RESUMO
The continual distress of COVID-19 cannot be overemphasized. The pandemic economic and social costs are alarming, with recent attributed economic loss amounting to billions of dollars globally. This economic loss is partly driven by workplace absenteeism due to the disease. Influenza is believed to be a culprit in reinforcing this phenomenon as it may exist in the population concurrently with COVID-19 during the influenza season. Furthermore, their joint infection may increase workplace absenteeism leading to additional economic loss. The objective of this project will aim to quantify the collective impact of COVID-19 and influenza on workplace absenteeism via a mathematical compartmental disease model incorporating population screening and vaccination. Our results indicate that appropriate PCR testing and vaccination of both COVID-19 and seasonal influenza may significantly alleviate workplace absenteeism. However, with COVID-19 PCR testing, there may be a critical threshold where additional tests may result in diminishing returns. Regardless, we recommend on-going PCR testing as a public health intervention accompanying concurrent COVID-19 and influenza vaccination with the added caveat that sensitivity analyses will be necessary to determine the optimal thresholds for both testing and vaccine coverage. Overall, our results suggest that rates of COVID-19 vaccination and PCR testing capacity are important factors for reducing absenteeism, while the influenza vaccination rate and the transmission rates for both COVID-19 and influenza have lower and almost equal affect on absenteeism. We also use the model to estimate and quantify the (indirect) benefit that influenza immunization confers against COVID-19 transmission.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI) has been used increasingly for selection of students to health professions programmes. OBJECTIVES: This paper reports on the evidence base for the feasibility, acceptability, reliability and validity of the MMI. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL and MEDLINE STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All studies testing the MMI on applicants to health professions training. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Each paper was appraised by two reviewers. Narrative summary findings on feasibility, acceptability, reliability and validity are presented. RESULTS: Of the 64 citations identified, 30 were selected for review. The modal MMI consisted of 10 stations, each lasting eight minutes and assessed by one interviewer. The MMI was feasible, i.e. did not require more examiners, did not cost more, and interviews were completed over a short period of time. It was acceptable, i.e. fair, transparent, free from gender, cultural and socio-economic bias, and did not favour applicants with previous coaching. Its reliability was reported to be moderate to high, with Cronbach's alpha = 0.69-0.98 and G = 0.55-0.72. MMI scores did not correlate to traditional admission tools scores, were not associated with pre-entry academic qualifications, were the best predictor for OSCE performance and statistically predictive of subsequent performance at medical council examinations. CONCLUSIONS: The MMI is reliable, acceptable and feasible. The evidence base for its validity against future medical council exams is growing with reports from longitudinal investigations. However, further research is needed for its acceptability in different cultural context and validity against future clinical behaviours.