Positive and negative emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal survey study of the UK population.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on society; it changed the way we work, learn, socialise, and move throughout the world. In the United Kingdom, policies such as business closures, travel restrictions, and social distance mandates were implemented to slow the spread of COVID-19 and implemented and relaxed intermittently throughout the response period. While negative emotions and feelings such as distress and anxiety during this time of crisis were to be expected, we also see the signs of human resilience, including positive feelings like determination, pride, and strength. A longitudinal study using online survey tools was conducted to assess people's changing moods during the pandemic in the UK. The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) was used to measure self-reported feelings and emotions throughout six periods (phases) of the study from March 2020 to July 2021. A total of 4,222 respondents participated in the survey, while a sub-group participated in each of the six study phases (n = 167). The results were analysed using a cross-sectional study design for the full group across each study phase, while prospective cohort analysis was used to assess the subset of participants who voluntarily answered the survey in each of the six study phases (n = 167). Gender, age and employment status were found to be most significant to PANAS score, with older people, retirees, and women generally reporting more positive moods, while young people and unemployed people generally reported lower positive scores and higher negative scores, indicating more negative emotions. Additionally, it was found that people generally reported higher positive feelings in the summer of 2021, which may be related to the relaxation of COVID-19-related policies in the UK as well as the introduction of vaccines for the general population. This study is an important investigation into what allows for positivity during a crisis and gives insights into periods or groups that may be vulnerable to increased negative states of emotions and feelings.

International stakeholder perspectives on One Health training and empowerment: a needs assessment for a One Health Workforce Academy.

BACKGROUND: One Health is defined as an integrated, unifying approach that aims to sustainably balance and optimize the health of people, animals and ecosystems; this approach attracts stakeholders from multiple sectors, academic disciplines, and professional practices. The diversity of expertise and interest groups is frequently and simultaneously framed as (1) a strength of the One Health approach in the process of understanding and solving complex problems associated with health challenges such as pathogen spillovers and pandemics and (2) a challenge regarding consensus on essential functions of One Health and the sets of knowledge, skills, and perspectives unique to a workforce adopting this approach. Progress in developing competency-based training in One Health has revealed coverage of various topics across fundamental, technical, functional, and integrative domains. Ensuring that employers value the unique characteristics of personnel trained in One Health will likely require demonstration of its usefulness, accreditation, and continuing professional development. These needs led to the conceptual framework of a One Health Workforce Academy (OHWA) for use as a platform to deliver competency-based training and assessment for an accreditable credential in One Health and opportunities for continuing professional development. METHODS: To gather information about the desirability of an OHWA, we conducted a survey of One Health stakeholders. The IRB-approved research protocol used an online tool to collect individual responses to the survey questions. Potential respondents were recruited from partners of One Health University Networks in Africa and Southeast Asia and international respondents outside of these networks. Survey questions collected demographic information, measured existing or projected demand and the relative importance of One Health competencies, and determined the potential benefits and barriers of earning a credential. Respondents were not compensated for participation. RESULTS: Respondents (N = 231) from 24 countries reported differences in their perspectives on the relative importance of competency domains of the One Health approach. More than 90% of the respondents would seek to acquire a competency-based certificate in One Health, and 60% of respondents expected that earning such a credential would be rewarded by employers. Among potential barriers, time and funding were the most cited. CONCLUSION: This study showed strong support from potential stakeholders for a OHWA that hosts competency-based training with opportunities for certification and continuing professional development.

Predicting the potential for zoonotic transmission and host associations for novel viruses.

Host-virus associations have co-evolved under ecological and evolutionary selection pressures that shape cross-species transmission and spillover to humans. Observed virus-host associations provide relevant context for newly discovered wildlife viruses to assess knowledge gaps in host-range and estimate pathways for potential human infection. Using models to predict virus-host networks, we predicted the likelihood of humans as hosts for 513 newly discovered viruses detected by large-scale wildlife surveillance at high-risk animal-human interfaces in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Predictions indicated that novel coronaviruses are likely to infect a greater number of host species than viruses from other families. Our models further characterize novel viruses through prioritization scores and directly inform surveillance targets to identify host ranges for newly discovered viruses.

To Zoom or not to Zoom: A longitudinal study of UK population's activities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This longitudinal study determines the frequency and way of people doing activities from Spring 2020 to Summer 2021 during different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. Six online surveys were carried out between April 2020 and July 2021. 4,992 participants were engaged in the cross-sectional study and 203 participants who provided repeat responses were included in the subset sample of prospective cohort analysis. Primary outcomes measured were the frequency and the mode of doing the activities (online or in-person) across sixteen selected activity groups, as defined by the UK National Time Use Survey. The results show that cultural activities, spending time with others, and travelling, were the activities with the largest proportions of frequency and mode changes. The most significant changes occurred from March to June 2020, a period that included the first lockdown. Survey results from this period show a significant decrease among most of the sixteen measured activities. From March to October 2020, a period which spans the first lockdown and its subsequent ease of restrictions, showed the most significant shift from accessing activities in-person to online. Despite 'Freedom Day', the July 19th 2021 date in which all restrictions were abolished, it was found that people do cultural activities and group activities at a significantly lower frequency than before the pandemic. In addition, despite a lack of restrictions after this date, more than half of participants access many activities, such as spending time with others, shopping, work and studying, online or hybrid. This study provides an invaluable insight into understanding how people in the UK changed their lifestyle, including what activities they do, and how they accessed those activities in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and related public health policy implemented to address the pandemic. These results may serve as unique evidence for policymakers.

Diagnostic accuracy of a rapid diagnostic test for the early detection of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card rapid antigen assay (Abbott; Chicago, IL, USA) in the detection of COVID-19 infection compared to the reference standard of PCR testing. METHODS: We evaluated the BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card rapid antigen assay relative to a standard reference PCR test. We tested 3810 nasal swabs from symptomatic and asymptomatic adults undergoing surveillance COVID-19 testing at Howard University using one swab for each nostril. One swab was tested using the rapid antigen assay and the other using the PCR test. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card rapid antigen assay was 91.84% (95% confidence interval (CI): 80.40-97.73%) and the specificity was 99.95% (95% CI: 99.81-99.99%). The range of Ct values for the N gene was 10.74-34.90 (M = 26.88, SD=4.86). Fourteen (28.6%) samples had an N gene Ct value > 30. The average N gene Ct value for rapid test negative (i.e. false negative) samples was 31.92. CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of the test in our symptomatic and asymptomatic cohort was lower than the manufacturer's reported sensitivity in a symptomatic cohort (97.1%). Despite their relatively lower sensitivity (especially in asymptomatic individuals), rapid tests have undeniable benefits (i.e., ease of use and rapid results) that make them a helpful tool in the control of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Given the diagnostic accuracy of these tests as evidenced by this study, rapid tests can be thoughtfully employed in situations where swift results are critical.

Living Safely With Bats: Lessons in Developing and Sharing a Global One Health Educational Resource.

As part of a public health behavior change and communication strategy related to the identification of a novel ebolavirus in bats in Sierra Leone in 2016, a consortium of experts launched an effort to create a widely accessible resource for community awareness and education on reducing disease risk. The resulting picture book, Living Safely With Bats, includes technical content developed by a consortium of experts in public health, animal health, conservation, bats, and disease ecology from 30 countries. The book has now been adapted, translated, and used in more than 20 countries in Africa and Asia. We review the processes used to integrate feedback from local stakeholders and multidisciplinary experts. We also provide recommendations for One Health and other practitioners who choose to pursue the development and evaluation of this or similar zoonotic disease risk mitigation tools.