Universitätspublikationen
Refine
Year of publication
- 2022 (24) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (22)
- Working Paper (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (24)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (24)
Keywords
- COVID-19 (24) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (10)
- Psychologie und Sportwissenschaften (5)
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (4)
- Center for Financial Studies (CFS) (2)
- House of Finance (HoF) (2)
- Sustainable Architecture for Finance in Europe (SAFE) (2)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (2)
- Biowissenschaften (1)
- Erziehungswissenschaften (1)
- Zentrum für Biomolekulare Magnetische Resonanz (BMRZ) (1)
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.
Patients with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) commonly show abnormalities of liver tests (LTs) of undetermined cause. Considering drugs as tentative culprits, the current systematic review searched for published COVID-19 cases with suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI) and established diagnosis using the diagnostic algorithm of RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method). Data worldwide on DILI cases assessed by RUCAM in COVID-19 patients were sparse. A total of 6/200 reports with initially suspected 996 DILI cases in COVID-19 patients and using all RUCAM-based DILI cases allowed for a clear description of clinical features of RUCAM-based DILI cases among COVID-19 patients: (1) The updated RUCAM published in 2016 was equally often used as the original RUCAM of 1993, with both identifying DILI and other liver diseases as confounders; (2) RUCAM also worked well in patients treated with up to 18 drugs and provided for most DILI cases a probable or highly probable causality level for drugs; (3) DILI was preferentially caused by antiviral drugs given empirically due to their known therapeutic efficacy in other virus infections; (4) hepatocellular injury was more often reported than cholestatic or mixed injury; (5) maximum LT values were found for alanine aminotransferase (ALT) 1.541 U/L and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) 1.076 U/L; (6) the ALT/AST ratio was variable and ranged from 0.4 to 1.4; (7) the mean or median age of the COVID-19 patients with DILI ranged from 54.3 to 56 years; (8) the ratio of males to females was 1.8–3.4:1; (9) outcome was favorable for most patients, likely due to careful selection of the drugs and quick cessation of drug treatment with emerging DILI, but it was fatal in 19 patients; (10) countries reporting RUCAM-based DILI cases in COVID-19 patients included China, India, Japan, Montenegro, and Spain; (11) robust estimation of the percentage contribution of RUCAM-based DILI for the increased LTs in COVID-19 patients is outside of the current scope. In conclusion, RUCAM-based DILI with its clinical characteristics in COVID-19 patients and its classification as a confounding variable is now well defined, requiring a new correct description of COVID-19 features by removing DILI characteristics as confounders.
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.
The new variant of concern (VOC) of SARS-CoV-2, Omicron (B.1.1.529), is genetically very different from other VOCs. We compared Omicron with the preceding VOC Delta (B.1.617.2) and the wildtype (wt) strain (B.1) with respect to their interactions with the antiviral interferon (IFN-alpha/beta) response in infected cells. Our data indicate that IFN induction by Omicron is low and comparable to the wt, whereas Delta showed an increased IFN induction. However, Omicron exceeded both the wt and the Delta strain with respect to the ability to withstand the antiviral state imposed by IFN-alpha.
The consequences of the current COVID-19 pandemic for mental health remain unclear, especially regarding the effects on suicidal behaviors. To assess changes in the pattern of suicide attempt (SA) admissions and completed suicides (CS) in association with the COVID-19 pandemic. As part of a longitudinal study, SA admissions and CS are systematically documented and analyzed in all psychiatric hospitals in Frankfurt/Main (765.000 inhabitants). Number, sociodemographic factors, diagnoses and methods of SA and CS were compared between the periods of March–December 2019 and March–December 2020. The number of CS did not change, while the number of SA significantly decreased. Age, sex, occupational status, and psychiatric diagnoses did not change in SA, whereas the percentage of patients living alone while attempting suicide increased. The rate and number of intoxications as a SA method increased and more people attempted suicide in their own home, which was not observed in CS. Such a shift from public places to home is supported by the weekday of SA, as the rate of SA on weekends was significantly lower during the pandemic, likely because of lockdown measures. Only admissions to psychiatric hospitals were recorded, but not to other institutions. As it seems unlikely that the number of SA decreased while the number of CS remained unchanged, it is conceivable that the number of unreported SA cases increased during the pandemic. Our data suggest that a higher number of SA remained unnoticed during the pandemic because of their location and the use of methods associated with lower lethality.
The SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) protein is crucial for the highly organized packaging and transcription of the genomic RNA. Studying atomic details of the role of its intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) in RNA recognition is challenging due to the absence of structure and to the repetitive nature of their primary sequence. IDRs are known to act in concert with the folded domains of N and here we use NMR spectroscopy to identify the priming events of N interacting with a regulatory SARS-CoV-2 RNA element. 13C-detected NMR experiments, acquired simultaneously to 1H detected ones, provide information on the two IDRs flanking the N-terminal RNA binding domain (NTD) within the N-terminal region of the protein (NTR, 1–248). We identify specific tracts of the IDRs that most rapidly sense and engage with RNA, and thus provide an atom-resolved picture of the interplay between the folded and disordered regions of N during RNA interaction.
Background: Predicted increases in suicide were not generally observed in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the picture may be changing and patterns might vary across demographic groups. We aimed to provide a timely, granular picture of the pandemic's impact on suicides globally.
Methods: We identified suicide data from official public-sector sources for countries/areas-within-countries, searching websites and academic literature and contacting data custodians and authors as necessary. We sent our first data request on 22nd June 2021 and stopped collecting data on 31st October 2021. We used interrupted time series (ITS) analyses to model the association between the pandemic's emergence and total suicides and suicides by sex-, age- and sex-by-age in each country/area-within-country. We compared the observed and expected numbers of suicides in the pandemic's first nine and first 10-15 months and used meta-regression to explore sources of variation.
Findings: We sourced data from 33 countries (24 high-income, six upper-middle-income, three lower-middle-income; 25 with whole-country data, 12 with data for area(s)-within-the-country, four with both). There was no evidence of greater-than-expected numbers of suicides in the majority of countries/areas-within-countries in any analysis; more commonly, there was evidence of lower-than-expected numbers. Certain sex, age and sex-by-age groups stood out as potentially concerning, but these were not consistent across countries/areas-within-countries. In the meta-regression, different patterns were not explained by countries’ COVID-19 mortality rate, stringency of public health response, economic support level, or presence of a national suicide prevention strategy. Nor were they explained by countries’ income level, although the meta-regression only included data from high-income and upper-middle-income countries, and there were suggestions from the ITS analyses that lower-middle-income countries fared less well.
Interpretation: Although there are some countries/areas-within-countries where overall suicide numbers and numbers for certain sex- and age-based groups are greater-than-expected, these countries/areas-within-countries are in the minority. Any upward movement in suicide numbers in any place or group is concerning, and we need to remain alert to and respond to changes as the pandemic and its mental health and economic consequences continue.
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.
Since 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on education worldwide. There is increased discussion of possible negative effects on students’ learning outcomes and the need for targeted support. We examined fourth graders’ reading achievement based on a school panel study, representative on the student level, with N = 111 elementary schools in Germany (total: N = 4,290 students, age: 9–10 years). The students were tested with the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study instruments in 2016 and 2021. The analysis focused on (1) total average differences in reading achievement between 2016 and 2021, (2) average differences controlling for student composition, and (3) changes in achievement gaps between student subgroups (i.e., immigration background, socio-cultural capital, and gender). The methodological approach met international standards for the analysis of large-scale assessments (i.e., multiple multi-level imputation, plausible values, and clustered mixed-effect regression). The results showed a substantial decline in mean reading achievement. The decline corresponds to one-third of a year of learning, even after controlling for changes in student composition. We found no statistically significant changes of achievement gaps between student subgroups, despite numerical tendencies toward a widening of achievement gaps between students with and without immigration background. It is likely that this sharp achievement decline was related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings are discussed in terms of further research needs, practical implications for educating current student cohorts, and educational policy decisions regarding actions in crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
During the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany, social restrictions and social distancing policies forced large parts of social life to take place within the household. However, comparatively little is known about how private living situations shaped individuals experiences of this crisis. To investigate this issue, we analyze how experiences and concerns vary across living arrangements along two dimensions that may be associated with social disadvantage: loneliness and care. In doing so, we employ quantitative text analysis on open-ended questions from survey data on a sample of 1,073 individuals living in Germany. We focus our analyses on four different household structures: living alone, shared living without children, living with a partner and children, and single parents. We find that single parents (who are primarily single mothers) are at high risk of experiencing care-related worries, particularly regarding their financial situation, while individuals living alone are most likely to report feelings of loneliness. Those individuals living in shared houses, with or without children, had the lowest risk of experiencing both loneliness and care-related worries. These findings illustrate that the living situation at home substantially impacts how individuals experienced and coped with the pandemic situation during the first wave of the pandemic.