Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “COVID”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

The Prediction Model of Risk Factors for COVID-19 Developing into Severe Illness Based on 1046 Patients with COVID-19

This study analyzed the risk factors for patients with COVID-19 developing severe illnesses and explored the value of applying the logistic model combined with ROC curve analysis to predict the risk of severe illnesses at COVID-19 patients’ admissions. The clinical data of 1046 COVID-19 patients admitted to a designated hospital in a certain city from July to September 2020 were retrospectively analyzed, the clinical characteristics of the patients were collected, and a multivariate unconditional logistic regression analysis was used to determine the risk factors for severe illnesses in COVID-19 patients during hospitalization. Based on the analysis results, a prediction model for severe conditions and the ROC curve were constructed, and the predictive value of the model was assessed. Logistic regression analysis showed that age (OR = 3.257, 95% CI 10.466–18.584), complications with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR = 7.337, 95% CI 0.227–87.021), cough (OR = 5517, 95% CI 0.258–65.024), and venous thrombosis (OR = 7322, 95% CI 0.278–95.020) were risk factors for COVID-19 patients developing severe conditions during hospitalization. When complications were not taken into consideration, COVID-19 patients’ ages, number of diseases, and underlying diseases were risk factors influencing the development of severe illnesses. The ROC curve analysis results showed that the AUC that predicted the severity of COVID-19 patients at admission was 0.943, the optimal threshold was −3.24, and the specificity was 0.824, while the sensitivity was 0.827. The changes in the condition of severe COVID-19 patients are related to many factors such as age, clinical symptoms, and underlying diseases. This study has a certain value in predicting COVID-19 patients that develop from mild to severe conditions, and this prediction model is a useful tool in the quick prediction of the changes in patients’ conditions and providing early intervention for those with risk factors.

Lian, Zhichuang↗
DOE OSTI2021

COVID-19 Evidence Accelerator: A parallel analysis to describe the use of Hydroxychloroquine with or without Azithromycin among hospitalized COVID-19 patients

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic remains a significant global threat. However, despite urgent need, there remains uncertainty surrounding best practices for pharmaceutical interventions to treat COVID-19. In particular, conflicting evidence has emerged surrounding the use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, alone or in combination, for COVID-19. The COVID-19 Evidence Accelerator convened by the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA, in collaboration with Friends of Cancer Research, assembled experts from the health systems research, regulatory science, data science, and epidemiology to participate in a large parallel analysis of different data sets to further explore the effectiveness of these treatments. Methods: Electronic health record (EHR) and claims data were extracted from seven separate databases. Parallel analyses were undertaken on data extracted from each source. Each analysis examined time to mortality in hospitalized patients treated with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and the two in combination as compared to patients not treated with either drug. Cox proportional hazards models were used, and propensity score methods were undertaken to adjust for confounding. Frequencies of adverse events in each treatment group were also examined. Results: Neither hydroxychloroquine nor azithromycin, alone or in combination, were significantly associated with time to mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. No treatment groups appeared to have an elevated risk of adverse events. Conclusion: Administration of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and their combination appeared to have no effect on time to mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Continued research is needed to clarify best practices surrounding treatment of COVID-19.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Pharmacoepidemiology, Machine Learning and COVID-19: An intent-to-treat analysis of hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, and COVID-19 outcomes amongst hospitalized US Veterans

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was proposed as an early therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) after in vitro studies indicated possible benefit. Previous in vivo observational studies have presented conflicting results, though recent randomized clinical trials have reported no benefit from HCQ amongst hospitalized COVID-19 patients. In this work, we examined the effects of HCQ alone, and in combination with azithromycin, in a hospitalized COVID-19 positive, United States (US) Veteran population using a propensity score adjusted survival analysis with imputation of missing data. From March 1, 2020 through April 30, 2020, 64,055 US Veterans were tested for COVID-19 based on Veteran Affairs Healthcare Administration electronic health record data. Of the 7,193 positive cases, 2,809 were hospitalized, and 657 individuals were prescribed HCQ within the first 48-hours of hospitalization for the treatment of COVID-19. There was no apparent benefit associated with HCQ receipt, alone or in combination with azithromycin, and an increased risk of intubation when used in combination with azithromycin [Hazard Ratio (95% Confidence Interval): 1.55 (1.07, 2.24)]. In conclusion, we assessed the effectiveness of HCQ with or without azithromycin in treating patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using a national sample of the US Veteran population. Using rigorous study design and analytic methods to reduce confounding and bias, we found no evidence of a survival benefit from the administration of HCQ.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

