Ticked off: New device may offer a better way to prevent tick bites

Spatial repellents tested at UMass Amherst for the Army could one day reduce tick-borne disease incidence

Peer-Reviewed Publication

UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST

 

IMAGE: VECTOR-BORNE DISEASE EXPERT STEPHEN RICH IS A PROFESSOR OF MICROBIOLOGY AT UMASS AMHERST AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE UMASS AMHERST-BASED NEW ENGLAND CENTER OF EXCELLENCE IN VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES. view more 

CREDIT: UMASS AMHERST

When it comes to preventing tick bites – especially in light of the dramatic, decade-long rise in tick-borne diseases – bug sprays help but are less than optimal. 

For example, DEET was designed to keep quick-moving mosquitoes from landing on their host, where they bite and fly off in seconds. Ticks, on the other hand, don’t fly but rather ambush and then climb slowly up their host until they embed, feed and may remain for days.

“Unfortunately most repellants were developed for mosquitoes 75-plus years ago and not for ticks,” says vector-borne disease expert Stephen Rich, professor of microbiology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and executive director of the UMass Amherst-based New England Center of Excellence in Vector-Borne Diseases (NEWVEC). “DEET, the gold standard, works fairly well, but a holy grail would be to have another repellency tool – not a contact repellent like DEET but a spatial repellent – that works as good as or better than DEET against ticks.”

Experiments at Rich’s Laboratory of Medical Zoology used a new controlled-release device developed by scientist-entrepreneur Noel Elman with funding from the Department of Defense’s medical research programs. Rich and colleagues tested the effects on ticks after releasing the synthetic pyrethroids transfluthrin and metofluthrin into a small, transparent chamber equipped with three vertical climbing sticks. Ticks don’t come in direct contact with the repellents but rather the active ingredients create more of a “force field” that alters and slows the ticks’ progress toward their target.

The results, published today, Nov. 8, in the journal PLOS ONE, found that the two spatial repellents were effective at changing the behavior of ticks, making them less likely to climb vertically and more likely to detach or fall off the stick.

“While we still have much work to do, these innovative findings prove the principle that these spatial repellents alter the behavior in ticks in a way we hope will lead to fewer tick bites,” says Rich, senior author.

The paper’s lead author, Eric Siegel, helped design the vision system that precisely tracked tick movement in the experiment chamber. “People throw the word ‘repellency’ around a lot, and we made it a goal to redefine repellency in tick protection and find ways to measure it,” says Siegel, a lab technician about to begin his Ph.D. studies in microbiology under Rich. “There’s so much we still don’t know about tick olfactory [smell] and gustatory [taste] mechanisms, and this was the biggest challenge in these experiments, as is the case overall in the development of protective products.”

The compounds were tested against the three main human-biting ticks in the U.S.: I. scapularis (black-legged or deer tick), which can spread Lyme disease and anaplasmosis, among other diseases; D. variabilis (American dog tick), which can transmit Rocky Mountain spotted fever and tularemia; and A. americanum (lone star tick), which can spread ehrlichiosis and has been associated with an allergy to red meat.  

The experiments found that transfluthrin deterred 75% of D. variabilis, 67% of A. Americanum and 50% of I. scapularis. Metofluthrin was slightly more effective, deterring 81% of D. variabilis, 73% of A. americanum and 72% of I. scapularis.

“We were impressed with not just the repellency but the behavioral changes in the tick,” says co-author Elman, founder and CEO of GearJump Technologies, who received the DoD funding to design a controlled-release device that can attach to the boot of soldiers. Many of the ticks in the experiments became slower moving, less mobile and appeared to be in a “drunken-like state,” according to the paper.

Elman approached Rich a few years ago to design and run experiments using the device with various repellents. A next step is to conduct experiments with actual animal hosts.

“Repellents probably won’t stop ticks from getting on us,” Rich says. “We hope the repellents will help keep them from staying on us, and that’s where the battle lines really should be drawn.”

The researchers can envision a day when such devices will be commercially available to the general population.

