nationwide retrospective cohort of all adult inpatients discharged with symptomatic COVID-19 between February 24, 2020 and August 28, 2021 in mainland France. The primary exposure was preexisting mental disorders assessed from all discharge information recorded over the last 9 years (dementia, depression, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, alcohol use disorders, opioid use disorders, Down syndrome, other learning disabilities, and other disorder requiring psychiatric ward admission). The main outcomes were all-cause mortality and access to salvage therapy (intensive-care unit admission or life-saving respiratory support) assessed at 120 days after recorded COVID-19 diagnosis at hospital. Independent associations were analysed in multivariate logistic models. Of 465,750 inpatients with symptomatic COVID-19, 153,870 (33.0%) were recorded with a history of mental disorders. Almost all categories of mental disorders were independently associated with higher mortality risks (except opioid use disorders) and lower salvage therapy rates (except opioid use disorders and Down syndrome). After taking into account the mortality risk predicted at baseline from patient vulnerability (including older age and severe somatic comorbidities), excess mortality risks due to caseload surges in hospitals were +5.0% (95% confidence interval (CI), 4.7 to 5.2) in patients without mental disorders (for a predicted risk of 13.3% [95% CI, 13.2 to 13.4] at baseline) and significantly higher in patients with mental disorders (+9.3% [95% CI, 8.9 to 9.8] for a predicted risk of 21.2% [95% CI, 21.0 to 21.4] at baseline). In contrast, salvage therapy rates during caseload surges in hospitals were significantly higher than expected in patients without mental disorders (+4.2% [95% CI, 3.8 to 4.5]) and lower in patients with mental disorders (-4.1% [95% CI, -4.4; -3.7]) for predicted rates similar at baseline (18.8% [95% CI, 18.7-18.9] and 18.0% [95% CI, 17.9-18.2], respectively). The main limitations of our study point to the assessment of COVID-19-related mortality at 120 days and potential coding bias of medical information recorded in hospital claims data, although the main study findings were consistently reproduced in multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients with mental disorders had lower odds of accessing salvage therapy, suggesting that life-saving measures at French hospitals were disproportionately denied to patients with mental disorders in this exceptional context.

Correcting the reproduction number for time-varying tests: A proposal and an application to COVID-19 in France.

We provide a novel way to correct the effective reproduction number for the time-varying amount of tests, using the acceleration index (Baunez et al., 2021) as a simple measure of viral spread dynamics. Not correcting results in the reproduction number being a biased estimate of viral acceleration and we provide a formal decomposition of the resulting bias, involving the useful notions of test and infectivity intensities. When applied to French data for the COVID-19 pandemic (May 13, 2020-October 26, 2022), our decomposition shows that the reproduction number, when considered alone, characteristically underestimates the resurgence of the pandemic, compared to the acceleration index which accounts for the time-varying volume of tests. Because the acceleration index aggregates all relevant information and captures in real time the sizable time variation featured by viral circulation, it is a more parsimonious indicator to track the dynamics of an infectious disease outbreak in real time, compared to the equivalent alternative which would combine the reproduction number with the test and infectivity intensities.

Tracking the dynamics and allocating tests for COVID-19 in real-time: An acceleration index with an application to French age groups and départements.

An acceleration index is proposed as a novel indicator to track the dynamics of COVID-19 in real-time. Using data on cases and tests in France for the period between the first and second lock-downs-May 13 to October 25, 2020-our acceleration index shows that the pandemic resurgence can be dated to begin around July 7. It uncovers that the pandemic acceleration was stronger than national average for the [59-68] and especially the 69 and older age groups since early September, the latter being associated with the strongest acceleration index, as of October 25. In contrast, acceleration among the [19-28] age group was the lowest and is about half that of the [69-78]. In addition, we propose an algorithm to allocate tests among French "départements" (roughly counties), based on both the acceleration index and the feedback effect of testing. Our acceleration-based allocation differs from the actual distribution over French territories, which is population-based. We argue that both our acceleration index and our allocation algorithm are useful tools to guide public health policies as France might possibly enter a third lock-down period with indeterminate duration.

Selfish or selfless? The role of empathy in economics.

Empathy is a longstanding issue in economics, especially for welfare economics, but one which has faded from the scene in recent years. However, with the rise of neuroeconomics, there is now a renewed interest in this subject. Some economists have even gone so far as to suggest that neuroscientific experiments reveal heterogeneous empathy levels across individuals. If this were the case, this would be in line with economists' usual assumption of stable and given preferences and would greatly facilitate the study of prosocial behaviour with which empathy is often associated. After reviewing some neuroscientific psychological and neuroeconomic evidence on empathy, we will, however, criticize the notion of a given empathy distribution in the population by referring to recent experiments on a public goods game that suggest that, on the contrary, the degree of empathy that individuals exhibit is very much dependent on context and social interaction.