The impacts of COVID-19 on clean energy labor markets: Evidence from multifaceted analysis of public health interventions and COVID-health factors

COVID-19 pandemic has affected clean energy labor market. Using real-time job vacancy data, this study analyzes the impacts of the pandemic on the U.S. clean energy labor market in 2020, including biomass, energy efficiency (EE), electric vehicle (EV), power/microgrid, solar, and wind industries. This study identifies how COVID-health factors and public health interventions influence clean energy job availability during the early COVID pandemic. Overall, California had the most energy jobs and experienced a significant decrease in April 2020. EV and solar had the highest percentages of job vacancies during the pandemic in general. Still, lockdowns had the most severe influence on EE and wind jobs. Stay-at-home orders negatively affected clean energy job vacancies in biomass, EV, power/microgrid, and wind. Social-gathering restrictions, however, did not have much influence. Increased COVID tests at the state level had the strongest and most positive influence on clean energy job postings, indicating the importance of a state's ability to manage public health infrastructure or crisis issues. COVID hospitalizations negatively influenced the job vacancies in biomass and wind but did not affect the other four sectors; conversely, as COVID death numbers increased, the number of jobs in biomass, EV, power grid, solar, and wind decreased, but not in EE jobs.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Development and validation of a 30-day mortality index based on pre-existing medical administrative data from 13,323 COVID-19 patients: The Veterans Health Administration COVID-19 (VACO) Index

Background Available COVID-19 mortality indices are limited to acute inpatient data. Using nationwide medical administrative data available prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection from the US Veterans Health Administration (VA), we developed the VA COVID-19 (VACO) 30-day mortality index and validated the index in two independent, prospective samples. Methods and findings We reviewed SARS-CoV-2 testing results within the VA between February 8 and August 18, 2020. The sample was split into a development cohort (test positive between March 2 and April 15, 2020), an early validation cohort (test positive between April 16 and May 18, 2020), and a late validation cohort (test positive between May 19 and July 19, 2020). Our logistic regression model in the development cohort considered demographics (age, sex, race/ethnicity), and pre-existing medical conditions and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) derived from ICD-10 diagnosis codes. Weights were fixed to create the VACO Index that was then validated by comparing area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) in the early and late validation cohorts and among important validation cohort subgroups defined by sex, race/ethnicity, and geographic region. We also evaluated calibration curves and the range of predictions generated within age categories. 13,323 individuals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (median age: 63 years; 91% male; 42% non-Hispanic Black). We observed 480/3,681 (13%) deaths in development, 253/2,151 (12%) deaths in the early validation cohort, and 403/7,491 (5%) deaths in the late validation cohort. Age, multimorbidity described with CCI, and a history of myocardial infarction or peripheral vascular disease were independently associated with mortality–no other individual comorbid diagnosis provided additional information. The VACO Index discriminated mortality in development (AUC = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.77–0.81), and in early (AUC = 0.81 95% CI: 0.78–0.83) and late (AUC = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.78–0.86) validation. The VACO Index allows personalized estimates of 30-day mortality after COVID-19 infection. For example, among those aged 60–64 years, overall mortality was estimated at 9% (95% CI: 6–11%). The Index further discriminated risk in this age stratum from 4% (95% CI: 3–7%) to 21% (95% CI: 12–31%), depending on sex and comorbid disease. Conclusion Prior to infection, demographics and comorbid conditions can discriminate COVID-19 mortality risk overall and within age strata. The VACO Index reproducibly identified individuals at substantial risk of COVID-19 mortality who might consider continuing social distancing, despite relaxed state and local guidelines.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Multiscale Effects Masked the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Electricity Demand in the United States