Until then, the research will continue. “We still mostly don’t know how the chemicals we use work,” Siegel says. “When we do, we can develop and refine these measures in a more targeted way.” 

---

JOURNAL

PLoS ONE

DOI

10.1371/journal.pone.0269150 

METHOD OF RESEARCH

Observational study

SUBJECT OF RESEARCH

Animals

ARTICLE TITLE

Spatial repellents transfluthrin and metofluthrin affect the behavior of Dermacentor variabilis, Amblyomma americanum, and Ixodes scapularis in an in vitro vertical climb assay

ARTICLE PUBLICATION DATE

8-Nov-2022

U.S. political partisanship affects first impressions of faces

Disclosing political partisanship of photo subjects strongly affected impressions of likeability, competence

Peer-Reviewed Publication

PLOS

 

IMAGE: THE RESEARCH SUGGESTS THAT POLARIZATION BASED ON POLITICAL PARTISANSHIP CAN APPEAR IN BASIC ASPECTS OF PERCEPTION. view more 

CREDIT: ELEMENT5 DIGITAL, UNSPLASH, CC0 (HTTPS://CREATIVECOMMONS.ORG/PUBLICDOMAIN/ZERO/1.0/)

In an experimental study, participants’ first impressions of photos of strangers’ faces were strongly influenced by disclosure of the stranger’s political partisanship. Brittany Cassidy of the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, U.S., and colleagues present these findings in the open-access journal PLOS ONE on November 9, 2022.

Previous research suggests that levels of ideological polarization are rising in the U.S., leading to tensions between people of differing political preferences. Such polarization could potentially be reflected in basic aspects of perception, such as first impressions of other people’s faces. However, while a growing number of studies have explored links between face impressions and interpersonal behavior, few have examined links between face impressions and political partisanship.

To explore the how political partisanship might influence face impressions, Cassidy and colleagues conducted two experiments involving 275 undergraduate college students.

In the first experiment, participants were presented with pairs of photos of two unfamiliar people’s faces and asked to select which was more likable and competent. In some cases, photos were labeled according to the subjects’ true political partisanship—Republican or Democratic. In other cases, these labels were inaccurate or omitted, but the researchers were aware of all subjects’ true political ideologies.

Results from the first experiment showed that participants’ first impressions of the faces were more strongly affected by disclosed political partisanship—even if it was inaccurate—than non-disclosed partisanship.

In the second experiment, participants evaluated likeability of faces before and after political partisanship was disclosed. The researchers found that participants changed their impressions post-disclosure based on their own political partisanship.

In both experiments, the researchers also evaluated each participant’s level of perceived partisan threat; they found that the effects of disclosure on face impressions were particularly pronounced for people with stronger perceptions of partisan threat.

These results suggest that polarization based on political partisanship can appear in basic aspects of perception. The researchers suggest their findings—and future research in this area—could help inform efforts to foster more equitable interactions between people of differing political ideologies.

#####

In your coverage please use this URL to provide access to the freely available article in PLOS ONE: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0276400

Citation: Cassidy BS, Hughes C, Krendl AC (2022) Disclosing political partisanship polarizes first impressions of faces. PLoS ONE 17(11): e0276400. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276400

Author Countries: USA, Canada

Funding: This research was supported by grant numbers KL2TR002530 and UL1TR002529 (A. Shekhar, PI) from the National Institutes of Health, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (https://ncats.nih.gov/), Clinical and Translational Sciences Award to A.C.K. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

---

JOURNAL

PLoS ONE

DOI

10.1371/journal.pone.0276400 

METHOD OF RESEARCH

Experimental study

SUBJECT OF RESEARCH

People

ARTICLE TITLE

Disclosing political partisanship polarizes first impressions of faces

ARTICLE PUBLICATION DATE

9-Nov-2022

New study in JNCCN presents evidence for ‘tough conversations’ around racism in access to cancer Care

Research led by Duke University School of Medicine found that Non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely to receive guideline-appropriate treatment for ovarian cancer compared to Non-Hispanic White patients

Peer-Reviewed Publication

NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK

 

