Global-, Regional-, and National-Level Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Tuberculosis Diagnoses, 2020-2021.

Evaluating cross-country variability on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on tuberculosis (TB) may provide urgent inputs to control programs as countries recover from the pandemic. We compared expected TB notifications, modeled using trends in annual TB notifications from 2013-2019, with observed TB notifications to compute the observed to expected (OE) ratios for 170 countries. We applied the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) method to identify the covariates, out of 27 pandemic- and tuberculosis-relevant variables, that had the strongest explanatory power for log OE ratios. The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a 1.55 million (95% CI: 1.26-1.85, 21.0% [17.5-24.6%]) decrease in TB diagnoses in 2020 and a 1.28 million (0.90-1.76, 16.6% [12.1-21.2%]) decrease in 2021 at a global level. India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and China contributed the most to the global declines for both years, while sub-Saharan Africa achieved pre-pandemic levels by 2021 (OE ratio = 1.02 [0.99-1.05]). Age-stratified analyses revealed that the ≥ 65-year-old age group experienced greater relative declines in TB diagnoses compared with the under 65-year-old age group in 2020 (RR = 0.88 [0.81-0.96]) and 2021 (RR = 0.88 [0.79-0.98]) globally. Covariates found to be associated with all-age OE ratios in 2020 were age-standardized smoking prevalence in 2019 (ß = 0.973 [0.957-990]), school closures (ß = 0.988 [0.977-0.998]), stay-at-home orders (ß = 0.993 [0.985-1.00]), SARS-CoV-2 infection rate (ß = 0.991 [0.987-0.996]), and proportion of population ≥65 years (ß = 0.971 [0.944-0.999]). Further research is needed to clarify the extent to which the observed declines in TB diagnoses were attributable to disruptions in health services, decreases in TB transmission, and COVID-19 mortality among TB patients.

Assessing COVID-19 pandemic policies and behaviours and their economic and educational trade-offs across US states from Jan 1, 2020, to July 31, 2022: an observational analysis.

BACKGROUND: The USA struggled in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, but not all states struggled equally. Identifying the factors associated with cross-state variation in infection and mortality rates could help to improve responses to this and future pandemics. We sought to answer five key policy-relevant questions regarding the following: 1) what roles social, economic, and racial inequities had in interstate variation in COVID-19 outcomes; 2) whether states with greater health-care and public health capacity had better outcomes; 3) how politics influenced the results; 4) whether states that imposed more policy mandates and sustained them longer had better outcomes; and 5) whether there were trade-offs between a state having fewer cumulative SARS-CoV-2 infections and total COVID-19 deaths and its economic and educational outcomes. METHODS: Data disaggregated by US state were extracted from public databases, including COVID-19 infection and mortality estimates from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation's (IHME) COVID-19 database; Bureau of Economic Analysis data on state gross domestic product (GDP); Federal Reserve economic data on employment rates; National Center for Education Statistics data on student standardised test scores; and US Census Bureau data on race and ethnicity by state. We standardised infection rates for population density and death rates for age and the prevalence of major comorbidities to facilitate comparison of states' successes in mitigating the effects of COVID-19. We regressed these health outcomes on prepandemic state characteristics (such as educational attainment and health spending per capita), policies adopted by states during the pandemic (such as mask mandates and business closures), and population-level behavioural responses (such as vaccine coverage and mobility). We explored potential mechanisms connecting state-level factors to individual-level behaviours using linear regression. We quantified reductions in state GDP, employment, and student test scores during the pandemic to identify policy and behavioural responses associated with these outcomes and to assess trade-offs between these outcomes and COVID-19 outcomes. Significance was defined as p<0·05. FINDINGS: Standardised cumulative COVID-19 death rates for the period from Jan 1, 2020, to July 31, 2022 varied across the USA (national rate 372 deaths per 100 000 population [95% uncertainty interval [UI] 364-379]), with the lowest standardised rates in Hawaii (147 deaths per 100 000 [127-196]) and New Hampshire (215 per 100 000 [183-271]) and the highest in Arizona (581 per 100 000 [509-672]) and Washington, DC (526 per 100 000 [425-631]). A lower poverty rate, higher mean number of years of education, and a greater proportion of people expressing interpersonal trust were statistically associated with lower infection and death rates, and states where larger percentages of the population identify as Black (non-Hispanic) or Hispanic were associated with higher cumulative death rates. Access to quality health care (measured by the IHME's Healthcare Access and Quality Index) was associated with fewer total COVID-19 deaths and SARS-CoV-2 infections, but higher public health spending and more public health personnel per capita were not, at the state level. The political affiliation of the state governor was not associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 death rates, but worse COVID-19 outcomes were associated with the proportion of a state's voters who voted for the 2020 Republican presidential candidate. State governments' uses of protective mandates were associated with lower infection rates, as were mask use, lower mobility, and higher vaccination rate, while vaccination rates were associated with lower death rates. State GDP and student reading test scores were not associated with state COVD-19 policy responses, infection rates, or death rates. Employment, however, had a statistically significant relationship with restaurant closures and greater infections and deaths: on average, 1574 (95% UI 884-7107) additional infections per 10 000 population were associated in states with a one percentage point increase in employment rate. Several policy mandates and protective behaviours were associated with lower fourth-grade mathematics test scores, but our study results did not find a link to state-level estimates of school closures. INTERPRETATION: COVID-19 magnified the polarisation and persistent social, economic, and racial inequities that already existed across US society, but the next pandemic threat need not do the same. US states that mitigated those structural inequalities, deployed science-based interventions such as vaccination and targeted vaccine mandates, and promoted their adoption across society were able to match the best-performing nations in minimising COVID-19 death rates. These findings could contribute to the design and targeting of clinical and policy interventions to facilitate better health outcomes in future crises. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, J Stanton, T Gillespie, J and E Nordstrom, and Bloomberg Philanthropies.

