Background The transmission dynamics and severity of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19)pandemic is different across countries or regions.Differences in governments’policy responses may explain some of these differenc...Background The transmission dynamics and severity of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19)pandemic is different across countries or regions.Differences in governments’policy responses may explain some of these differences.We aimed to compare worldwide government responses to the spread of COVID-19,to examine the relationship between response level,response timing and the epidemic trajectory.Methods Free publicly-accessible data collected by the Coronavirus Government Response Tracker(OxCGRT)were used.Nine sub-indicators reflecting government response from 148 countries were collected systematically from January 1 to May 1,2020.The sub-indicators were scored and were aggregated into a common Stringency Index(SI,a value between 0 and 100)that reflects the overall stringency of the government’s response in a daily basis.Group-based trajectory modelling method was used to identify trajectories of SI.Multivariable linear regression models were used to analyse the association between time to reach a high-level SI and time to the peak number of daily new cases.Results Our results identified four trajectories of response in the spread of COVID-19 based on when the response was initiated:before January 13,from January 13 to February 12,from February 12 to March 11,and the last stage—from March 11(the day WHO declared a pandemic of COVID-19)on going.Governments’responses were upgraded with further spread of COVID-19 but varied substantially across countries.After the adjustment of SI level,geographical region and initiation stages,each day earlier to a high SI level(SI>80)from the start of response was associated with 0.44(standard error:0.08,P<0.001,R2=0.65)days earlier to the peak number of daily new case.Also,each day earlier to a high SI level from the date of first reported case was associated with 0.65(standard error:0.08,P<0.001,R2=0.42)days earlier to the peak number of daily new case.Conclusions Early start of a high-level response to COVID-19 is associated with early arrival of the peak number of daily new cases.This may help to reduce the delays in flattening the epidemic curve to the low spread level.展开更多
Background: Several studies have investigated the association of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) gene insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism with peripheral vascular disease (PVD); however, the results remain contr...Background: Several studies have investigated the association of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) gene insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism with peripheral vascular disease (PVD); however, the results remain controversial. Therefore, we conducted the current meta-analysis to evaluate this relationship in the general population of different ethnicities. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Wanfang Database, and CNKI to identify eligible studies. Random-effect models were applied to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR) with a 95％ confidence interval (CI), regardless of between-study heterogeneity. Results: A total of 13 studies with 1966 cases and 6129 controls were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled ORs for the association between ACE I/D polymorphism and PVD risk were not statistically significant in the overall population under all genetic models. In further ethnicity-stratified analyses, we found a statistically significant association of ACE I/D polymorphism with PVD susceptibility in Asians under most models. However, the association among Caucasians did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion: ACE I/D polymorphism might be associated with susceptibility to PVD in the Asian population, but there was no clear evidence indicating a similar significant relationship among Caucasians.展开更多
The editorial staff and authors would like to make a correction to the published paper.1
There were some mistakes in the original version of the article in Fig. 4. The editorial staff and authors havecorrected the er...The editorial staff and authors would like to make a correction to the published paper.1
There were some mistakes in the original version of the article in Fig. 4. The editorial staff and authors havecorrected the errors as shown in the figure below. The figure legend does not need to be changed. The rest of themanuscript does not need to be changed.展开更多
文摘Background The transmission dynamics and severity of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19)pandemic is different across countries or regions.Differences in governments’policy responses may explain some of these differences.We aimed to compare worldwide government responses to the spread of COVID-19,to examine the relationship between response level,response timing and the epidemic trajectory.Methods Free publicly-accessible data collected by the Coronavirus Government Response Tracker(OxCGRT)were used.Nine sub-indicators reflecting government response from 148 countries were collected systematically from January 1 to May 1,2020.The sub-indicators were scored and were aggregated into a common Stringency Index(SI,a value between 0 and 100)that reflects the overall stringency of the government’s response in a daily basis.Group-based trajectory modelling method was used to identify trajectories of SI.Multivariable linear regression models were used to analyse the association between time to reach a high-level SI and time to the peak number of daily new cases.Results Our results identified four trajectories of response in the spread of COVID-19 based on when the response was initiated:before January 13,from January 13 to February 12,from February 12 to March 11,and the last stage—from March 11(the day WHO declared a pandemic of COVID-19)on going.Governments’responses were upgraded with further spread of COVID-19 but varied substantially across countries.After the adjustment of SI level,geographical region and initiation stages,each day earlier to a high SI level(SI>80)from the start of response was associated with 0.44(standard error:0.08,P<0.001,R2=0.65)days earlier to the peak number of daily new case.Also,each day earlier to a high SI level from the date of first reported case was associated with 0.65(standard error:0.08,P<0.001,R2=0.42)days earlier to the peak number of daily new case.Conclusions Early start of a high-level response to COVID-19 is associated with early arrival of the peak number of daily new cases.This may help to reduce the delays in flattening the epidemic curve to the low spread level.
文摘Background: Several studies have investigated the association of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) gene insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism with peripheral vascular disease (PVD); however, the results remain controversial. Therefore, we conducted the current meta-analysis to evaluate this relationship in the general population of different ethnicities. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Wanfang Database, and CNKI to identify eligible studies. Random-effect models were applied to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR) with a 95％ confidence interval (CI), regardless of between-study heterogeneity. Results: A total of 13 studies with 1966 cases and 6129 controls were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled ORs for the association between ACE I/D polymorphism and PVD risk were not statistically significant in the overall population under all genetic models. In further ethnicity-stratified analyses, we found a statistically significant association of ACE I/D polymorphism with PVD susceptibility in Asians under most models. However, the association among Caucasians did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion: ACE I/D polymorphism might be associated with susceptibility to PVD in the Asian population, but there was no clear evidence indicating a similar significant relationship among Caucasians.
文摘The editorial staff and authors would like to make a correction to the published paper.1
There were some mistakes in the original version of the article in Fig. 4. The editorial staff and authors havecorrected the errors as shown in the figure below. The figure legend does not need to be changed. The rest of themanuscript does not need to be changed.