IMAGE: MARY KATHERINE MONTES DE OCA, MD, DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE view more 

CREDIT: NCCN

PLYMOUTH MEETING, PA [November 9, 2022] — New research in the November 2022 issue of JNCCN—Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network examined whether people with ovarian cancer were being treated based on very specific recommendations regarding comprehensive staging surgery and the recommended minimum cycles of systemic therapy from evidence-based, expert consensus NCCN Guidelines. The findings showed clear disparities based on patients’ race, ability to pay, and the availability of specialists/cancer centers in their area—significantly impacting treatment course, which can affect survival. Out of 6,632 patients studied, 23.8% of non-Hispanic White patients received fully guideline-concordant surgery and chemotherapy compared to only 14.2% of non-Hispanic Black patients. Racial disparities remained after adjusting for the assessed healthcare access issues, including the ability to pay for care and having access to local specialists.

“While the ability to pay and the number of hospitals and specialists in the area impacts a patient's cancer care, these do not completely explain racial disparities in ovarian cancer treatment. More work needs to be done to determine what other factors are contributing to these inequities,” said lead author Mary Katherine Montes de Oca, MD, Duke University School of Medicine.

“The reasons are complex and multifaceted,” agreed senior author Tomi F. Akinyemiju, PhD, with the Department of Population Health Sciences and the Duke Cancer Institute at Duke University School of Medicine. “For many reasons, including the legacy of structural racism, Black patients have poorer access to healthcare. This is related to employment patterns, which predict quality insurance coverage and residential patterns, and in turn, the availability and quality of healthcare resources in predominantly Black neighborhoods. As our study shows, these are significant contributors to receiving guideline-concordant care. There is also an aspect of the quality of interactions between patients and providers, which is an area of ongoing research by our group─these additional dimensions of accommodation and acceptability need to be further addressed.”

Dr. Akinyemiju continued: “As a society, we need to have tough conversations about access to quality care, and collectively come up with solutions so that having a cancer diagnosis does not become a death sentence for the most vulnerable members of our society.”

The researchers used a SEER-Medicare linked dataset to examine the treatment received by patients who had at least 12 months of continuous enrollment in Medicare fee-for-service before and after being diagnosed with ovarian cancer. The findings also reference previous studies that illustrate worse outcomes, including increased mortality, for ovarian cancer patients who did not receive guideline-concordant treatment—based on the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) for Ovarian Cancer recommendations for surgery and chemotherapy cycles. According to their cited research, guideline-adherent treatment has been associated with substantially improved outcomes in both Black and White patients, but some racial disparities in survival still remain, possibly due to later diagnosis or higher comorbidity burden.

“We know that the best outcomes for ovarian cancer are achieved when affected patients are treated according to NCCN Guidelines,” commented Ronald D. Alvarez, MD, MBA, Professor, Chairman, and Clinical Service Chief, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, who was not involved in this research. “This study demonstrated, similar to many other studies, that non-Hispanic Black ovarian cancer patients were less likely than non-Hispanic White ovarian cancer patients to receive NCCN Guidelines-based care. This study specifically pointed out that non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely to undergo guideline-based surgery or initiate/complete chemotherapy and that this was predominantly related to lower affordability and availability of quality ovarian cancer services.”

Dr. Alvarez—who serves as Vice-Chair for the NCCN Guidelines® Panel for Ovarian Cancer—continued: “Improving the affordability and availability of such services should help improve adherence to guidelines and improve ovarian cancer outcomes in non-Hispanic Black patients. Interestingly, this study suggests that outcomes for this population would still fall short of those achieved for non-Hispanic White patients, even if affordability and availability issues were overcome.”

To read the entire study, visit JNCCN.org. Complimentary access to “Healthcare Access Dimensions and Guideline-Concordant Ovarian Cancer Treatment: SEER-Medicare Analysis of the ORCHiD Study” is available until February 10, 2023.

