Recent Italian Economics
In: The Economic Journal, Band 40, Heft 158, S. 309
73 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: The Economic Journal, Band 40, Heft 158, S. 309
In: Cahier de recherche / Centre de Recherche pour l'Etude et l'Observation des Conditions de Vie, No 121
World Affairs Online
In: The journal of psychology: interdisciplinary and applied, Band 147, Heft 6, S. 577-597
ISSN: 1940-1019
Climate could influence the COVID-19 pandemic, but while no evidence has been advanced on the influence of colder climates, some studies have provided data to support a possible heat-related protective factor. The objective is to verify whether areas with a Cold Temperate Climate (TC) have a higher Case Fatality Ratio (CFR) for COVID-19 than areas with a Cold Climate (CC) or with a Mediterranean Climate (MC) in the European Union and the Enlarged European Region. Countries or regions were subdivided into 3 groups according to the Köppen climate classification system: TC (Cfa, Cfb and Cfc in the Köppen system); MC (Csa, Csb); CC (D and E in the Köppen system). The total number of cases and the total number of deaths were detected on 13 August 2020 on the COVID-19 Map-Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center-the CFR was thus calculated by area. Living in TC areas is strongly associated with risk of a high Case Fatality Ratio for COVID-19, OR for MC =0.42, IC 95% 0.41-0.43; OR for CC=0.33, IC 95% 0.33-0.35. The results are confirmed in the EU, OR per MC=0.85, CI 95% 0.84-0.87; OR per CC=0.63, IC 95% 0.61-0.65.The study found that the IC in a humid temperate climate is associated with higher CFR with respect to the coldest and warmest temperate climates in Europe. This does not appear to be the only determinant of the pandemic.
BASE
L'eliminazione dell'infezione da HCV entro il 2030 è uno degli obiettivi dell'Organizzazione Mondiale della Sanità. Date le restrizioni all'uso dei farmaci ad azione diretta (DAA) in quasi tutto il mondo a causa dei prezzi elevati, abbiamo valutato la costo-efficacia di due strategie terapeutiche: Politica 1 (universale): trattare tutti i pazienti, indipendentemente dallo stadio di fibrosi; Politica 2 (prioritizzata): trattare solo i pazienti con malattia avanzata del fegato e i rimanenti quando raggiungono uno stadio F3. Il modello è basato sui dati di pazienti inclusi nello studio di coorte PITER. Abbiamo dimostrato che il trattamento di tutti i pazienti con infezione cronica da HCV, anche in stadi di malattia lieve, migliora lo stato di salute ed è sostenibile ; The World Health Organization foresees the elimination of HCV infection by 2030. In light of this and the current, nearly worldwide, restriction in direct-acting agents (DAA) accessibility due to their high price, we aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two alternative DAA treatment policies: Policy 1 (universal): treat all patients, regardless of the fibrosis stage; Policy 2 (prioritized): treat only prioritized patients and delay treatment of the remaining patients until reaching stage F3. The model was based on patient's data from the PITER cohort. We demonstrated that extending HCV treatment of patients in any fibrosis stage improves health outcomes and is cost-effective.
BASE
In: Environmental science and pollution research: ESPR, Band 23, Heft 21, S. 21726-21732
ISSN: 1614-7499
The risk of stunted growth and development is affected by the context in which a child is born and grows. This includes such interdependent influences as the political economy, health and health care, education, society and culture, agriculture and food systems, water and sanitation, and the environment. Here, we briefly review how factors linked with the key sectors can contribute to healthy growth and reduced childhood stunting. Emphasis is placed on the role of agriculture/food security, especially family farming; education, particularly of girls and women; water, sanitation, and hygiene and their integration in stunting reduction strategies; social protection including cash transfers, bearing in mind that success in this regard is linked to reducing the gap between rich and poor; economic investment in stunting reduction including the work with the for‐profit commercial sector balancing risks linked to marketing foods that can displace affordable and more sustainable alternatives; health with emphasis on implementing comprehensive and effective health care interventions and building the capacity of health care providers. We complete the review with examples of national and subnational multi‐sectoral interventions that illustrate how critical it is for sectors to work together to reduce stunting.
BASE
In: Natural hazards and earth system sciences: NHESS, Band 5, Heft 5, S. 741-754
ISSN: 1684-9981
Abstract. Within the framework of the European Interreg IIIb Medocc program, the HYDROPTIMET project aims at the optimization of the hydrometeorological forecasting tools in the context of intense precipitation within complex topography. Therefore, some meteorological forecast models and hydrological models were tested on four Mediterranean flash-flood events. One of them occured in France where the South-eastern ridge of the French "Massif Central", the Gard region, experienced a devastating flood on 8 and 9 September 2002. 24 people were killed during this event and the economic damage was estimated at 1.2 billion euros. To built the next generation of the hydrometeorological forecasting chain that will be able to capture such localized and fast events and the resulting discharges, the forecasted rain fields might be improved to be relevant for hydrological purposes. In such context, this paper presents the results of the evaluation methodology proposed by Yates et al. (2005) that highlights the relevant hydrological scales of a simulated rain field. Simulated rain fields of 7 meteorological model runs concerning with the French event are therefore evaluated for different accumulation times. The dynamics of these models are either based on non-hydrostatic or hydrostatic equation systems. Moreover, these models were run under different configurations (resolution, initial conditions). The classical score analysis and the areal evaluation of the simulated rain fields are then performed in order to put forward the main simulation characteristics that improve the quantitative precipitation forecast. The conclusions draw some recommendations on the value of the quantitative precipitation forecasts and way to use it for quantitative discharge forecasts within mountainous areas.
In: German politics, Band 3, Heft 2, S. 302-320
ISSN: 1743-8993
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
BASE
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
BASE
Background: Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods: This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings: Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16-30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77-0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50-0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80-0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54-0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation: Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services.
BASE