Collaborative nowcasting of COVID-19 hospitalization incidences in Germany

Real-time surveillance is a crucial element in the response to infectious disease outbreaks. However, the interpretation of incidence data is often hampered by delays occurring at various stages of data gathering and reporting. As a result, recent values are biased downward, which obscures current trends. Statistical nowcasting techniques can be employed to correct these biases, allowing for accurate characterization of recent developments and thus enhancing situational awareness. In this paper, we present a preregistered real-time assessment of eight nowcasting approaches, applied by independent research teams to German 7-day hospitalization incidences during the COVID-19 pandemic. This indicator played an important role in the management of the outbreak in Germany and was linked to levels of non-pharmaceutical interventions via certain thresholds. Due to its definition, in which hospitalization counts are aggregated by the date of case report rather than admission, German hospitalization incidences are particularly affected by delays and can take several weeks or months to fully stabilize. For this study, all methods were applied from 22 November 2021 to 29 April 2022, with probabilistic nowcasts produced each day for the current and 28 preceding days. Nowcasts at the national, state, and age-group levels were collected in the form of quantiles in a public repository and displayed in a dashboard. Moreover, a mean and a median ensemble nowcast were generated. We find that overall, the compared methods were able to remove a large part of the biases introduced by delays. Most participating teams underestimated the importance of very long delays, though, resulting in nowcasts with a slight downward bias. The accompanying prediction intervals were also too narrow for almost all methods. Averaged over all nowcast horizons, the best performance was achieved by a model using case incidences as a covariate and taking into account longer delays than the other approaches. For the most recent days, which are often considered the most relevant in practice, a mean ensemble of the submitted nowcasts performed best. We conclude by providing some lessons learned on the definition of nowcasting targets and practical challenges

Changes in healthcare seeking and lifestyle in old aged individuals during COVID-19 lockdown in Germany: the population-based AugUR study

Background Containment measures in the COVID-19 pandemic protected individuals at high risk, particularly individuals at old age, but little is known about how these measures affected health-related behavior of old aged individuals. We aimed to investigate the impact of the spring 2020 lockdown in Germany on healthcare-seeking and health-related lifestyle in the old aged and to identify susceptible subgroups. Methods We conducted a follow-up survey among the pre-pandemically well-characterized participants of our AugUR cohort study, residents in/around Regensburg aged 70+ years and relatively mobile. A self-completion questionnaire on current behavior, perceived changes, and SARS-Cov-2 infection was mailed in May 2020, shortly before contact restrictions ended. Pre-pandemic lifestyle and medical conditions were derived from previous study center visits. Results Among 1850 survey participants (73–98 years; net-response 89%), 74% were at increased risk for severe COVID-19 according to medical conditions; four participants reported SARS-CoV-2 infection (0.2%). Participants reported changes in behavior: 29% refrained from medical appointments, 14% increased TV consumption, 26% reported less physical activity, but no systematic increase of smoking or alcohol consumption. When comparing during- and pre-lockdown reports of lifestyle within participant, we found the same pattern as for the reported perceived changes. Women and the more educated were more susceptible to changes. Worse QOL was perceived by 38%. Conclusions Our data suggest that the spring 2020 lockdown did not affect the lifestyle of a majority of the mobile old aged individuals, but the substantial proportions with decreased physical activity and healthcare-seeking are markers of collateral damage

Genome-wide association meta-analysis for early age-related macular degeneration highlights novel loci and insights for advanced disease

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Regression analysis with categorized regression calibrated exposure: some interesting findings

BACKGROUND: Regression calibration as a method for handling measurement error is becoming increasingly well-known and used in epidemiologic research. However, the standard version of the method is not appropriate for exposure analyzed on a categorical (e.g. quintile) scale, an approach commonly used in epidemiologic studies. A tempting solution could then be to use the predicted continuous exposure obtained through the regression calibration method and treat it as an approximation to the true exposure, that is, include the categorized calibrated exposure in the main regression analysis. METHODS: We use semi-analytical calculations and simulations to evaluate the performance of the proposed approach compared to the naive approach of not correcting for measurement error, in situations where analyses are performed on quintile scale and when incorporating the original scale into the categorical variables, respectively. We also present analyses of real data, containing measures of folate intake and depression, from the Norwegian Women and Cancer study (NOWAC). RESULTS: In cases where extra information is available through replicated measurements and not validation data, regression calibration does not maintain important qualities of the true exposure distribution, thus estimates of variance and percentiles can be severely biased. We show that the outlined approach maintains much, in some cases all, of the misclassification found in the observed exposure. For that reason, regression analysis with the corrected variable included on a categorical scale is still biased. In some cases the corrected estimates are analytically equal to those obtained by the naive approach. Regression calibration is however vastly superior to the naive method when applying the medians of each category in the analysis. CONCLUSION: Regression calibration in its most well-known form is not appropriate for measurement error correction when the exposure is analyzed on a percentile scale. Relating back to the original scale of the exposure solves the problem. The conclusion regards all regression models

On the impact of different approaches to classify age-related macular degeneration: Results from the German AugUR study

While age-related macular degeneration (AMD) poses an important personal and public health burden, comparing epidemiological studies on AMD is hampered by differing approaches to classify AMD. In our AugUR study survey, recruiting residents from in/around Regensburg, Germany, aged 70+, we analyzed the AMD status derived from color fundus images applying two different classification systems. Based on 1,040 participants with gradable fundus images for at least one eye, we show that including individuals with only one gradable eye (n = 155) underestimates AMD prevalence and we provide a correction procedure. Bias-corrected and standardized to the Bavarian population, late AMD prevalence is 7.3% (95% confidence interval = [5.4; 9.4]). We find substantially different prevalence estimates for "early/intermediate AMD" depending on the classification system: 45.3% (95%-CI = [41.8; 48.7]) applying the Clinical Classification (early/intermediate AMD) or 17.1% (95%-CI = [14.6; 19.7]) applying the Three Continent AMD Consortium Severity Scale (mild/moderate/severe early AMD). We thus provide a first effort to grade AMD in a complete study with different classification systems, a first approach for bias-correction from individuals with only one gradable eye, and the first AMD prevalence estimates from a German elderly population. Our results underscore substantial differences for early/intermediate AMD prevalence estimates between classification systems and an urgent need for harmonization