Shelter-in-place orders and business closures related to COVID-19 changed the hourly profile of electricity demand and created an unprecedented source of uncertainty for the grid. The potential for continued shifts in electricity profiles has implications for electricity sector investment and operating decisions that maintain reserve margins and provide grid reliability. This study reveals that understanding this uncertainty requires an understanding of the underlying drivers at the customer-class scale. This paper utilizes three datasets to compare the impacts of COVID-19 on electricity consumption across a range of spatiotemporal and customer scales. At the utility/customer-class scale, COVID-19-induced shutdowns in the spring of 2020 shifted weekday residential load profiles to resemble weekend profiles from previous years. Total commercial loads declined, but the commercial diurnal load profile was unchanged. With only total loads available at the balancing authority scale, the apparent impact of COVID-19 was smaller during the summer due in part to phased re-opening and spatial variability in re-opening, but there were still clear variations once total loads were broken down zonally. Monthly data at the state scale showed an increase in state-level residential electricity sales, a decrease in commercial sales, and a small net decrease in total sales in most states from April-August 2020. Analyses that focus on total load or a single scale may miss important changes that become apparent when the load is broken down regionally or by customer class.

COVID-19, electricity demand, multiscale, Commonwe↗
DOE OSTI2020

Machine learning model to project the impact of COVID-19 on U.S. motor gasoline demand

Owing to the global lockdowns that resulted from the COVID-19 pandemic, fuel demand plummeted and the price of oil futures went negative in April 2020. Robust fuel demand projections are crucial to economic and energy planning and policy discussions. Here we incorporate pandemic projections and people's resulting travel and trip activities and fuel usage in a machine-learning-based model to project the US medium-term gasoline demand and study the impact of government intervention. We found that under the reference infection scenario, the US gasoline demand grows slowly after a quick rebound in May, and is unlikely to fully recover prior to October 2020. Under the reference and pessimistic scenario, continual lockdown (no reopening) could worsen the motor gasoline demand temporarily, but it helps the demand recover to a normal level quicker. Under the optimistic infection scenario, gasoline demand will recover close to the non-pandemic level by October 2020. The COVID 19 pandemic and consequent lockdown has had a substantial impact on mobility and therefore fuel demand and it is not clear when demand will recover. Ou et al. use a machine learning model that integrates health recovery scenarios to project the near-term future of gasoline demand.

COVID-19 pandemic↗
DOE OSTI2023

COVID-19 Lead Time: Evaluating the timeliness and reliability of reported COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations as leading indicators of hospitalizations and death in the US

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a reliance on real-time data sources to understand the global spread and impact of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Reported cases were presumed leading indicators for hospitalizations, while hospitalizations were considered predictive of deaths. However, studies have questioned the consistency of reported cases as leading indicators. This study systematically assesses the reliability of United States (US) reported cases and hospitalizations as leading indicators for hospitalizations and deaths respectively, examining the first 2.5 years of the pandemic (January 2020 - June 2022) across different phases of the pandemic and states. Using correlation analysis, population data, and forecasting accuracy measures, we investigate the temporal relationships and identify possible determinants of lead time variability. Notably, we found that the average lead time between reported cases and hospitalizations across US states is relatively short at 1.76 days, implying that reported cases might not be as effective a leading indicator for hospitalizations as previously believed. Populations with higher comorbidity burdens, such as proportion of smokers, are expected on average to have shorter lead times, possibly due to shorter time to hospitalization among these vulnerable populations.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Supercomputer-Based Ensemble Docking Drug Discovery Pipeline with Application to Covid-19

In this work, we present a supercomputer-driven pipeline for in silico drug discovery using enhanced sampling molecular dynamics (MD) and ensemble docking. Ensemble docking makes use of MD results by docking compound databases into representative protein binding-site conformations, thus taking into account the dynamic properties of the binding sites. We also describe preliminary results obtained for 24 systems involving eight proteins of the proteome of SARS-CoV-2. The MD involves temperature replica exchange enhanced sampling, making use of massively parallel supercomputing to quickly sample the configurational space of protein drug targets. Using the Summit supercomputer at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, more than 1 ms of enhanced sampling MD can be generated per day. We have ensemble docked repurposing databases to 10 configurations of each of the 24 SARS-CoV-2 systems using AutoDock Vina. Comparison to experiment demonstrates remarkably high hit rates for the top scoring tranches of compounds identified by our ensemble approach. We also demonstrate that, using Autodock-GPU on Summit, it is possible to perform exhaustive docking of one billion compounds in under 24 h. Finally, we discuss preliminary results and planned improvements to the pipeline, including the use of quantum mechanical (QM), machine learning, and artificial intelligence (AI) methods to cluster MD trajectories and rescore docking poses.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Host genetics and gut microbiota composition: Baseline gut microbiota composition as a possible prognostic factor for the severity of COVID-19 in patients with familial Mediterranean fever disease

