Measles.

Measles is a highly contagious, potentially fatal, but vaccine-preventable disease caused by measles virus. Symptoms include fever, maculopapular rash, and at least one of cough, coryza, or conjunctivitis, although vaccinated individuals can have milder or even no symptoms. Laboratory diagnosis relies largely on the detection of specific IgM antibodies in serum, dried blood spots, or oral fluid, or the detection of viral RNA in throat or nasopharyngeal swabs, urine, or oral fluid. Complications can affect many organs and often include otitis media, laryngotracheobronchitis, pneumonia, stomatitis, and diarrhoea. Neurological complications are uncommon but serious, and can occur during or soon after the acute disease (eg, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis) or months or even years later (eg, measles inclusion body encephalitis and subacute sclerosing panencephalitis). Patient management mainly involves supportive therapy, such as vitamin A supplementation, monitoring for and treatment of secondary bacterial infections with antibiotics, and rehydration in the case of severe diarrhoea. There is no specific antiviral therapy for the treatment of measles, and disease control largely depends on prevention. However, despite the availability of a safe and effective vaccine, measles is still endemic in many countries and causes considerable morbidity and mortality, especially among children in resource-poor settings. The low case numbers reported in 2020, after a worldwide resurgence of measles between 2017 and 2019, have to be interpreted cautiously, owing to the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on disease surveillance. Disrupted vaccination activities during the pandemic increase the potential for another resurgence of measles in the near future, and effective, timely catch-up vaccination campaigns, strong commitment and leadership, and sufficient resources will be required to mitigate this threat.

Leveraging natural history biorepositories as a global, decentralized, pathogen surveillance network.

The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic reveals a major gap in global biosecurity infrastructure: a lack of publicly available biological samples representative across space, time, and taxonomic diversity. The shortfall, in this case for vertebrates, prevents accurate and rapid identification and monitoring of emerging pathogens and their reservoir host(s) and precludes extended investigation of ecological, evolutionary, and environmental associations that lead to human infection or spillover. Natural history museum biorepositories form the backbone of a critically needed, decentralized, global network for zoonotic pathogen surveillance, yet this infrastructure remains marginally developed, underutilized, underfunded, and disconnected from public health initiatives. Proactive detection and mitigation for emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) requires expanded biodiversity infrastructure and training (particularly in biodiverse and lower income countries) and new communication pipelines that connect biorepositories and biomedical communities. To this end, we highlight a novel adaptation of Project ECHO's virtual community of practice model: Museums and Emerging Pathogens in the Americas (MEPA). MEPA is a virtual network aimed at fostering communication, coordination, and collaborative problem-solving among pathogen researchers, public health officials, and biorepositories in the Americas. MEPA now acts as a model of effective international, interdisciplinary collaboration that can and should be replicated in other biodiversity hotspots. We encourage deposition of wildlife specimens and associated data with public biorepositories, regardless of original collection purpose, and urge biorepositories to embrace new specimen sources, types, and uses to maximize strategic growth and utility for EID research. Taxonomically, geographically, and temporally deep biorepository archives serve as the foundation of a proactive and increasingly predictive approach to zoonotic spillover, risk assessment, and threat mitigation.

Remote triage incorporating symptom-based risk stratification for suspected head and neck cancer referrals: A prospective population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Remote triage for suspected head and neck cancer (HNC) referrals was adopted by many institutions during the initial peak of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Its safety in this population has not been established. METHODS: A 16-week, prospective, multicenter national service evaluation was started on March 23, 2020. Suspected HNC referrals undergoing remote triage in UK secondary care centers were identified and followed up for a minimum of 6 months to record the cancer status. Triage was supported by risk stratification using a validated calculator. RESULTS: Data for 4568 cases were submitted by 41 centers serving a population of approximately 26 million. These represented 14.1% of the predicted maximum referrals for this population outside of pandemic times, and this gave the study a margin of error of 1.34% at 95% confidence. Completed 6-month follow-up data were available for 99.8% with an overall cancer rate of 5.6% (254 of 4557). The rates of triage were as follows: urgent imaging investigation, 25.4% (n = 1156); urgent face-to-face review, 27.8%; (n = 1268); assessment deferral, 30.3% (n = 1382); and discharge, 16.4% (n = 749). The corresponding missed cancers rates were 0.5% (5 of 1048), 0.3% (3 of 1149), 0.9% (12 of 1382), and 0.9% (7 of 747; P = .15). The negative predictive value for a nonurgent triage outcome and no cancer diagnosis was 99.1%. Overall harm was reported in 0.24% (11 of 4557) and was highest for deferred assessments (0.58%; 8 of 1382). CONCLUSIONS: Remote triage, incorporating risk stratification, may facilitate targeted investigations for higher risk patients and prevent unnecessary hospital attendance for lower risk patients. The risk of harm is low and may be reduced further with appropriate safety netting of deferred appointments. LAY SUMMARY: This large national study observed the widespread adoption of telephone assessment (supported by a risk calculator) of patients referred to hospital specialists with suspected head and neck cancer during the initial peak of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The authors identified 4568 patients from 41 UK centers (serving a population of more than 26 million people) who were followed up for a minimum of 6 months. Late cancers were identified, whether reviewed or investigated urgently (0.4%) or nonurgently (0.9%), but the overall rate of harm was low (0.2%), with the highest rate being seen with deferred appointments (0.6%).