# # #

About JNCCN—Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network

More than 25,000 oncologists and other cancer care professionals across the United States read JNCCN—Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. This peer-reviewed, indexed medical journal provides the latest information about innovation in translational medicine, and scientific studies related to oncology health services research, including quality care and value, bioethics, comparative and cost effectiveness, public policy, and interventional research on supportive care and survivorship. JNCCN features updates on the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®), review articles elaborating on guidelines recommendations, health services research, and case reports highlighting molecular insights in patient care. JNCCN is published by Harborside. Visit JNCCN.org. To inquire if you are eligible for a FREE subscription to JNCCN, visit NCCN.org/jnccn/subscribe. Follow JNCCN on Twitter @JNCCN.

About the National Comprehensive Cancer Network

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®) is a not-for-profit alliance of leading cancer centers devoted to patient care, research, and education. NCCN is dedicated to improving and facilitating quality, effective, equitable, and accessible cancer care so all patients can live better lives. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) provide transparent, evidence-based, expert consensus recommendations for cancer treatment, prevention, and supportive services; they are the recognized standard for clinical direction and policy in cancer management and the most thorough and frequently-updated clinical practice guidelines available in any area of medicine. The NCCN Guidelines for Patients® provide expert cancer treatment information to inform and empower patients and caregivers, through support from the NCCN Foundation®. NCCN also advances continuing education, global initiatives, policy, and research collaboration and publication in oncology. Visit NCCN.org for more information and follow NCCN on Facebook @NCCNorg, Instagram @NCCNorg, and Twitter @NCCN.

Tomi F. Akinyemiju, PhD, with the Department of Population Health Sciences and the Duke Cancer Institute at Duke University School of Medicine

JNCCN Cover, November 2022

CREDIT

NCCN

JOURNAL

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network

DOI

10.6004/jnccn.2022.7055 

ARTICLE TITLE

Healthcare Access Dimensions and Guideline-Concordant Ovarian Cancer Treatment: SEER-Medicare Analysis of the ORCHiD Study

ARTICLE PUBLICATION DATE

9-Nov-2022

COI STATEMENT

Dr. Wilson has disclosed receiving grant/research support from AstraZeneca. Dr. Previs has disclosed serving on an advisory board for Myriad Genetics and Natera. The remaining authors have disclosed that they have not received any financial consideration from any person or organization to support the preparation analysis, results, or discussion of this article.

How has Medicaid expansion impacted health disparities nationwide?

Grant and Award Announcement

UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA

 

IMAGE: A STUDY LED BY J. TOM MUELLER, PH.D., RESEARCH ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN THE DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY IN THE COLLEGE OF ATMOSPHERIC AND GEOGRAPHIC SCIENCES, AND THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY IN THE DODGE FAMILY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES, WILL EXAMINE THE IMPACT OF MEDICAID EXPANSION ACROSS THE UNITED STATES TO DETERMINE WHETHER REDUCED MORTALITY RATES BEAR OUT ACROSS RURAL AND URBAN COMMUNITIES AS WELL AS ACROSS ETHNIC OR RACIAL GROUPS. view more 

CREDIT: IMAGE PROVIDED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA

A study led by J. Tom Mueller, Ph.D., a research assistant professor at the University of Oklahoma, will examine the impact of Medicaid expansion across the United States to determine whether reduced mortality rates bear out across rural and urban communities as well as across ethnic or racial groups.

An estimated 82.8 million Americans currently receive health coverage through Medicaid. Jointly funded by states and the federal government, Medicaid provides health coverage to eligible low-income adults, children, pregnant women, elderly adults and people with disabilities.

The passage of the Affordable Care Act, signed into law in 2010, called for the expansion of Medicaid nationwide. After a Supreme Court ruling in 2012 determined that the decision to expand Medicaid benefits would be left to the states, participation in the expanded Medicaid program has grown slowly from 26 states participating in 2014 to 38 states and the District of Columbia participating by 2022.

Through the ACA, states participating in the Medicaid expansion program have the option to expand Medicaid coverage to adults with household incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty level.

Research has shown that from 2014-2018, mortality rates were reduced 3.6% more in states that expanded Medicaid than in states that did not. However, the impact of Medicaid expansion on health disparities remained underexamined.