It is known that the gut microbiome of a healthy person affects the process of COVID-19 after getting infected with SARS-CoV-2 virus. It is also believed that colchicine can alleviate the severity of COVID-19. Current investigations aimed to evaluate the associations between the baseline gut microbiota composition of healthy and Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) - carrier Armenian men populations, and the severity of the COVID-19 disease after their infection with the SARS-CoV-2. The study has a purpose of answering three core questions: i. Do the characteristics of gut microbiome of Armenians affect the course of COVID-19 severity? ii. How does the COVID-19 disease course on go for FMF patients who have been taking colchicine as a medication over the years after getting infected with SARS-CoV-2? iii. Is there an initial gut micribiota structure pattern for non-FMF and FMF patients in the cases when COVID-19 appears in mild form? The gut microbiota composition in non-FMF and FMF patients before the first infection (mild and moderate course of COVID-19) was considered. COVID-19 was diagnosed by SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid RT-PCR in nasopharyngeal swab and/or sputum. The number of patients with male FMF with mild COVID-19 was approximately two times higher than that of non-FMF male subjects with COVID-19. In addition, an association of COVID-19 disease severity with the baseline gut Prevotella, Clostridium hiranonis, Eubacterium biforme, Veillonellaceae, Coprococcus, and Blautia diversities in the non-FMF and FMF populations were revealed by us, which can be used as risk/prognostic factor for the severity of COVID-19.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Predictive models of long COVID

Background: The cause and symptoms of long COVID are poorly understood. It is challenging to predict whether a given COVID-19 patient will develop long COVID in the future. Methods: We used electronic health record (EHR) data from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative to predict the incidence of long COVID. We trained two machine learning (ML) models — logistic regression (LR) and random forest (RF). Features used to train predictors included symptoms and drugs ordered during acute infection, measures of COVID-19 treatment, pre-COVID comorbidities, and demographic information. We assigned the ‘long COVID’ label to patients diagnosed with the U09.9 ICD10-CM code. The cohorts included patients with (a) EHRs reported from data partners using U09.9 ICD10-CM code and (b) at least one EHR in each feature category. We analysed three cohorts: all patients (n = 2,190,579; diagnosed with long COVID = 17,036), inpatients (149,319; 3,295), and outpatients (2,041,260; 13,741). Findings: LR and RF models yielded median AUROC of 0.76 and 0.75, respectively. Ablation study revealed that drugs had the highest influence on the prediction task. The SHAP method identified age, gender, cough, fatigue, albuterol, obesity, diabetes, and chronic lung disease as explanatory features. Models trained on data from one N3C partner and tested on data from the other partners had average AUROC of 0.75. Interpretation: ML-based classification using EHR information from the acute infection period is effective in predicting long COVID. SHAP methods identified important features for prediction. Cross-site analysis demonstrated the generalizability of the proposed methodology.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

COVID-19 Outcomes by Cancer Status, Site, Treatment, and Vaccination

Background: Studies have shown an increased risk of severe SARS-CoV-2–related (COVID-19) disease outcome and mortality for patients with cancer, but it is not well understood whether associations vary by cancer site, cancer treatment, and vaccination status. Methods: Using electronic health record data from an academic medical center, we identified a retrospective cohort of 260,757 individuals tested for or diagnosed with COVID-19 from March 10, 2020, to August 1, 2022. Of these, 52,019 tested positive for COVID-19 of whom 13,752 had a cancer diagnosis. We conducted Firth-corrected logistic regression to assess the association between cancer status, site, treatment, vaccination, and four COVID-19 outcomes: hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, mortality, and a composite “severe COVID” outcome. Results: Cancer diagnosis was significantly associated with higher rates of severe COVID, hospitalization, and mortality. These associations were driven by patients whose most recent initial cancer diagnosis was within the past 3 years. Chemotherapy receipt, colorectal cancer, hematologic malignancies, kidney cancer, and lung cancer were significantly associated with higher rates of worse COVID-19 outcomes. Vaccinations were significantly associated with lower rates of worse COVID-19 outcomes regardless of cancer status. Conclusions: Patients with colorectal cancer, hematologic malignancies, kidney cancer, or lung cancer or who receive chemotherapy for treatment should be cautious because of their increased risk of worse COVID-19 outcomes, even after vaccination. Impact: Additional COVID-19 precautions are warranted for people with certain cancer types and treatments. Further, significant benefit from vaccination is noted for both cancer and cancer-free patients.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

