Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientists' productivity in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and medicine fields.

While studies suggested adverse impacts of COVID-19 on scientific outputs and work routines for scientists, more evidence is required to understand detailed obstacles challenging scientists' work and productivity during the pandemic, including how different people are affected (e.g., by gender). This online survey-based thematic analysis investigated how the pandemic affected scientists' perception of scientific and academic productivity in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and medicine fields. The analysis examined if inequitable changes in duties and responsibilities for caregiving for children, family, and/or households exist between scientists who are mothers compared to scientists who are fathers or non-parents. The survey collected data from 2548 survey responses in six languages across 132 countries. Results indicate that many scientists suffered from delays and restrictions on research activities and administrations due to the lockdown of institutions, as well as increased workloads from adapting to online teaching environment. Caregiving responsibility for children and family increased, which compromised time for academic efforts, especially due to the temporary shutdown of social supports. Higher percentages of female parent participants than male parent participants expressed such increased burdens indicating unequal divisions of caregiving between women and men. A range of physical and mental health issues was identified mainly due to overworking and isolation. Despite numerous obstacles, some participants reported advantages during the pandemic including the efficiency of online teaching, increased funding for COVID-related research, application of alternative research methodologies, and fluidity of the workday from not commuting. Findings imply the need for rapid institutional support to aid various academic activities and diminish gender inequity in career development among academicians, highlighting how crisis can exacerbate existing inequalities.

The Intersection of Immigrant and Environmental Health: A Scoping Review of Observational Population Exposure and Epidemiologic Studies.

BACKGROUND: Transnational immigration has increased since the 1950s. In countries such as the United States, immigrants now account for >15% of the population. Although differences in health between immigrants and nonimmigrants are well documented, it is unclear how environmental exposures contribute to these disparities. OBJECTIVES: We summarized current knowledge comparing immigrants' and nonimmigrants' exposure to and health effects of environmental exposures. METHODS: We conducted a title and abstract review on articles identified through PubMed and selected those that assessed environmental exposures or health effects separately for immigrants and nonimmigrants. After a full text review, we extracted the main findings from eligible studies and categorized each article as exposure-focused, health-focused, or both. We also noted each study's exposure of interest, study location, exposure and statistical methods, immigrant and comparison groups, and the intersecting socioeconomic characteristics controlled for. RESULTS: We conducted a title and abstract review on 3,705 articles, a full text review on 84, and extracted findings from 50 studies. There were 43 studies that investigated exposure (e.g., metals, organic compounds, fine particulate matter, hazardous air pollutants) disparities, but only 12 studies that assessed health disparities (e.g., mortality, select morbidities). Multiple studies reported higher exposures in immigrants compared with nonimmigrants. Among immigrants, studies sometimes observed exposure disparities by country of origin and time since immigration. Of the 50 studies, 43 were conducted in North America. DISCUSSION: The environmental health of immigrants remains an understudied area, especially outside of North America. Although most identified studies explored potential exposure disparities, few investigated subsequent differences in health effects. Future research should investigate environmental health disparities of immigrants, especially outside North America. Additional research gaps include the role of immigrants' country of origin and time since immigration, as well as the combined effects of immigrant status with intersecting socioeconomic characteristics, such as race/ethnicity, income, and education attainment. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP9855.

Why They Stayed and Why They Left-A Case Study from Ellicott City, MD after Flash Flooding.

Ellicott City, MD was devasted by flash flooding in 2016 and 2018. A lack of qualitative research has been conducted on topics related to sense of place and flash flooding, especially in the United States. In this study, we reveal reasons why some who experienced flash flooding continued to stay the flood zone and why some leave. We utilized a phenomenological approach to answer these research questions. Data were generated through in-depth interviews with 19 participants from the Historic District and adjacent neighborhoods in Ellicott City. The most common reasons participants stayed were: (1) Community Impact, (2) Historical Land, and (3) Financial Burden. The most common reasons participants left were: (1) Emotional Exhaustion and Frustration, (2) Fear/Anxiety, and (3) Financial Burden. The results of our study indicate that reasons individuals who experience flash flooding stay, or leave may include community/historical, environmental, emotional, and economic factors. This reveals the complexity of relocation and sense of place after natural/environmental disasters and supports previous literature that suggests tailored response efforts based on these unique set of burdens. This paper aims to identify burdens and understand flood victims' decisions to help policy makers improve flood response efforts.

Higher incidence of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) cases in areas with combined sewer systems, heavy precipitation, and high percentages of impervious surfaces.

Combined sewer systems (CSS) are water management systems that collect and transport stormwater and sewer water in the same pipes. During large storm events, stormwater runoff may exceed the capacity of the system and lead to combined sewer overflows (CSOs), where untreated sewer and stormwater are released into the environment. Though current literature reveals inconclusive evidence regarding the infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater, detection of infectious SARS-CoV-2 in urine and feces of COVID-19 patients led to concerns that areas contaminated by CSOs may be a reservoir of SARS-CoV-2 and may result in illness after the ingestion and/or inhalation of contaminated splashes, droplets, or aerosols. We investigated the association between COVID-19 incidence and CSSs and whether this association differed by precipitation and percent impervious surfaces as a proxy for possible CSOs. We fitted a quasi-Poisson regression model to estimate the change in percentage of incidence rate of COVID-19 cases in counties with a CSS compared to those without, adjusting for potential confounders (i.e., state, population density, date of first documented COVID-19 case, social vulnerability, and percent vaccinated) and including interaction variables between CSS, precipitation, and impervious surfaces. Our findings suggest that heavy precipitation in combination with high percentages of imperviousness is associated with higher incidences of COVID-19 cases in counties with a CSS compared to in counties without (p-value = 2.5e-9). For example, CSS-counties with precipitation of 10 in/month may observe a higher incidence in COVID-19 cases compared to non-CSS counties if their impervious surfaces exceed 33.5% [95%CI: 23.0%, 60.0%]. We theorize that more COVID-19 cases may be seen in counties with a CSS, heavy precipitation, and high percentages of impervious surfaces because of the possible increase in frequency and severity of CSOs. The results suggest links between climate change, urbanization, and COVID-19.