“Medicaid expansion basically means that people at different income thresholds are eligible for Medicaid, which opens up a whole suite of health care options to people who otherwise wouldn't have been able to afford it,” Mueller said. “We have evidence that Medicaid expansion has reduced poverty and we have evidence that it has impacted health, but we don’t really have this kind of understanding on how it has related to disparities.”

“This project is looking at the impact of Medicaid expansion on disparities in mortality between rural and urban areas, and also then between different ethnic and racial populations within those areas, with the idea being that Medicaid expansion should have reduced mortality disparities,” he added. “Since poverty is such a dramatic social determinant of health, poverty reduction should be working as a mechanism for disparity reduction.”

The researchers will use data sets for the entire United States dating from before the ACA Medicaid expansion, 2008 through 2019, to reduce variables influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic. They plan to report their findings at the county level.

Mueller said in addition to insights on how Medicaid expansion may have impacted health disparities, “(the data) could also tell us information about the possible impacts of more broad scale universal health care options in the United States.”

Mueller, who holds faculty positions in the Department of Geography and Environmental Sustainability in the College of Atmospheric and Geographic Sciences, and the Department of Sociology in the Dodge Family College of Arts and Sciences, is working with collaborators at the University of Pennsylvania, McGill University and U.S. Census Bureau, as well as a board of consultants. The five-year project, “The Effect of Medicaid Expansion on Mortality Disparities and Poverty,” is funded by an estimated $1.5 million grant from the National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities of the National Institutes of Health. Mueller is also a research fellow with OU’s Institute for Resilient Environmental and Energy Systems.

 

About the University of Oklahoma Office of the Vice President for Research and Partnerships 

The University of Oklahoma is a leading research university classified by the Carnegie Foundation in the highest tier of research universities in the nation. Faculty, staff and students at OU are tackling global challenges and accelerating the delivery of practical solutions that impact society in direct and tangible ways through research and creative activities. OU researchers expand foundational knowledge while moving beyond traditional academic boundaries, collaborating across disciplines and globally with other research institutions as well as decision makers and practitioners from industry, government and civil society to create and apply solutions for a better world. Find out more at ou.edu/research.

About the University of Oklahoma

Founded in 1890, the University of Oklahoma is a public research university located in Norman, Oklahoma. OU serves the educational, cultural, economic and health care needs of the state, region and nation. For more information visit www.ou.edu

Global COVID-19 infection rates may be higher than previously reported

Study suggests two-thirds of the global population may have antibodies from vaccination or infection

Peer-Reviewed Publication

PLOS

 

IMAGE: A PHLEBOTOMIST COLLECTS BLOOD IN THE HAY FIELD IN THE SELENGE AIMAG (PROVINCE) IN MONGOLIA FOR THE THIRD ROUND OF THE SARS-COV-2 POPULATION-BASED SEROEPIDEMIOLOGIC INVESTIGATION IN MAY 2021. view more 

CREDIT: MONGOLIAN SARS-COV-2 POPULATION-BASED SEROEPIDEMIOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION PROJECT TEAM (CC BY 4.0, HTTPS://CREATIVECOMMONS.ORG/LICENSES/BY/4.0/)

Serosurveillance provides estimates of antibody levels against infectious diseases and is considered the gold standard for measuring population immunity due to past infection or vaccination. A study publishing November 10th in the open access journal PLOS Medicine jointly authored by the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Unity Studies and SeroTracker and colleagues suggests that based on seroprevalence, global COVID-19 infection rates are likely to be higher than previously reported.

The global scale of COVID-19 infections is not well understood. Routine surveillance data underestimates infection and cannot infer population immunity due to asymptomatic infections and uneven access to diagnostics. In order to ascertain the true rates of infection and indicators of immunity in the population against SARS-CoV-2 over time, researchers conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of seroprevalence studies published from January 1, 2020 to May 20, 2022. From their search parameters, the authors identified 965 distinct seroprevalence studies sampling 5,346,069 participants between January 2020 and April 2022, with 43% of these studies being from low-middle income countries. They analyzed seroprevalence by country and month, estimating regional and global seroprevalence over time, and estimated seropositivity rates from infection versus infection or vaccination.

