Literature DB >> 32763263

'Most at risk' for COVID19? The imperative to expand the definition from biological to social factors for equity.

Rima A Afifi1, Nicole Novak2, Paul A Gilbert3, Bernadette Pauly4, Sawsan Abdulrahim5, Sabina Faiz Rashid6, Fernando Ortega7, Rashida A Ferrand8.   

Abstract

First recognized in December 2019, the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID19) was declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020. To date, the most utilized definition of 'most at risk' for COVID19 morbidity and mortality has focused on biological susceptibility to the virus. This paper argues that this dominant biomedical definition has neglected the 'fundamental social causes' of disease, constraining the effectiveness of prevention and mitigation measures; and exacerbating COVID19 morbidity and mortality for population groups living in marginalizing circumstances. It is clear - even at this early stage of the pandemic - that inequitable social conditions lead to both more infections and worse outcomes. Expanding the definition of 'most at risk' to include social factors is critical to implementing equitable interventions and saving lives. Prioritizing populations with social conditions is necessary for more effective control of the epidemic in its next phase; and should become standard in the planning for, and prevention and mitigation of all health conditions. Reversing disparities and health inequities is only possible through an expansion of our 'most-at-risk' definition to also include social factors.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID19; Decision-making; Fundamental social causes; Health disparities; Health equity; Most-at-risk; Public health; Social determinants of health

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32763263     DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2020.106229

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  6 in total

1.  Analyzing Commute Mode Choice Using the LCNL Model in the Post-COVID-19 Era: Evidence from China.

Authors:  Siliang Luan; Qingfang Yang; Zhongtai Jiang; Huxing Zhou; Fanyun Meng
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-04-21       Impact factor: 4.614

Review 2.  Ten GIS-Based Solutions for Managing and Controlling COVID-19 Pandemic Outbreak.

Authors:  Najmeh Neysani Samany; Hua Liu; Reza Aghataher; Mohammad Bayat
Journal:  SN Comput Sci       Date:  2022-05-05

3.  Simulation of COVID-19 Propagation Scenarios in the Madrid Metropolitan Area.

Authors:  David E Singh; Maria-Cristina Marinescu; Miguel Guzmán-Merino; Christian Durán; Concepción Delgado-Sanz; Diana Gomez-Barroso; Jesus Carretero
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2021-03-16

4.  Agent-based modeling and life cycle dynamics of COVID-19-related online collective actions.

Authors:  Gang Zhang; Hao Li; Rong He; Peng Lu
Journal:  Complex Intell Systems       Date:  2021-12-17

5.  The impact of COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions on the lived experiences of people living in Thailand, Malaysia, Italy and the United Kingdom: A cross-country qualitative study.

Authors:  Mira L Schneiders; Bhensri Naemiratch; Phaik Kin Cheah; Giulia Cuman; Tassawan Poomchaichote; Supanat Ruangkajorn; Silvia Stoppa; Anne Osterrieder; Phee-Kheng Cheah; Darlene Ongkili; Wirichada Pan-Ngum; Constance R S Mackworth-Young; Phaik Yeong Cheah
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Mortality Risk from PM2.5: A Comparison of Modeling Approaches to Identify Disparities across Racial/Ethnic Groups in Policy Outcomes.

Authors:  Elisheba Spiller; Jeremy Proville; Ananya Roy; Nicholas Z Muller
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2021-12-15       Impact factor: 9.031

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.