Do temporal trends of associations between short-term exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and risk of hospitalizations differ by sub-populations and urbanicity-a study of 968 U.S. counties and the Medicare population.

While associations between short-term exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and risk of hospitalization are well documented and evidence suggests that such associations change over time, it is unclear whether these temporal changes exist in understudied less-urban areas or differ by sub-population. We analyzed daily time-series data of 968 continental U.S. counties for 2000-2016, with cause-specific hospitalization from Medicare claims and population-weighted PM2.5 concentrations originally estimated at 1km × 1 km from a hybrid model. Circulatory and respiratory hospitalizations were categorized based on primary diagnosis codes at discharge. Using modified Bayesian hierarchical modelling, we evaluated the temporal trend in association between PM2.5 and hospitalizations and whether disparities in this trend exist across individual-level characteristics (e.g., sex, age, race, and Medicaid eligibility as a proxy for socio-economic status) and urbanicity. Urbanicity was categorized into three levels by county-specific percentage of urban population based on urban rural delineation from the U.S. Census. In this cohort with understudied less-urban areas without regulatory monitors, we still found positive association between circulatory and respiratory hospitalization and short-term exposure to PM2.5, with higher effect estimates towards the end of study period. Consistent with current literature, we identified significant disparity in associations by race, socioeconomic status and urbanicity. We found that the percentage change in circulatory hospitalization rate per 10 µg/m3 increase in PM2.5 was higher in the 2008-2016 time period compared to the 2000-2007 period by 0.33% (95% posterior credible interval 0.22, 0.44%), 0.52% (0.33, 0.69%), and 0.67% (0.53, 0.83%) for low, medium and high tertiles of urban areas, respectively. We also observed significant differences in temporal trends of associations across socioeconomic status, sex, and age, indicating a possible widening in disparity of PM2.5-related health burden. This study raises the importance of considering environmental justice issues in PM2.5-related health impacts with respect to how associations may change over time.

Displacement of Racially and Ethnically Minoritized Groups after the Installation of Stormwater Control Measures (i.e., Green Infrastructure): A Case Study of Washington, DC.

Stormwater control measures (SCMs) (i.e., green infrastructure) are advantageous methods of stormwater management. However, studies suggest that urban greening may be associated with gentrification, displacing racially/ethnically minoritized groups due to increased housing costs and loss of feelings of belonging. We studied displacement of racially/ethnically minoritized groups after SCM installation in Washington, DC. We compared the change in percentage of persons in racial/ethnic groups at the Census block group level with varying levels of SCM installation (i.e., area-weighted SCM count at 300 m buffer). We stratified findings by SCM type, pre-installation income, and SCM size. DC installed a higher density of SCMs in areas with a higher percentage of Black and/or Hispanic/Latino residents. Nonetheless, findings suggest SCM installation is associated with displacement of Black residents. The percentage of residents who are Black decreased by 2.2% [95% Confidence Interval: 1.7, 2.7] and 4.1% [95% Confidence Interval: 3.4, 4.8] after low and high levels of SCM installation, respectively. In turn, the change in percentage of residents who are White increased with increasing levels of SCM installation. Compared to ecological studies on SCMs, studies about social impacts are scarce. This research intends to help optimize SCM installations so more residents can enjoy their health, economic, and ecological benefits.

Distribution of polychlorinated biphenyls in effluent from a large municipal wastewater treatment plant: Potential for bioremediation?

This study involved an evaluation of the potential for bioremediation of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in the effluent from a large municipal wastewater treatment plant. It was focused on the presence of PCBs in two types of effluents: the continuous effluent present during dry weather conditions and the intermittently present effluent that was present during wet weather due to incoming stormwater. The annual discharge of PCBs for both types of effluent was calculated based on a five-year dataset (2011-2015). In addition, the toxicity and bioremediation potential of the PCBs in the effluent were also assessed. It was found that the continuous effluent was responsible for the majority of the discharged PCB into the receiving river (1821 g for five years), while the intermittent effluent contributed 260 g over the five years. The average number of chlorine per biphenyl for the detected PCB congeners showed a 19% difference between the two types of effluent, which indicated a potential for organohalide respiration of PCBs during the continuous treatment. This was further supported by a high level of tri-, tetra- and penta-chlorinated congeners accounting for 75% of the anaerobically respired PCBs. Potential for aerobic degradation and thus biomineralization of PCBs was identified for both effluents. Furthermore, toxicity of 12 dioxin-like PCBs showed that normal operation of the wastewater reduced the toxicity throughout the wastewater treatment plant.