The researchers found that global seroprevalence has risen from 7.7% in June 2020 to 59.2% in September 2021, suggesting two-thirds of the global population may be SARS-CoV-2 seropositive from either vaccination or infection. Estimates of COVID-19 infections based on seroprevalence data far exceed reported cases, suggesting a bigger global impact of COVID-19 than previously known. The study did have limits, such as underrepresentation of some countries in the data, and overrepresentation of others.

According to the authors, “This study on global seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies found that while seroprevalence has increased over time, a third of the global population tested negative for antibodies against the virus as of September 2021 estimates. It was also found that compared to seroprevalence estimates, routine testing for COVID-19 has largely underestimated the number of global infections.”

Bergeri, Whelan, Ware, Subissi and colleagues add, “As we enter the third year of the COVID-19 pandemic, implementation of a global system or network for targeted, multi-pathogen, high-quality and standardized collaborative serosurveillance is a crucial next step to monitor the COVID-19 pandemic and contribute to preparedness for other emerging respiratory pathogens.”

#####

In your coverage, please use this URL to provide access to the freely available paper in PLOS Medicine: http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004107

Citation: Bergeri I, Whelan M, Ware H, Subissi L, Nardone A, Lewis HC, et al. (2022) Global SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence from January 2020 to April 2022: A systematic review and meta-analysis of standardized population-based studies. PLoS Med 19(11): e1004107. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004107

Author Countries: Switzerland, Canada, France, Congo, Egypt, India, Philippines, Denmark, United States, United Kingdom

Funding: see manuscript

---

JOURNAL

PLoS Medicine

DOI

10.1371/journal.pmed.1004107 

METHOD OF RESEARCH

Observational study

SUBJECT OF RESEARCH

People

COI STATEMENT

Competing Interests: see manuscript

COVID testing programs may increase risky behavior

Peer-Reviewed Publication

UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING

Frequent, mandatory surveillance testing was one of the techniques deployed in some jurisdictions in an attempt to control COVID-19, but new research shows that such testing may have the unintended consequence of riskier behavior by those enrolled in the testing.

Based on a false sense of security, students who participated in frequent COVID-19 testing at two universities engaged in more behavior known to increase the risk of spreading the virus than they might have otherwise, according to results of surveys led by University of Wyoming economists.

“Recent research provides some evidence that people increase risky behavior in response to facemask wearing and vaccines, but this is the first study to examine the behavioral responses to mandatory testing,” wrote researchers Chian Jones Ritten, Linda Thunstrom and Todd Cherry, of UW, and J.D. Wulfhorst, of the University of Idaho. “Overall, (our) results suggest that students perceived that the mandatory testing policy decreased their risk of contracting COVID-19, and that this perception led to higher participation in COVID-risky events.”

The research findings were published Friday in PNAS Nexus, the open access sister journal of the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

During the fall 2020 semester, UW required all on-campus undergraduate students to be tested for COVID twice weekly, while the University of Idaho tested a small random sample of students weekly. Both universities required masks for all indoor events on campus.

The researchers surveyed students at both universities and found that, in both cases, respondents who were tested more frequently perceived that they were at a reduced risk of contracting the virus. Those individuals also more frequently attended “risky” events such as large and small indoor gatherings and frequented restaurants and bars.

From a public health standpoint, such behavior is problematic because inaccurate and delayed test results can result in people who believe they’re not infected carrying the virus and infecting others. Although perhaps unlikely, it is possible that the benefits of testing programs could be entirely offset by increased viral transmission, the researchers say.

While other research shows that, in other contexts, this type of risk compensation behavior is generally small in magnitude, small behavioral changes may lead to meaningful increases in disease spread.

“These unintended consequences may pose a particularly large threat to public health when incubation times are short, the virus is highly transmissible and the risk of false negatives is high, such as with the Omicron variant of the coronavirus,” the researchers wrote.

Interestingly, the surveys found that women, more than men, perceive that increased testing reduces the risk of contracting the virus -- and are, thus, more likely to increase risky behavior than men.