Cancer in Lockdown: Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients with Cancer.

The lockdown measures of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic have disengaged patients with cancer from formal health care settings, leading to an increased use of social media platforms to address unmet needs and expectations. Although remote health technologies have addressed some of the medical needs, the emotional and mental well-being of these patients remain underexplored and underreported. We used a validated artificial intelligence framework to conduct a comprehensive real-time analysis of two data sets of 2,469,822 tweets and 21,800 discussions by patients with cancer during this pandemic. Lung and breast cancer are most prominently discussed, and the most concerns were expressed regarding delayed diagnosis, cancellations, missed treatments, and weakened immunity. All patients expressed significant negative sentiment, with fear being the predominant emotion. Even as some lockdown measures ease, it is crucial that patients with cancer are engaged using social media platforms for real-time identification of issues and the provision of informational and emotional support.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Surgical Management of Breast Cancer: Global Trends and Future Perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: The rapid spread of COVID-19 across the globe is forcing surgical oncologists to change their daily practice. We sought to evaluate how breast surgeons are adapting their surgical activity to limit viral spread and spare hospital resources. METHODS: A panel of 12 breast surgeons from the most affected regions of the world convened a virtual meeting on April 7, 2020, to discuss the changes in their local surgical practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Similarly, a Web-based poll based was created to evaluate changes in surgical practice among breast surgeons from several countries. RESULTS: The virtual meeting showed that distinct countries and regions were experiencing different phases of the pandemic. Surgical priority was given to patients with aggressive disease not candidate for primary systemic therapy, those with progressive disease under neoadjuvant systemic therapy, and patients who have finished neoadjuvant therapy. One hundred breast surgeons filled out the poll. The trend showed reductions in operating room schedules, indications for surgery, and consultations, with an increasingly restrictive approach to elective surgery with worsening of the pandemic. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 emergency should not compromise treatment of a potentially lethal disease such as breast cancer. Our results reveal that physicians are instinctively reluctant to abandon conventional standards of care when possible. However, as the situation deteriorates, alternative strategies of de-escalation are being adopted. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study aimed to characterize how the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting breast cancer surgery and which strategies are being adopted to cope with the situation.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Urological Care Delivery in the United States.

PURPOSE: We examined changes in urological care delivery due to COVID-19 in the U.S. based on patient, practice, and local/regional demographic and pandemic response features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed real-world data from the American Urological Association Quality (AQUA) Registry collected from electronic health record systems. Data represented 157 outpatient urological practices and 3,165 providers across 48 U.S. states and territories, including 3,297,721 unique patients, 12,488,831 total outpatient visits and 2,194,456 procedures. The primary outcome measure was the number of outpatient visits and procedures performed (inpatient or outpatient) per practice per week, measured from January 2019 to February 2021. RESULTS: We found large (>50%) declines in outpatient visits from March 2020 to April 2020 across patient demographic groups and states, regardless of timing of state stay-at-home orders. Nonurgent outpatient visits decreased more across various nonurgent procedures (49%-59%) than for procedures performed for potentially urgent diagnoses (38%-52%); surgical procedures for nonurgent conditions also decreased more (43%-79%) than those for potentially urgent conditions (43%-53%). African American patients had similar decreases in outpatient visits compared with Asians and Caucasians, but also slower recoveries back to baseline. Medicare-insured patients had the steepest declines (55%), while those on Medicaid and government insurance had the lowest percentage of recovery to baseline (73% and 69%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides real-world evidence on the decline in urological care across demographic groups and practice settings, and demonstrates a differential impact on the utilization of urological health services by demographics and procedure type.

