{"id":942,"date":"2020-09-17T10:36:57","date_gmt":"2020-09-17T17:36:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/?p=942"},"modified":"2020-09-18T10:55:20","modified_gmt":"2020-09-18T17:55:20","slug":"covid-19-literature-situation-report-sept-17-2020","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/2020\/09\/17\/covid-19-literature-situation-report-sept-17-2020\/","title":{"rendered":"COVID-19 Literature Situation Report Sept. 17, 2020"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The scientific literature on COVID-19 is rapidly evolving and these articles were selected for review based on their relevance to Washington State decision making around COVID-19 response efforts. Included in these Lit Reps are some manuscripts that have been made available online as pre-prints but have not yet undergone peer review. Please be aware of this when reviewing articles included in the Lit Reps.<\/p>\n<p><em>Today&#8217;s summary is based on a review of 800 articles (686 published, 114 in preprint).<\/em><\/p>\n<h2>Key Takeaways<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>One-quarter of the pregnant women who were hospitalized with symptomatic COVID-19 had a severe disease course, including ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, or death. <\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6938e1\">More<\/a><\/li>\n<li><strong>A study among 105 pregnant women with COVID-19 reported the prevalence of pre-pregnancy obesity and gestational diabetes were significantly higher among those hospitalized for COVID-19\u2013related illness than among those originally admitted for obstetric reasons. <\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6938e2\">More<\/a><\/li>\n<li><strong>An open-ended survey reported that 35% of participating US youth (n=950) experienced difficulty accessing essential resources due to COVID-19. <\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jadohealth.2020.07.043\">More<\/a><\/li>\n<li><strong>There was a 61% decrease in the number of respiratory specimens sent for influenza testing and a 98% decrease in test positivity during the COVID-19 pandemic period (March 1\u2013May 16), which may indicate that COVID-19 mitigation measures can prevent influenza in the US, but the authors emphasize that influenza vaccination remains very important. <\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6937a6\">More<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<div id=\"uw-accordion-shortcode\">\n<h3>Article Summaries<\/h3>\n<div class=\"js-accordion\" data-accordion-prefix-classes=\"uw-accordion-shortcode\">\n<div class=\"js-accordion__panel\" >\n<h2 class=\"js-accordion__header\">Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions<\/h2>\n<div class=\"su-posts su-posts-default-loop\">\n<div id=\"su-post-945\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">Association of Daily Wear of Eyeglasses With Susceptibility to Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>Eyeglass wearers were underrepresented among COVID-19 patients, providing some evidence that eyeglasses could provide some protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection. A cohort study of COVID-19 patients conducted in Suizhou, China found that 6% of patients wore eyeglasses for extended periods. In comparison, a previous study estimated that 32% of the general population wore glasses.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Zeng et al. (Sept 16, 2020). Association of Daily Wear of Eyeglasses With Susceptibility to Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection. JAMA Ophthalmology. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jamaophthalmol.2020.3906\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jamaophthalmol.2020.3906<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div id=\"su-post-943\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">Case-Control Study of Use of Personal Protective Measures and Risk for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection, Thailand. Emerging Infectious Diseases<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>Wearing a facemask at all times when in contact with someone with COVID-19 was associated with a significantly lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (aOR=0.23) among close contacts of people with COVID-19 in Thailand. The case-control study (211 cases and 839 controls) also found that maintaining physical distance (aOR=0.15), shorter duration of contact (aOR=0.24), and handwashing (aOR=0.33) were also independently associated with lower risk of infection.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Doung-ngern et al. (Sept 14, 2020). Case-Control Study of Use of Personal Protective Measures and Risk for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection, Thailand. Emerging Infectious Diseases. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3201\/eid2611.203003\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3201\/eid2611.203003<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"js-accordion__panel\" >\n<h2 class=\"js-accordion__header\">Transmission<\/h2>\n<div class=\"su-posts su-posts-default-loop\">\n<div id=\"su-post-949\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">Prolonged SARS-CoV-2 Detection and Reversed RT-PCR Results in Mild or Asymptomatic Patients<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>Many people with mild or asymptomatic COVID-19 (n=300) had prolonged SARS-CoV-2 RNA positivity with intermittent negative tests in a study in Korea. 23% had SARS-CoV-2 detected more than 3 weeks after the initial positive RT-PCR test, and 14% had positive results for more than 4 weeks. Overall, 37% (152\/405) of negative results were positive or indeterminate in the next day&#8217;s test, and 43% (123\/283) of negative results were followed by a positive or indeterminate result within 3 weeks of diagnosis.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Kim et al. (Sept 16, 2020). Prolonged SARS-CoV-2 Detection and Reversed RT-PCR Results in Mild or Asymptomatic Patients. Infectious Diseases. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/23744235.2020.1820076\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/23744235.2020.1820076<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"js-accordion__panel\" >\n<h2 class=\"js-accordion__header\">Testing and Treatment<\/h2>\n<div class=\"su-posts su-posts-default-loop\">\n<div id=\"su-post-953\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">Change in Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 Over 60 Days Among Health Care Personnel in Nashville, Tennessee<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels declined over 60 days among all 19 health care personnel in Tennessee who had anti\u2013SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at baseline. In 11 (58%), antibody levels declined substantially enough that they tested negative at 60 days, while 8 (42%) remained seropositive after 60 days. The authors conclude that cross-sectional seroprevalence studies may underestimate rates of prior infections because antibodies may only be transiently detectable following infection.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Patel et al. (Sept 17, 2020). Change in Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 Over 60 Days Among Health Care Personnel in Nashville, Tennessee. JAMA. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2020.18796\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2020.18796<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div id=\"su-post-951\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">Self-Collected Saline Gargle Samples as an Alternative to Healthcare Worker Collected Nasopharyngeal Swabs for COVID-19 Diagnosis in Outpatients<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>[Pre-print, not peer reviewed] Self-collected saline mouth rinse\/gargle samples and saliva samples had a sensitivity of 98% (39\/40) and 79% (26\/33), respectively, compared to healthcare worker (HCW)-collected nasopharyngeal swab samples among 40 people with SARS-CoV-2. Both types of self-collected samples showed stable viral RNA detection after 2 days of storage at room temperature and demonstrated higher user acceptability ratings than HCW-collected NP swabs.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Goldfarb et al. (Sept 14, 2020). Self-Collected Saline Gargle Samples as an Alternative to Healthcare Worker Collected Nasopharyngeal Swabs for COVID-19 Diagnosis in Outpatients. Pre-print downloaded Sept 18 from <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1101\/2020.09.13.20188334\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1101\/2020.09.13.20188334<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"js-accordion__panel\" >\n<h2 class=\"js-accordion__header\">Clinical Characteristics and Health Care Setting<\/h2>\n<div class=\"su-posts su-posts-default-loop\">\n<div id=\"su-post-965\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">Preventing COVID-19 Outbreaks in Long-Term Care Facilities Through Preemptive Testing of Residents and Staff Members \u2014 Fulton County, Georgia, March\u2013May 2020<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>There was a considerably higher proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 test results among residents and staff in long-term care facilities when testing was conducted in response to an initial confirmed case of COVID-19 compared to preventive testing done before cases were detected.<\/li>\n<li>In Fulton County, Georgia, testing in response to an initial case in long-term care facilities (n=15) resulted in positive tests in 28% of residents and 7% of staff, increasing to 42% of residents and 12% of staff at 4-week follow-up testing. By comparison, when testing was conducted preventively (n=13 facilities), only 1% of residents and staff tested positive, increasing to 2% after 4 weeks. The authors conclude that proactive testing for residents and staff members might prevent large COVID-19 outbreaks through early identification and timely response. [EDITORIAL NOTE: A version of this article was previously summarized as a pre-print on July 2, 2020]<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Telford et al. (Sept 18, 2020). Preventing COVID-19 Outbreaks in Long-Term Care Facilities Through Preemptive Testing of Residents and Staff Members \u2014 Fulton County, Georgia, March\u2013May 2020. MMWR. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6937a4\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6937a4<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div id=\"su-post-963\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">Serial Testing for SARS-CoV-2 and Virus Whole Genome Sequencing Inform Infection Risk at Two Skilled Nursing Facilities with COVID-19 Outbreaks \u2014 Minnesota, April\u2013June 2020<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>During April\u2013June 2020, serial facility-wide testing at two Minnesota skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) identified COVID-19 cases among 64% of residents (N=259) and 33% of health care personnel (N=341). Genetic sequencing found facility-specific clustering of viral genomes from healthcare professionals\u2019 and residents\u2019 specimens, suggesting intra-facility transmission.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Taylor et al. (Sept 18, 2020). Serial Testing for SARS-CoV-2 and Virus Whole Genome Sequencing Inform Infection Risk at Two Skilled Nursing Facilities with COVID-19 Outbreaks \u2014 Minnesota, April\u2013June 2020. MMWR. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6937a3\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6937a3<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div id=\"su-post-961\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">The COVID-19 Pandemic\u2019s Impact on Critical Care Resources and Providers: A Global Survey<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>Female gender, being a nurse, reporting a shortage of ICU nurses and powered air-purifying respirators, as well as poor communication from supervisors were found to be positively associated with emotional distress or burnout among healthcare providers (n=2,700) for critically ill patients with COVID-19. These results were obtained from an electronic 41-question survey administered to health care workers in 77 countries during April 23-May 7, 2020. In addition, 16% of respondents reported limiting mechanical ventilation and 66% reported changes in cardiopulmonary resuscitation practices. The authors addressed a need for targeted interventions to support HCPs on the front lines.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Wahlster et al. (Sept 11, 2020). The COVID-19 Pandemic\u2019s Impact on Critical Care Resources and Providers: A Global Survey. Chest. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.chest.2020.09.070\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.chest.2020.09.070<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div id=\"su-post-959\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Hospitalized Pregnant Women: Reasons for Admission and Pregnancy Characteristics \u2014 Eight U.S. Health Care Centers, March 1\u2013May 30, 2020<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>Prevalence of pre-pregnancy obesity and gestational diabetes were higher among pregnant women hospitalized for COVID-19\u2013related illness than among women admitted for obstetric reasons and later found to have COVID-19 (44% vs. 31%, and 26% vs. 8%, respectively). These findings were among 105 pregnant women hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 in the US from March 1\u2013May 30, 2020.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Panagiotakopoulos et al. (Sept 16, 2020). SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Hospitalized Pregnant Women: Reasons for Admission and Pregnancy Characteristics \u2014 Eight U.S. Health Care Centers, March 1\u2013May 30, 2020. MMWR. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6938e2\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6938e2<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div id=\"su-post-957\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">Mortality Rate and Predictors of Mortality in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients with Diabetes<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>Older age (\u226570 years) and a high serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level significantly predicted mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients with diabetes in South Korea. Diabetes was present in 55 (17%) of 324 patients who were hospitalized with COVID-19 at two tertiary healthcare facilities. The mortality rate was much higher among patients with diabetes than among those without (20% vs 5%). The authors suggest that COVID-19 patients with diabetes should be closely considered at high risk of COVID-19 mortality.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Acharya et al. (Sept 13, 2020). Mortality Rate and Predictors of Mortality in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients with Diabetes. Healthcare. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/healthcare8030338\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/healthcare8030338<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div id=\"su-post-955\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">Characteristics and Maternal and Birth Outcomes of Hospitalized Pregnant Women with Laboratory-Confirmed COVID-19 \u2014 COVID-NET, 13 States, March 1\u2013August 22, 2020<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>Among 598 pregnant women hospitalized with COVID-19 during March 1\u2013August 22, 2020 in the US, 272 (45%) were symptomatic at admission, among whom 69 (25%) had severe illness during COVID-19-related hospitalizations, including ICU admissions (n=44), mechanical ventilation (n=23), and death (n=2). Ten women (7 symptomatic and 3 asymptomatic) experienced pregnancy losses.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Delahoy et al. (Sept 16, 2020). Characteristics and Maternal and Birth Outcomes of Hospitalized Pregnant Women with Laboratory-Confirmed COVID-19 \u2014 COVID-NET, 13 States, March 1\u2013August 22, 2020. MMWR. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6938e1\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6938e1<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"js-accordion__panel\" >\n<h2 class=\"js-accordion__header\">Mental Health and Personal Impact<\/h2>\n<div class=\"su-posts su-posts-default-loop\">\n<div id=\"su-post-969\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">COVID-19 and Traumatic Stress: The Role of Perceived Vulnerability, COVID-19-Related Worries, and Social Isolation<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>Perceived vulnerability to COVID-19 was positively related to COVID-19-related worries, social isolation, and traumatic stress, and both COVID-19-related worries and social isolation were significant mediators of the relationship between perceived vulnerability to COVID-19 and traumatic stress. These associations were reported in a study including 747 US adults recruited through an online survey during March 26-April 6, 2020.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Boyraz et al. (Sept 8, 2020). COVID-19 and Traumatic Stress: The Role of Perceived Vulnerability, COVID-19-Related Worries, and Social Isolation. Journal of Anxiety Disorders. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.janxdis.2020.102307\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.janxdis.2020.102307<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div id=\"su-post-967\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">Needs and Coping Behaviors of Youth in the U.S. During COVID-19. Journal of Adolescent Health<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>A sizable proportion of US youth reported experiencing unmet needs and negative emotions due to COVID-19. An open-ended survey conducted in March 2020 among 950 US youth (age 14-24 years) found that 35% reported difficulty accessing or unavailability of essential resources (e.g., food, household supplies, cleaning supplies, money\/work). One-fifth of respondents reported symptoms of anxiety and depression. Commonly reported coping strategies included staying connected and maintaining positivity.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Waselewski et al. (Sept 12, 2020). Needs and Coping Behaviors of Youth in the U.S. During COVID-19. Journal of Adolescent Health. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jadohealth.2020.07.043\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jadohealth.2020.07.043<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"js-accordion__panel\" >\n<h2 class=\"js-accordion__header\">Public Health Policy and Practice<\/h2>\n<div class=\"su-posts su-posts-default-loop\">\n<div id=\"su-post-973\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">Trends and Predictors of COVID-19 Information Sources and Their Relationship with Knowledge and Beliefs Related to the Pandemic: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study (Preprint)<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>An online survey (n=11,242) found that US adults used an average of 6.1 sources for COVID-19 information, with 91% using traditional media and 70% using mainstream media during March-April 2020. A larger number of sources used was reported by men (vs women), those aged 40-59 or \u226560 (vs 18-38 years), those not working (vs working), and Republican (vs Democrat). Respondents with higher educational attainment reported using fewer sources. Government websites were reported to be the largest individual information source (88%). Men and elder people (aged 40-59 and \u226560 years) were less likely to trust government websites.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Ali et al. (Sept 16, 2020). Trends and Predictors of COVID-19 Information Sources and Their Relationship with Knowledge and Beliefs Related to the Pandemic: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study (Preprint). JMIR Public Health and Surveillance. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2196\/21071\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2196\/21071<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div id=\"su-post-971\" class=\"su-post\">\n<h5 class=\"su-post-title\">Decreased Influenza Activity During the COVID-19 Pandemic \u2014 United States, Australia, Chile, and South Africa, 2020<\/h5>\n<p>\t\t\t\t<!-- \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<div class=\"su-post-meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t: \t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n --><\/p>\n<div class=\"su-post-excerpt\">\n<ul>\n<li>There was a 61% decrease in the US in the number of respiratory specimens submitted for influenza testing during the COVID-19 pandemic (49,696 per week during September 29, 2019\u2013February 29, 2020 vs. 19,537 during March 1\u2013May 16, 2020). The rate of test positive decreased by 98% (19% vs. 0.3%) and has remained at historically low inter-seasonal levels (0.2% in 2020 vs. 1\u20132% in 2017-2019). The authors state that some of the mitigation measures for the COVID-19 pandemic might have a role in preventing influenza in future seasons, but that influenza vaccination of all persons aged \u22656 months remains especially important in the United States this fall and winter when SARS-CoV-2 and influenza virus might co-circulate.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Olsen et al. (Sept 18, 2020). Decreased Influenza Activity During the COVID-19 Pandemic \u2014 United States, Australia, Chile, and South Africa, 2020. MMWR. <a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6937a6\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.15585\/mmwr.mm6937a6<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<!-- <a href=\"\" class=\"su-post-comments-link\"><\/a> --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<h2>Other Resources and Commentaries<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"http:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2020.15139\">The Science of Persuasion Offers Lessons for COVID-19 Prevention<\/a> \u2013 JAMA (Sept 16)<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/d41586-020-02619-4\">Researchers Highlight \u2018Questionable\u2019 Data in Russian Coronavirus Vaccine Trial Results<\/a> \u2013 Nature (Sept 15)<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2196\/22374\">COVID-19 and the \u201cFilm Your Hospital\u201d Conspiracy Theory: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data.<\/a> \u2013 Journal of Medical Internet Research (Sept 16)<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1056\/NEJMp2024046\">A Pandemic within a Pandemic \u2014 Intimate Partner Violence during Covid-19<\/a> \u2013 NEJM (Sept 16)<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jamaophthalmol.2020.3909\">Eye Protection and the Risk of Coronavirus Disease 2019: Does Wearing Eye Protection Mitigate Risk in Public, Non\u2013Health Care Settings?<\/a> \u2013 JAMA Ophthalmology (Sept 16)<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2020.16343\">Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and Worker Safety During the COVID-19 Pandemic<\/a> \u2013 JAMA (Sept 16)<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2020.17395\">Suboptimal US Response to COVID-19 Despite Robust Capabilities and Resources<\/a> \u2013 JAMA (Sept 16)<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1056\/NEJMe2029886\">Audio Interview: Operation Warp Speed and Covid-19 Therapeutics<\/a> \u2013 NEJM (Sept 17)<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2020.16516\">Investigating Whether Blood Type Is Linked to COVID-19 Risk<\/a> \u2013 JAMA (Sept 16)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Report prepared by the UW Alliance for Pandemic Preparedness and the START Center in collaboration with and on behalf of WA DOH COVID-19 Incident Management Team.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>One-quarter of the pregnant women who were hospitalized with symptomatic COVID-19 had a severe disease course, including ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, or death. More<\/p>\n<div><a class=\"more\" href=\"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/2020\/09\/17\/decreased-influenza-activity-during-the-covid-19-pandemic-united-states-australia-chile-and-south-africa-2020\/\">Read more<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":341,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"topic":[],"class_list":["post-942","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-covid-19-literature-situation-report"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/942","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=942"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/942\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":975,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/942\/revisions\/975"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/341"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=942"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=942"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=942"},{"taxonomy":"topic","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/pandemicalliance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/topic?post=942"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}