Linear low-dose extrapolation for noncancer health effects is the exception, not the rule

The nature of the exposure-response relationship has a profound influence on risk analyses. Several arguments have been proffered as to why all exposure-response relationships for both cancer and noncarcinogenic end-points should be assumed to be linear at low doses. We focused on three arguments that have been put forth for noncarcinogens. First, the general “additivity-to-background” argument proposes that if an agent enhances an already existing disease-causing process, then even small exposures increase disease incidence in a linear manner. This only holds if it is related to a specific mode of action that has nonuniversal properties—properties that would not be expected for most noncancer effects. Second, the “heterogeneity in the population” argument states that variations in sensitivity among members ofthe target population tend to “flatten out and linearize” the exposure-response curve, but this actually only tends to broaden, not linearize, the dose-response relationship. Third, it has been argued that a review of epidemiological evidence shows linear or no-threshold effects at low exposures in humans, despite nonlinear exposure-response in the experimental dose range in animal testing for similar endpoints. It is more likely that this is attributable to exposure measurement error rather than a true non-threshold association. Assuming that every chemical is toxic at high exposures and linear at low exposures does not comport to modern-day scientific knowledge of biology. There is no compelling evidence-based justification for a general low-exposure linearity; rather, case-specific mechanistic arguments are needed

Incidence, progression and risk factors of age-related macular degeneration in 35–95-year-old individuals from three jointly designed German cohort studies

Objective To estimate age-related macular degeneration (AMD) incidence/progression across a wide age range. Methods and analysis AMD at baseline and follow-up (colour fundus imaging, Three Continent AMD Consortium Severity Scale, 3CACSS, clinical classification, CC) was assessed for 1513 individuals aged 35–95 years at baseline from three jointly designed population-based cohorts in Germany: Kooperative Gesundheitsforschung in der Region Augsburg (KORA-Fit, KORA-FF4) and Altersbezogene Untersuchungen zur Gesundheit der Universität Regensburg (AugUR) with 18-year, 14-year or 3-year follow-up, respectively. Baseline assessment included lifestyle, metabolic and genetic markers. We derived cumulative estimates, rates and risk factor association for: (1) incident early AMD, (2) incident late AMD among no AMD at baseline (definition 1), (3) incident late AMD among no/early AMD at baseline (definition 2), (4) progression from early to late AMD. Results Incidence/progression increased by age, except progression in 70+-year old. We observed 35–55-year-old with 3CACSS-based early AMD who progressed to late AMD. Predominant risk factor for incident late AMD definition 2 was early AMD followed by genetics and smoking. When separating incident late AMD definition 1 from progression (instead of combined as incident late AMD definition 2), estimates help judge an individual’s risk based on age and (3CACSS) early AMD status: for example, for a 65-year old, 3-year late AMD risk with no or early AMD is 0.5% or 7%, 3-year early AMD risk is 3%; for an 85-year old, these numbers are 0.5%, 21%, 12%, respectively. For CC-based ‘early/intermediate’ AMD, incidence was higher, but progression was lower. Conclusion We provide a practical guide for AMD risk for ophthalmology practice and healthcare management and document a late AMD risk for individuals aged <55 years

Geschlechterstereotype und Geschlechterrollen

Zweitveröffentlichun

Psychodynamik medikalisierter Beziehungen

Konsensuskonferenzen in der Medizin tragen das zu einem bestimmten Zeitpunkt verfügbare Wissen über eine Krankheit zusammen, um Empfehlungen zu formulieren, wie sie erfolgreich diagnostiziert und therapiert werden kann. Für die Aufmerksamkeits und/oder Hyperaktivitätsstörung bei Kindern und Jugendlichen haben entsprechende Bemühungen dazu geführt, einen aufwendigen Diagnoseprozess zu verlangen, der die gesamte Lebenswelt der auffälligen Kinder und Jugendlichen in die Beobachtung einbezieht und Vorsicht walten lässt, um Unaufmerksamkeit, Impulsivität und Hyperaktivität nicht vorschnell als Symptome einer psychischen Störung zu beurteilen (Remschmidt, 2005). Ein solcher Aufwand ist nicht zuletzt deshalb notwendig, weil die Symptomdiagnose einer AD(H)S auf Urteilen sozialer Wahrnehmung beruht, die immer Normalitätsvorstellungen enthalten, die unterschiedlich ausfallen können. Eine andere Möglichkeit der Objektivierung gibt es nicht. Was die Therapie der AD(H)S betrifft, so gilt es inzwischen als Behandlungsstandard, sich nicht auf die Verordnung von Medikamenten zu beschränken, weil eine solche Beschränkung die Ätiologie der Symptome ignoriert. Wenn eine Medikation nach sorgfältiger Prüfung indiziert erscheint, sollte sie gegebenenfalls von psychotherapeutischen, psychoedukativen, ergotherapeutischen, logopädischen, pädagogischen oder anderen geeigneten nichtmedikamentösen Unterstützungen flankiert werden. Ohne eine solche Flankierung wird den Betroffenen die Entwicklung eines angemessenen Selbstverständnisses vorenthalten