A Critical Appraisal of the American College of Surgeons Medically Necessary, Time Sensitive Procedures (MeNTS) Scoring System, Urology Consensus Recommendations and Individual Surgeon Case Prioritization for Resumption of Elective Urological Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: Resumption of elective urology cases postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic requires a systematic approach to case prioritization, which may be based on detailed cross-specialty questionnaires, specialty specific published expert opinion or by individual (operating) surgeon review. We evaluated whether each of these systems effectively stratifies cases and for agreement between approaches in order to inform departmental policy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated triage of elective cases postponed within our department due to the COVID-19 pandemic (March 9, 2020 to May 22, 2020) using questionnaire based surgical prioritization (American College of Surgeons Medically Necessary, Time Sensitive Procedures [MeNTS] instrument), consensus/expert opinion based surgical prioritization (based on published urological recommendations) and individual surgeon based surgical prioritization scoring (developed and managed within our department). Lower scores represented greater urgency. MeNTS scores were compared across consensus/expert opinion based surgical prioritization and individual surgeon based surgical prioritization scores. RESULTS: A total of 204 cases were evaluated. Median MeNTS score was 50 (IQR 44, 55), and mean consensus/expert opinion based surgical prioritization and individual surgeon based surgical prioritization scores were 2.6±0.6 and 2.2±0.8, respectively. Median MeNTS scores were 52 (46.5, 57.5), 50 (44.5, 54.5) and 48 (43.5, 54) for individual surgeon based surgical prioritization priority 1, 2 and 3 cases (p=0.129), and 55 (51.5, 57), 47.5 (42, 56) and 49 (44, 54) for consensus/expert opinion based surgical prioritization priority scores 1, 2, and 3 (p=0.002). There was none to slight agreement between consensus/expert opinion based surgical prioritization and individual surgeon based surgical prioritization scores (Kappa 0.131, p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Questionnaire based, expert opinion based and individual surgeon based approaches to case prioritization result in significantly different case prioritization. Questionnaire based surgical prioritization did not meaningfully stratify urological cases, and consensus/expert opinion based surgical prioritization and individual surgeon based surgical prioritization frequently disagreed. The strengths and weaknesses of each of these systems should be considered in future disaster planning scenarios.

Factors influencing medical student choices in the integrated vascular surgery match: Implications for future post-pandemic residency matches.

OBJECTIVE: Integrated vascular surgery residency is among the most competitive specialties, but little is known about the applicant perspective. The coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak impacted the 2021 integrated vascular surgery residency match because of travel restrictions. We sought to better understand pre-pandemic applicant recruitment strategies, logistics of away rotations, and the residency interview process to identify areas for improvement in the application process. METHODS: An anonymous survey was sent to matched students in 2020, inquiring about motivations for pursuing vascular surgery (VS), logistic of away rotations and interviews, and factors influencing students' rank lists. RESULTS: Seventy of the 73 matched students completed the survey (95.9% response rate). The median age was 27 (range, 25-41); 32.9% were female, 91.4% were U.S. medical students, and 77.1% were from institutions with a VS training program. Factors most strongly influencing the decision to choose VS as a career were interest in open vascular procedures, endovascular procedures, perceived job satisfaction, emerging technologies, and influence of a mentor. The prospect of the job market, future salary, and competitiveness of the application process had the least impact. Of the matched students, 82.9% completed an away rotation (median, 2; range, 1-4), with 51.7% of students paying a total cost of more than $2500. Fifty percent of students matched either at their home institution or where they had performed an away rotation. Students reported application submissions to a median of 50 programs (range, 1-70) and interviewed at 17 (range, 1-28), with 40% of students paying a total of more than $4000 for interview costs. The most significant factors affecting students' rank lists included program culture, open aortic surgical volume, geography, and complex endovascular procedure volume. Tours of facilities, resident salary, and male/female distribution had the least importance. CONCLUSIONS: Successfully matched applicants in 2020 prioritized operative case volume and program collegiality when ranking programs. Despite their high cost, away rotations played an important role in the Match, suggesting that time spent at potential institutions allowed ideal assessment of factors for students. The high average number of away rotations and in-person interviews performed in 2019-2020 was limited for the 2021 Match due to coronavirus disease 2019 restrictions. Programs will have to continue developing creative alternatives or additions to away rotations and the application processes to assure continued success in future post-pandemic Match cycles.

