Refine
Document Type
- Article (81)
- Working Paper (13)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Preprint (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (96) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (96) (remove)
Keywords
- COVID-19 (96) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (58)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (14)
- Center for Financial Studies (CFS) (12)
- Psychologie und Sportwissenschaften (10)
- Sustainable Architecture for Finance in Europe (SAFE) (10)
- House of Finance (HoF) (9)
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (4)
- Erziehungswissenschaften (2)
- Rechtswissenschaft (2)
- Biochemie, Chemie und Pharmazie (1)
Evidence-based and comprehensible health information is a key element of evidence-based medicine and public health. The goal is informed decision-making based on realistic estimations of health risks and accurate expectations about benefits and harms of interventions. In Germany, standards of evidence-based risk information were poorly followed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Frequently, public information was biased, fragmentary and misleading. Pandemic-related threat scenarios induced emotional distress and unnecessary anxiety. A systematic and comprehensive evaluation of the pandemic measures is crucial, but still pending in Germany. A critical analysis of risk communication by experts, politicians and the media during the pandemic should be a key element of the evaluation process. Evaluation of decision making and media reporting during the pandemic should improve preparedness for future crises.
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.
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.
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.
The first case of COVID-19 infection in Africa was recorded in Egypt on 14 February 2020. Following this, several projections of the possible devastating effect that the virus can have on the population of African countries were made in the Western media. This paper presents evidence for Africa’s successful responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and under-reporting or misrepresentation of these successes in Western media. It proceeds to argue for accounting for these successes in terms of Africa’s communitarian way of life and conceptions of self, duty, and rights; and that a particular orientation in theorizing on global justice can highlight the injustices inherent in the misrepresentation of these successes and contribute shared perspectives to formulating a framework of values and concepts that would facilitate the implementation of global policy goals for justice. The paper is thus grounded in a rejection of the insular tenets of theorizing prevalent in the global justice debate and to persistent inclinations in Western scholarship to the thinking that theorizing in the African context that draws inspiration from the cultural past has little to contribute to the quest for justice globally. On the contrary, it argues that reflexive critique of cultural history is a necessary source of normative ideals that can foster tolerant coexistence and a cooperative endeavour toward shared conceptions of justice in the contemporary world.
This paper considers ways in which rulers can respond to, generate, or exploit fear of COVID-19 infection for various ends, and in particular distinguishes between ‘fear-invoking’ and ‘fear-minimising’ strategies. It examines historical precedent for executive overreach in crises and then moves on to look in more detail at some specific areas where fear is being mobilised or generated: in ways that lead to the suspension of civil liberties; that foster discrimination against minorities; and that boost the personality cult of leaders and limit criticism or competition. Finally, in the Appendix, we present empirical work, based on the results of an original survey in Brazil, that provides support for the conjectures in the previous sections. While it is too early to tell what the longer-term outcomes of the changes we note will be, our purpose here is simply to identify some warning signs that threaten the key institutions and values of democracy.
The COVID-19 pandemic is affecting countries across the globe. Only a globally coordinated response, however, will enable the containment of the virus. Responding to a request from policy makers for ethics input for a global resource pledging event as a starting point, this paper outlines normative and procedural principles to inform a coordinated global coronavirus response. Highlighting global connections and specific vulnerabilities from the pandemic, and proposing standards for reasonable and accountable decision-making, the ambition of the paper is two-fold: to raise awareness for the justice dimensions in the global response, and to argue for moving health from the periphery to the centre of philosophical debates about social and global justice.
Hintergrund: Eine standardisierte Erhebung von COVID-19-Infektionen bei Gesundheitspersonal während der laufenden Pandemie war und ist nicht gegeben. Vor allem der Anteil von arbeitsbedingten Infektionen beim Gesundheitspersonal und die Frage, welche Arbeitnehmer/-innen darunter am meisten gefährdet sind, bleiben unklar.
Ziel: Ziel dieser Studie war es, die gemeldeten COVID-19-Fälle beim Gesundheitspersonal in Frankfurt/Main in den ersten 6 Monaten der Pandemie zu analysieren, die Zahl der arbeitsbedingten Infektionen zu ermitteln und somit eine bessere Interpretation der durch das Robert Koch-Institut veröffentlichten Daten zu ermöglichen.
Methoden: Die Daten des Gesundheitsamts Frankfurt/Main wurden für den Zeitraum vom 01.03. bis zum 31.08.2020 betrachtet und medizinisches Personal für eine Querschnittserhebung im Rahmen einer Umfrage rekrutiert. Drei Subgruppen wurden nach Ort des Infektionskontakts, am Arbeitsplatz, im Privaten und unbekannt, unterteilt und analysiert.
Ergebnisse: Medizinisches Personal machte 11,8 % (319/2700) aller gemeldeten COVID-19-Fälle in Frankfurt/Main im untersuchten Zeitraum aus. In der Umfrage gaben 47,2 % der Befragten an, dass ihre Infektion am Arbeitsplatz erworben wurde. Es zeigte sich eine Assoziation von Kontakt zu COVID-19-Patient/-innen sowie der Beschäftigung auf einer internistischen Station und einer arbeitsbedingten Infektion. Ersichtlich wurde außerdem ein Zusammenhang zwischen mutmaßlichen Infektionen am Arbeitsplatz und folglich gestellten Verdachtsanzeigen auf Berufskrankheit.
Diskussion und Fazit: Gesundheitsämter sind in der Lage, relevante Daten von arbeitsbedingten Transmissionen in Berufen und Arbeitsplätzen im Gesundheitswesen zu erheben, und sollten standardisierte Daten zu infiziertem Gesundheitspersonal generieren. Diese Daten sind notwendig, um gezielte Maßnahmen der Infektionsprävention zu ergreifen, die Gesundheitspersonal und ihre Patient/-innen schützen.
Während der COVID-19-Pandemie in Deutschland standen besonders Familien mit Kindern vor großen Herausforderungen. Der erste Lockdown erscheint im Zeitverlauf markant, da sich das ausdifferenzierte Familienleben fast ausschließlich auf die häusliche Umgebung konzentrierte und Bildungs- und Betreuungsstätten geschlossen waren. Das Wegbrechen der öffentlichen Infrastruktur definieren wir hier als zentrales Krisenphänomen für Familien.
Im Fokus dieses Beitrags steht eine Auswertung von 5075 Kommentaren aus dem Online-Fragebogen der Studie „KiCo – Kinder, Eltern und ihre Erfahrungen während der Corona-Pandemie“, an der im April/Mai 2020 über 25.000 Eltern mit Kindern unter 15 Jahren teilnahmen. Hauptsächlich stammen die Kommentare von Müttern zwischen 30 und 50 Jahren, die zum Zeitpunkt der Befragung größtenteils im Homeoffice arbeiteten und ein bis zwei Kinder unter 15 Jahren hatten.
Anhand der Kommentare können wir nachzeichnen, wie das Krisenerleben verhandelt wurde bzw. wie auf das Narrativ der Krise in den ersten zwei Monaten der Pandemie in Deutschland Bezug genommen wurde. Folgende Kategorien konnten identifiziert werden: Die Dauer der Krise (Zeit), Krise als Chance für gesellschaftlichen Wandel, die Krise der Demokratie, Krise als Chance für die Familie, Leidtragende der Krise.