Overall, the research shows that mandatory testing programs should be accompanied by mitigation measures to reduce the unintended consequence of people engaging in riskier behavior, the researchers say.

“Our findings suggest that programs with frequent testing may unintentionally increase behavior known to contribute to virus spread -- the potential consequences of which are amplified by the exponential nature of viral spread,” the researchers concluded. “Thus, when implementing mandatory testing programs to manage a pathogen, it is important to communicate the programs’ limitations in protecting against infection and highlight the potential for unintended behavioral responses.”

---

JOURNAL

PNAS Nexus

DOI

10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac247 

METHOD OF RESEARCH

Survey

SUBJECT OF RESEARCH

People

ARTICLE TITLE

Frequent mandatory COVID-19 testing may increase risky behavior

ARTICLE PUBLICATION DATE

10-Nov-2022

Investigating COVID-19 deaths for children and young people

Study confirms death rates remain low and fatalities are often linked to underlying conditions

Peer-Reviewed Publication

PLOS

 

IMAGE: COVID-19 INFECTION RATES BY AGE GROUP AND NUMBER OF DEATHS BY CAUSE OF DEATH IN CYP <20 YEARS (PREDOMINANT CIRCULATING VARIANT SHOWN BY COLOURED CHEVRONS; ERROR BARS INDICATE 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVALS). view more 

CREDIT: BERTRAN M, ET AL., 2022, PLOS MEDICINE, CC-BY 4.0 (HTTPS://CREATIVECOMMONS.ORG/LICENSES/BY/4.0/)

A new study conducted in England shows that the risk of death due to COVID-19 remains very low for children and young people, and most deaths occur in those with underlying health conditions. Marta Bertran of the UK Health Security Agency, London, and colleagues present these findings November 8th in the open access journal PLOS Medicine.

Pediatric deaths due to COVID-19 are rare, and because infection tends to be mild in children and young people compared to adults, it can be challenging to assess COVID-19 severity and cause of death for those with serious underlying health conditions. In addition, because death due to COVID-19 is so uncommon for children, limited data exist to examine such fatalities at the population level.

To improve our understanding of pediatric COVID-19 deaths—and which factors might be linked to an increased risk of death—Bertran and colleagues analyzed detailed data on everyone aged less than 20 years in England who died within 100 days of a confirmed COVID-19 infection between March 2020 and December 2021.

The analysis showed that, of 185 total deaths that occurred, 81 were due to COVID-19. Of those who died from COVID-19, 75 percent had underlying health conditions, primarily severe neurodisability and conditions involving a compromised immune system. Half of COVID-19 deaths occurred within seven days of infection and the majority within 30 days of infection.

These findings confirm that death due to COVID-19 remained rare in children and young people even as new variants of the SARS-Cov-2 virus emerged during the study period. They also highlight which children might be at greater risk of COVID-19 death, which could help inform parents, clinicians, and policymakers about prevention through vaccination, for example, and seeking early treatment.

The authors note that this study emphasizes the need for detailed review of individual cases in order to collaboratively monitor rare COVID-19 outcomes in children. They also note that the study period occurred prior to the rise of the Omicron variant, which now dominates cases worldwide.

Coauthor Shamez Ladhani adds, “Our national surveillance in England continues to show a very very low risk of death due to COVID-19 in children and teenagers, with most fatalities occurring in those with multiple and life-limiting underlying conditions.”

#####

In your coverage, please use this URL to provide access to the freely available paper in PLOS Medicine: http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004118

Citation: Bertran M, Amin-Chowdhury Z, Davies HG, Allen H, Clare T, Davison C, et al. (2022) COVID-19 deaths in children and young people in England, March 2020 to December 2021: An active prospective national surveillance study. PLoS Med 19(11): e1004118. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004118

Author Countries: United Kingdom

Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

---

JOURNAL

PLoS Medicine

DOI

10.1371/journal.pmed.1004118 

METHOD OF RESEARCH

Observational study

SUBJECT OF RESEARCH

People