Refine
Year of publication
- 2023 (4) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (4) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4) (remove)
Keywords
- COVID-19 (4) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (2)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (1)
As kindergartens and schools closed down during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany, two hashtags emerged on Twitter: #CoronaEltern (#CoronaParents) and #CoronaElternRechnenAb (#CoronaParentsDocumentTheCosts). In this paper, we examine the positioning practices around both hashtags as expressions of “digital activism” (Joyce 2010: VIII). One characteristic of the hashtag campaign is that political demands are hardly ever made directly. Rather, the participants resort to five main linguistic patterns: (1) they address different target groups; (2) they refer to different protagonists; (3) in the subcorpus #CoronaEltern specifically, they constitute themselves as a collective through (4) the recurring use of first-person narratives; (5) and generalization and typification. Our findings show that #CoronaParents are not just parents in times of a pandemic: #CoronaParents are only those who see themselves as such, participating in an evolving, at times misunderstood community.
Objectives In this early retrospective cohort study, a total of 26 patients with SARS-CoV-2 were treated with bamlanivimab or casirivimab/imdevimab, and the reduction of the viral load associated with the developed clinical symptoms was analyzed.
Methods: Patients in the intervention groups received bamlanivimab or casirivimab/imdevimab. Patients without treatment served as control. Outcomes were assessed by clinical symptoms and change in log viral load from baseline based on the cycle threshold over a period of 18 days.
Results: Median log viral load decline was higher in both intervention groups after 3 and 6 days compared to control. However, at later time points, the decline of the viral load was more distinct in the control group. Mild symptoms of COVID-19 were observed in 6.3% of the intervention groups and in no patient of the control. No patients treated with bamlanivimab, 18.8% treated with casirivimab/imdevimab, and 14.2% in the control group developed moderate symptoms. Severe symptoms were recorded only in the control group (14.2%), including one related death.
Conclusion: Treatment with monoclonal SARS-CoV-2 antibodies seems to accelerate decline of virus loads, especially in the first 6 days after administration, compared to control. This may be associated with a reduced likeliness of a severe course of COVID-19.
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated a reduction in face-to-face consultations, resulting in significant limitations in healthcare for individuals with depression. To ensure safe and adequate care, e-health services, such as telemedicine, gained a more prominent role. Governments have eased restrictions on the use of telemedicine, enabling healthcare professionals to increasingly offer video and telephone consultations.
Objective: This study examines, 1) possible changes over the course of the pandemic in reported use of video and telephone consultations and intended future use of video consultations with healthcare professionals among adults with diagnosed depression; 2) their attitudes towards video and telephone consultations and perceived barriers towards using e-health after prolonged time of the pandemic; and 3) differences in results between subgroups based on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics.
Methods: Three population-representative online surveys were conducted in Germany at different timepoints (t) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents aged 18–69 years with a professionally diagnosed depression were included in the present analyses (t1: June/July 2020 with n = 1094; t2: February 2021 with n = 1038; t3: September 2021 with n = 1255).
Results: The overall proportion of adults with depression who used video or telephone consultations did not change significantly in the time surveyed (t1: 16.51 %, n = 179; t2: 20.23 %, n = 210; t3: 18.47 %, n = 230). However, among users, reported use of video consultations with a psychotherapist increased significantly from t1 (34.83 %, n = 62) to t3 (44.98 %, n = 102, p = .023). Intended future use of VC for healthcare varied depending on the purpose of the consultation. Significant differences over time were only found for the purpose of using VC to discuss clinical findings, laboratory results and diagnostic analyses with a doctor, with higher intentions reported at t2 during lockdown in Germany. At t3, the majority of adults with depression felt that video and telephone consultations were too impersonal and considered them more as a helpful support rather than an alternative to face-to-face psychotherapy. Key barriers to using e-health were found within the societal context and the lacking support from significant others for using e-health, while knowledge and skills represented facilitators for using e-health.
Conclusion: Despite ambivalent attitudes towards video and telephone consultations among adults with depression, reported use of video consultations with a psychotherapist increased during the COVID-19 pandemic.
While the COVID-19 pandemic had a large and asymmetric impact on firms, many countries quickly enacted massive business rescue programs which are specifically targeted to smaller firms. Little is known about the effects of such policies on business entry and exit, investment, factor reallocation, and macroeconomic outcomes. This paper builds a general equilibrium model with heterogeneous and financially constrained firms in order to evaluate the short- and long-term consequences of small firm rescue programs in a pandemic recession. We calibrate the stationary equilibrium and the pandemic shock to the U.S. economy, taking into account the factual Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) as a specific policy. We find that the policy has only a modest impact on aggregate output and employment because (i) jobs are saved predominately in the smallest firms that account for a minor share of employment and (ii) the grant reduces the reallocation of resources towards larger and less impacted firms. Much of the reallocation effects occur in the aftermath of the pandemic episode. By preventing inefficient liquidations, the policy dampens the long-term declines of aggregate consumption and of the real wage, thus delivering small welfare gains.