Patient Questions Surrounding Mask Use for Prevention of COVID-19 and Physician Answers from an Evidence-Based Perspective: a Narrative Review.

Recent mandates to wear masks in public places across the USA combined with conflicting messaging from the media and government agencies have generated a lot of patient questions surrounding the appropriate use and efficacy of cloth masks. Here, we have organized the evidence in the context of real patient questions and have provided example answers from a physician's perspective. The purpose of this review is to offer healthcare providers with examples of how to respond to patient questions about masks in a way that encourages responsible decision-making. We conclude, based on the evidence showing a benefit for cloth masks and the recent reports supporting a role for aerosols in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, that cloth masks will be effective when used correctly. We further assert that stronger public messaging surrounding cloth masks in the community setting is needed, and should specify that 2-3 layer, fitted face masks be worn at all times in public as another layer of protection in addition to social distancing, not just when social distancing cannot be maintained.

Virtual visits among gynecologic oncology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic are accessible across the social vulnerability spectrum.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has quickly transformed healthcare systems with expansion of telemedicine. The past year has highlighted risks to immunosuppressed cancer patients and shown the need for health equity among vulnerable groups. In this study, we describe the utilization of virtual visits by patients with gynecologic malignancies and assess their social vulnerability. METHODS: Virtual visit data of 270 gynecology oncology patients at a single institution from March 1, 2020 to August 31, 2020 was obtained by querying a cohort discovery tool. Through geocoding, the CDC Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) was utilized to assign social vulnerability indices to each patient and the results were analyzed for trends and statistical significance. RESULTS: African American patients were the most vulnerable with a median SVI of 0.71, Asian 0.60, Hispanic 0.41, and Caucasian 0.21. Eighty-seven percent of patients in this study were Caucasian, 8.9% African American, 3.3% Hispanic, and 1.1% Asian, which is comparable to the baseline institutional gynecologic cancer population. The mean census tract SVI variable when comparing patients to all census tracts in the United States was 0.31 (range 0.00 least vulnerable to 0.98 most vulnerable). CONCLUSIONS: Virtual visits were utilized by patients of all ages and gynecologic cancer types. African Americans were the most socially vulnerable patients of the cohort. Telemedicine is a useful platform for cancer care across the social vulnerability spectrum during the pandemic and beyond. To ensure continued access, further research and outreach efforts are needed.

Gynecologic oncology treatment modifications or delays in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in a publicly funded versus privately funded North American tertiary cancer center.

OBJECTIVE: To compare gynecologic oncology surgical treatment modifications and delays during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between a publicly funded Canadian versus a privately funded American cancer center. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of all planned gynecologic oncology surgeries at University Health Network (UHN) in Toronto, Canada and Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) in Boston, USA, between March 22,020 and July 302,020. Surgical treatment delays and modifications at both centers were compared to standard recommendations. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 450 surgical gynecologic oncology patients were included; 215 at UHN and 235 at BWH. There was a significant difference in median time from decision-to-treat to treatment (23 vs 15 days, p < 0.01) between UHN and BWH and a significant difference in treatment delays (32.56% vs 18.29%; p < 0.01) and modifications (8.37% vs 0.85%; p < 0.01), respectively. On multivariable analysis adjusting for age, race, treatment site and surgical priority status, treatment at UHN was an independent predictor of treatment modification (OR = 9.43,95% CI 1.81-49.05, p < 0.01). Treatment delays were higher at UHN (OR = 1.96,95% CI 1.14-3.36 p = 0.03) and for uterine disease (OR = 2.43, 95% CI 1.11-5.33, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: During the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic, gynecologic oncology patients treated at a publicly funded Canadian center were 9.43 times more likely to have a surgical treatment modification and 1.96 times more likely to have a surgical delay compared to an equal volume privately funded center in the United States.

Isolation thresholds for curbing SARS-CoV-2 resurgence.

Self-instigated isolation is heavily relied on to curb severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission. Accounting for uncertainty in the latent and prepatent periods, as well as the proportion of infections that remain asymptomatic, the limits of this intervention at different phases of infection resurgence are estimated. We show that by October 2020, SARS-CoV-2 transmission rates in England had already begun exceeding levels that could be interrupted using this intervention alone, lending support to the second national lockdown on 5th November 2020.