NSAID use and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients: a 38-center retrospective cohort study

Abstract Background Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to reduce pain, fever, and inflammation but have been associated with complications in community-acquired pneumonia. Observations shortly after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 suggested that ibuprofen was associated with an increased risk of adverse events in COVID-19 patients, but subsequent observational studies failed to demonstrate increased risk and in one case showed reduced risk associated with NSAID use. Methods A 38-center retrospective cohort study was performed that leveraged the harmonized, high-granularity electronic health record data of the National COVID Cohort Collaborative. A propensity-matched cohort of 19,746 COVID-19 inpatients was constructed by matching cases (treated with NSAIDs at the time of admission) and 19,746 controls (not treated) from 857,061 patients with COVID-19 available for analysis. The primary outcome of interest was COVID-19 severity in hospitalized patients, which was classified as: moderate, severe, or mortality/hospice. Secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury (AKI), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), invasive ventilation, and all-cause mortality at any time following COVID-19 diagnosis. Results Logistic regression showed that NSAID use was not associated with increased COVID-19 severity (OR: 0.57 95% CI: 0.53–0.61). Analysis of secondary outcomes using logistic regression showed that NSAID use was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (OR 0.51 95% CI: 0.47–0.56), invasive ventilation (OR: 0.59 95% CI: 0.55–0.64), AKI (OR: 0.67 95% CI: 0.63–0.72), or ECMO (OR: 0.51 95% CI: 0.36–0.7). In contrast, the odds ratios indicate reduced risk of these outcomes, but our quantitative bias analysis showed E-values of between 1.9 and 3.3 for these associations, indicating that comparatively weak or moderate confounder associations could explain away the observed associations. Conclusions Study interpretation is limited by the observational design. Recording of NSAID use may have been incomplete. Our study demonstrates that NSAID use is not associated with increased COVID-19 severity, all-cause mortality, invasive ventilation, AKI, or ECMO in COVID-19 inpatients. A conservative interpretation in light of the quantitative bias analysis is that there is no evidence that NSAID use is associated with risk of increased severity or the other measured outcomes. Our results confirm and extend analogous findings in previous observational studies using a large cohort of patients drawn from 38 centers in a nationally representative multicenter database.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Characterizing Long COVID: Deep Phenotype of a Complex Condition

Background: Numerous publications describe the clinical manifestations of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC or "long COVID"), but they are difficult to integrate because of heterogeneous methods and the lack of a standard for denoting the many phenotypic manifestations. Patient-led studies are of particular importance for understanding the natural history of COVID-19, but integration is hampered because they often use different terms to describe the same symptom or condition. This significant disparity in patient versus clinical characterization motivated the proposed ontological approach to specifying manifestations, which will improve capture and integration of future long COVID studies. Methods: The Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO) is a widely used standard for exchange and analysis of phenotypic abnormalities in human disease but has not yet been applied to the analysis of COVID-19. Funding: We identified 303 articles published before April 29, 2021, curated 59 relevant manuscripts that described clinical manifestations in 81 cohorts three weeks or more following acute COVID-19, and mapped 287 unique clinical findings to HPO terms. We present layperson synonyms and definitions that can be used to link patient self-report questionnaires to standard medical terminology. Long COVID clinical manifestations are not assessed consistently across studies, and most manifestations have been reported with a wide range of synonyms by different authors. Across at least 10 cohorts, authors reported 31 unique clinical features corresponding to HPO terms; the most commonly reported feature was Fatigue (median 45.1%) and the least commonly reported was Nausea (median 3.9%), but the reported percentages varied widely between studies. Interpretation: Translating long COVID manifestations into computable HPO terms will improve analysis, data capture, and classification of long COVID patients. If researchers, clinicians, and patients share a common language, then studies can be compared/pooled more effectively. Furthermore, mapping lay terminology to HPO will help patients assist clinicians and researchers in creating phenotypic characterizations that are computationally accessible, thereby improving the stratification, diagnosis, and treatment of long COVID.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Publication and Impact of Preprints Included in the First 100 Editions of the CDC COVID-19 Science Update: Content Analysis