Phylogenetic conservation of behavioural variation and behavioural syndromes.

Individuals frequently differ consistently from one another in their average behaviours (i.e. 'animal personality') and in correlated suites of consistent behavioural responses (i.e. 'behavioural syndromes'). However, understanding the evolutionary basis of this (co)variation has lagged behind demonstrations of its presence. This lag partially stems from comparative methods rarely being used in the field. Consequently, much of the research on animal personality has relied on 'adaptive stories' focused on single species and populations. Here, we used a comparative approach to examine the role of phylogeny in shaping patterns of average behaviours, behavioural variation and behavioural correlations. In comparing the behaviours and behavioural variation for five species of Gryllid crickets, we found that phylogeny shaped average behaviours and behavioural (co)variation. Despite differences among species, behavioural responses and variation were most similar among more closely related species. These results suggest that phylogenetic constraints play an important role in the expression of animal personalities and behavioural syndromes and emphasize the importance of examining evolutionary explanations within a comparative framework.

The Heritability of Behavior: A Meta-analysis.

The contribution of genetic variation to phenotypes is a central factor in whether and how populations respond to selection. The most common approach to estimating these influences is via the calculation of heritabilities, which summarize the contribution of genetic variation to phenotypic variation. Heritabilities also indicate the relative effect of genetic variation on phenotypes versus that of environmental sources of variation. For labile traits like behavioral responses, life history traits, and physiological responses, estimation of heritabilities is important as these traits are strongly influenced by the environment. Thus, knowing whether or not genetic variation is present within populations is necessary to understand whether or not these populations can evolve in response to selection. Here we report the results of a meta-analysis summarizing what we currently know about the heritability of behavior. Using phylogenetically controlled methods we assessed the average heritability of behavior (0.235)-which is similar to that reported in previous analyses of physiological and life history traits-and examined differences among taxa, behavioral classifications, and other biologically relevant factors. We found that there was considerable variation among behaviors as to how heritable they were, with migratory behaviors being the most heritable. Interestingly, we found no effect of phylogeny on estimates of heritability. These results suggest, first, that behavior may not be particularly unique in the degree to which it is influenced by factors other than genetics and, second, that those factors influencing whether a behavioral trait will have low or high heritability require further consideration.