Evaluating the effectiveness of measures to control the novel coronavirus disease 2019 in Jilin Province, China.

BACKGROUND: Based on differences in populations and prevention and control measures, the spread of new coronary pneumonia in different countries and regions also differs. This study aimed to calculate the transmissibility of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and to evaluate the effectiveness of measures to control the disease in Jilin Province, China. METHODS: The data of reported COVID-19 cases were collected, including imported and local cases from Jilin Province as of March 14, 2019. A Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Asymptomatic-Recovered/Removed (SEIAR) model was developed to fit the data, and the effective reproduction number (Reff) was calculated at different stages in the province. Finally, the effectiveness of the measures was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 97 COVID-19 infections were reported in Jilin Province, among which 45 were imported infections (including one asymptomatic infection) and 52 were local infections (including three asymptomatic infections). The model fit the reported data well (R2 = 0.593, P < 0.001). The Reff of COVID-19 before and after February 1, 2020 was 1.64 and 0.05, respectively. Without the intervention taken on February 1, 2020, the predicted cases would have reached a peak of 177,011 on October 22, 2020 (284 days from the first case). The projected number of cases until the end of the outbreak (on October 9, 2021) would have been 17,129,367, with a total attack rate of 63.66%. Based on the comparison between the predicted incidence of the model and the actual incidence, the comprehensive intervention measures implemented in Jilin Province on February 1 reduced the incidence of cases by 99.99%. Therefore, according to the current measures and implementation efforts, Jilin Province can achieve good control of the virus's spread. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 has a moderate transmissibility in Jilin Province, China. The interventions implemented in the province had proven effective; increasing social distancing and a rapid response by the prevention and control system will help control the spread of the disease.

Economic burden in treated Japanese patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma.

Aim: To understand the economic burden of relapsed and refractory large B-cell lymphoma patients in Japan treated with salvage chemotherapy. Patients & methods: Patients who received systemic therapy after first-line treatment were analyzed to assess its associated cost and resource use using a retrospective claims database. The impact of COVID-19 was assessed separately. Results & conclusion: This study identified 2927 and 1085 patients in the second- (2L) and third-line (3L) cohorts. The median ages for the 2L and 3L cohorts were 71 and 70 years, respectively, with Charlson Comorbidity Score of 3. A majority of the patients had limited stem cell transplant due to advanced age. Median lengths of inpatient stay for the 2L and 3L cohorts were 118 and 116 days, respectively. The majority of costs were attributed to inpatient costs, and limited COVID-19 impact was observed in this study.

COVID-19: experiences of lockdown and support needs in children and young adults with kidney conditions.

BACKGROUND: During the initial COVID-19 pandemic, young United Kingdom (UK) kidney patients underwent lockdown and those with increased vulnerabilities socially isolated or 'shielded' at home. The experiences, information needs, decision-making and support needs of children and young adult (CYA) patients or their parents during this period is not well known. METHODS: A UK-wide online survey co-produced with patients was conducted in May 2020 amongst CYA aged 12-30, or parents of children aged < 18 years with any long-term kidney condition. Participants answered qualitative open text alongside quantitative closed questions. Thematic content analysis using a three-stage coding process was conducted. RESULTS: One-hundred and eighteen CYA (median age 21) and 197 parents of children (median age 10) responded. Predominant concerns from CYA were heightened vigilance about viral (68%) and kidney symptoms (77%) and detrimental impact on education or work opportunities (70%). Parents feared the virus more than CYA (71% vs. 40%), and had concerns that their child would catch the virus from them (64%) and would have an adverse impact on other children at home (65%). CYA thematic analysis revealed strong belief of becoming seriously ill if they contracted COVID-19; lost educational opportunities, socialisation and career development; and frustration with the public for not following social distancing rules. Positive outcomes included improved family relationships and community cohesion. Only a minority (14-21% CYA and 20-31% parents, merged questions) desired more support. Subgroup analysis identified greater negative psychological impact in the shielded group. CONCLUSIONS: This survey demonstrates substantial concern and need for accurate tailored advice for CYA based on individualised risks to improve shared decision making.

Beyond Sociodemographic and COVID-19-Related Factors: The Association Between the Need for Psychological and Information Support from School and Anxiety and Depression.