Preprints are publicly available manuscripts posted to various servers that have not been peer reviewed. Although preprints have existed since 1961, they have gained increased popularity during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the need for immediate, relevant information. The aim of this study is to evaluate the publication rate and impact of preprints included in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) COVID-19 Science Update and assess the performance of the COVID-19 Science Update team in selecting impactful preprints. All preprints in the first 100 editions (April 1, 2020, to July 30, 2021) of the Science Update were included in the study. Preprints that were not published were categorized as “unpublished preprints.” Preprints that were subsequently published exist in 2 versions (in a peer-reviewed journal and on the original preprint server), which were analyzed separately and referred to as “peer-reviewed preprint” and “original preprint,” respectively. Time to publish was the time interval between the date on which a preprint was first posted and the date on which it was first available as a peer-reviewed article. Impact was quantified by Altmetric Attention Score and citation count for all available manuscripts on August 6, 2021. Preprints were analyzed by publication status, publication rate, preprint server, and time to publication. Of the 275 preprints included in the CDC COVID-19 Science Update during the study period, most came from three servers: medRxiv (n=201, 73.1%), bioRxiv (n=41, 14.9%), and SSRN (n=25, 9.1%), with 8 (2.9%) coming from other sources. Additionally, 152 (55.3%) were eventually published. The median time to publish was 2.3 (IQR 1.4-3.7). When preprints posted in the last 2.3 months were excluded (to account for the time to publish), the publication rate was 67.8%. Moreover, 76 journals published at least one preprint from the CDC COVID-19 Science Update, and 18 journals published at least three. The median Altmetric Attention Score for unpublished preprints (n=123, 44.7%) was 146 (IQR 22-552) with a median citation count of 2 (IQR 0-8); for original preprints (n=152, 55.2%), these values were 212 (IQR 22-1164) and 14 (IQR 2-40), respectively; for peer-review preprints, these values were 265 (IQR 29-1896) and 19 (IQR 3-101), respectively. Prior studies of COVID-19 preprints found publication rates between 5.4% and 21.1%. Preprints included in the CDC COVID-19 Science Update were published at a higher rate than overall COVID-19 preprints, and those that were ultimately published were published within months and received higher attention scores than unpublished preprints. These findings indicate that the Science Update process for selecting preprints had a high fidelity in terms of their likelihood to be published and their impact. The incorporation of high-quality preprints into the CDC COVID-19 Science Update improves this activity’s capacity to inform meaningful public health decision-making.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

COVID-19-Related Experiences and Perspectives of Peruvian College Students: A Descriptive Study

The COVID-19 pandemic drastically affected higher education and higher education students around the world, but few studies of college students’ experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic have been conducted in Latin America. This study describes the COVID-19-related experiences and perspectives of Peruvian college students. We surveyed 3,427 full-time college students (average age: 23 years) attending a multi-campus Peruvian university in fall 2020. Participants were recruited through the digital platform of the learning management system at their university, email, and social media. We asked participants how they were managing risks related to COVID-19; the continuity of social, educational, and work activities; and the psychological and economic impacts of the pandemic on their lives. Since March 2020, 73.0% of participants reported COVID-19-related symptoms, but only 33.9% were tested for COVID-19. During the national quarantine imposed by the Peruvian government (March 15–June 30, 2020), 64.3% of participants remained in their house. Furthermore, while 44.0% of participants were working in February 2020 (95% CI: [41.7%, 46.4%]), only 23.6% (95% CI: [21.7%, 25.7%]) were working immediately after the pandemic began (i.e., at the end of April 2020). Participants were more stressed about the health and educational implications of COVID-19 for Peruvian society and their families than about themselves. The public health, economic, and educational implications of COVID-19 on college students are continuing to unfold. This study informed Peruvian higher education institutions’ continued response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the progressive return to postpandemic activities, as well as other future pandemics and other crises.

Bazo-Alvarez, Juan Carlos↗