BACKGROUND In addition to sociodemographic and COVID-19- related factors, the needs of school support, including material, psychological and information support, have seldom been discussed as factors influencing anxiety and depression among college students during the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS In this cross-sectional study, 3351 college students from China were surveyed through questionnaires about their sociodemographic and COVID-19 characteristics, the needs of school support, and their experiences with anxiety and depression. RESULTS Anxiety and depression were reported by 6.88% and 10.50% of students, respectively. Married, higher education, non-medical, and urban students had significantly higher risks of anxiety or depression. Additionally, symptoms such as cough and fever, especially when following a possible contact with suspected individuals, quarantine history of a personal contact, going out 1-3 times a week, not wearing a mask, and spending 2-3 hours browsing COVID-19-related information were significantly associated with the occurrence of anxiety or depression. Those who used methods to regulate their emotional state, used a psychological hotline, and who had visited a psychiatrist showed higher anxiety or depression. Those who used online curricula and books, used preventive methods for COVID-19, and who had real-time information about the epidemic situation of the school showed lower anxiety and depression. CONCLUSIONS In addition to sociodemographic and COVID-19-related aspects, students' needs for psychological assistance and information from schools were also associated with anxiety and depression among college students.

Association of COVID-19 Misinformation with Face Mask Wearing and Social Distancing in a Nationally Representative US Sample.

Wide-spread misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic has presented challenges for communicating public health recommendations. Should campaigns to promote protective behaviors focus on debunking misinformation or targeting behavior-specific beliefs? To address this question, we examine whether belief in COVID-19 misinformation is directly associated with two behaviors (face mask wearing and social distancing), and whether behavior-specific beliefs can account for this association and better predict behavior, consistent with behavior-change theory. We conducted a nationally representative two-wave survey of U.S. adults from 5/26/20-6/12/20 (n = 1074) and 7/15/20-7/21//20 (n = 889; follow-up response 83%). Scales were developed and validated for COVID-19 related misinformation beliefs, social distancing and face mask wearing, and beliefs about the consequences of both behaviors. Cross-lagged panel linear regression models assessed relationships among the variables. While belief in misinformation was negatively associated with both face mask wearing (B = -.27, SE =.06) and social-distancing behaviors (B = -.46, SE =.08) measured at the same time, misinformation did not predict concurrent or lagged behavior when the behavior-specific beliefs were incorporated in the models. Beliefs about behavioral outcomes accounted for face mask wearing and social distancing, both cross-sectionally (B =.43, SE =.05; B =.63, SE =.09) and lagged over time (B =.20, SE = 04; B =.30, SE =.08). In conclusion, belief in COVID-19-related misinformation is less relevant to protective behaviors, but beliefs about the consequences of these behaviors are important predictors. With regard to misinformation, we recommend health campaigns aimed at promoting protective behaviors emphasize the benefits of these behaviors, rather than debunking unrelated false claims.

Noise measurements as a proxy to evaluating the response to recommendations in times of crisis: An update analysis of the transition to the second wave of the CoViD-19 pandemic in Central Stockholm, Sweden.

Sweden stands out among the other European countries by the degree of restrictive measures taken towards handling the 2019 coronavirus outbreak, associated with the CoViD-19 pandemic. While several governments have imposed a nationwide total or partial lockdown to slow down the spread of the virus, the Swedish government has opted for a recommendation-based approach together with a few imposed restrictions. In a previous contribution by the authors, the impact of the Swedish strategy was observed through the monitored variation of the city noise levels during a period associated with the so-called "first wave" of the pandemic in Stockholm. A very strong impact of these recommendations was shown on the evolution of the noise levels in central Stockholm. This highlighted the potential of acoustic sensor networks both for enforcement of regulation and monitoring of the effectiveness of their implementation. The present contribution presents a follow-up to this urban noise monitoring in central Stockholm, Sweden, for the period leading to the so-called "second wave" of the pandemic in Europe. Both the evolution of adherence to the recommendations and the impact of the recurrence of cases combined with reinforced recommendations are observed through the evolution of the measured noise levels. While the measurements show a gradual lower level of compliance, in particular, past the summer break, these also show again a rapid response to the reinforced recommendations issued by the authorities in mid-fall of 2020. These observations thus confirm the potential associated with detailed urban noise monitoring, for instance here acting as a proxy to evaluating the response to recommendations or restrictions in times of crisis.