DOCSLIB.ORG

COVID-19 Response Interim Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
COVID-19 Response Interim Report JUNE 2021 COVID-19 response interim report Interim Report (January 2020 to March 2021) Medical Research Council Evaluation and Analysis Team I Foreword The intent of this report is to document the main activities undertaken by Medical Research Council (MRC), part of UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), and its community of researchers in response to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and to recognise the impacts and insights arising from these activities. As the response and outcomes will continue past 2021, this is an interim report covering January 2020 to March 2021. It is proposed that a final form of this report is produced in 2022. The report is a collection of eight summaries of separate components of the MRC-led aspects of the UKRI COVID-19 response and their impact rather than a connected narrative of events. Highlighted blue and bold text provide links to more detailed descriptions either within the document and the Annexes or external webpages. Methods and acknowledgements The information in this paper has been gathered live throughout 2020. Funding activity data was collated from various off-line call processes by Matt Coles. Activity, outcomes, and impact information from the research community was primarily self-reported in project and Institute, Unit and Centre surveys and Researchfish®. Interviews were undertaken with MRC staff in May and October 2020 and in January 2021. The data was gathered, and the report composed by Emily Gale, Ian Viney, Buddhini Samarasinghe, and James Carter. Additional analysis was provided by the members of the Evaluation and Analysis Team: Joe Murphy and Dominic Hedges. Data on the individual calls and community activities was collected by Rebecca Barlow, Jo Jenkinson, Graham Campbell, Jessica Boname, Kath Giles, David Pan, Anne McGavigan, Mario Moroso (National Institute of Health Research, NIHR), Catrin Bailey, Anne McKeown, Jonathan Pearce, Alistair Lamb, Samia Majid and other MRC staff. More than 20 MRC Programme Managers have provided detailed monitoring of individual COVID-19 research projects. Financial information was provided by Caroline Fitzpatrick. II Contents SECTION 1 Executive Summary 5 Timeline of pandemic-related events divided by world or background events, MRC activities and their impacts 7 SECTION 2 Impacts arising from MRC supported COVID-19 research 8 Treatment 9 Vaccines 11 Surveillance 12 Modelling 12 Data connectivity and co-ordination 13 Clinical care guidance 14 Public engagement and global communication 15 Understanding SARS-CoV-2 biology and pathology 15 SECTION 3 Strategic activities 17 Leading an agile research response 17 Forward planning and relationship building 17 Clarity on the setting of research priorities and identifying gaps in the research landscape 20 Balance of bottom-up and top-down funding mechanisms 21 International coordination 22 SECTION 4 MRC funding response to the COVID-19 pandemic 24 Activities Summary 24 MRC supported COVID –19 research 24 Funding calls – summary and abbreviations 24 Other COVID-19 awards 25 MRC co-ordinated/supported research platforms/knowledge infrastructure 25 MRC support for strategic initiatives 27 International coordination 27 MRC COVID-19 portfolio 28 3 SECTION 5 COVID-19 response from the MRC community of major investments 33 Research initiated within partnerships, institutes, units and centres 33 Understanding virus biology and immune responses 33 Modelling disease outbreak and understanding transmission 33 Societal and psychological impacts of COVID-19 33 Understanding the global context 33 Coordinating big data 34 Refinements to diagnostic testing and vaccine delivery 34 MRC-supported community response: other support activities 34 SECTION 6 Knowledge platforms – prior investments and research themes 36 SECTION 7 COVID-19 response implications for MRC resources 38 SECTION 8 Lessons learned: Impediments to research progress during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic 41 SECTION 9 ANNEXES 42 Version 1.1 (03/08/2021) - updated with bookmarks to sections/annexes to aid navigation, and revised hyperlinks to WHO pages following their website revamp. 4 SECTION 1 Executive Summary The UK Biomedical research community has been in the forefront of the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Mobilising existing expertise, infrastructure and a knowledge base developed over decades of funding, the work of MRC-funded researchers provided global leadership and world leading research in clinical trial implementation, health data management, vaccine development, and genome sequencing throughout 2020. MRC is now leading a £256m portfolio of COVID-19 relevant projects (£177m of which is funded from budgets managed by MRC). More than 60% of this funding will be spent by the end of 2021 and has been allocated to projects that have explicit objectives to have a rapid impact to prevent, treat and manage the pandemic. The community response has been unprecedented, with more than 3000 applications submitted to MRC-led COVID-19 research calls in 2020. This was in addition to the business-as-usual submissions to MRC Research Boards and panels1. Researchers from across the MRC community have speedily formed collaborative research efforts both within and between research organisations. Three of the MRC supported COVID-19 research platforms include academics from more than 15 research organisations. From the outset of the pandemic, MRC’s major strategic investments have worked collaboratively and individually re-aligning their work to progress hundreds of new COVID-19-relevant research projects. Additionally, the staff have delivered practical support for local clinical needs as well as providing analyses or compounds for research projects carried out by others. Some have built on their existing networks of laboratory expertise. For example, through the creation of the Protein Portal, a new international resource which provided key COVID-19 reagents for fellow investigators in the first year of the pandemic, the COVID-19 Protein Production Consortium contributed significantly to accelerating COVID-19 research. The rapid development and scale up of production of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine at unprecedented speed2, has delivered an intervention that is suitable for global distribution. This assistance in bringing the global pandemic under control could provide benefits, in global income of almost 9 trillion dollars by end-20253. The OECD has positively upgraded UK growth estimates specifically due to its successful vaccination programme4. The ongoing UK vaccination programme which primarily utilises the Oxford/ AstraZeneca vaccine has, in combination with social distancing, brought the UK epidemic under control and provided considerable protection for the population against severe disease and future infection. The development of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine was substantially founded on years of MRC- funded research, and publicly funded by MRC and partners in the early clinical studies. 1. All applications considered by MRC research boards and panels in 2019/20 totalled 2169 and totalled 2070 in 2020/21. 2. Previously the four-year development of the mumps vaccine was the most rapid. (Why a coronavirus vaccine could take way longer than a year (nationalgeographic.com); Maurice Hilleman, M.M.R. Vaccine’s Forgotten Hero - The New York Times (nytimes.com); Pinkbook | Mumps | Epidemiology of Vaccine Preventable Diseases | CDC) 3. IMF estimate Transcript of October 2020 World Economic Outlook Press Briefing (imf.org) 4. In December 2020 the OECD economic outlook estimated that UK total GDP growth in 2021 would be 4.2%, in March 2021 this estimate was revised to 5.1%, and then in May 2021 the estimate was further revised upwards to 7.2% https://stats.oecd.org/ index.aspx?DataSetCode=EO. 5 In the year since the pandemic started, MRC UKRI-supported research has directly led to important societal impacts. COVID-19 targeted clinical guidance has been developed, effective treatments have been identified (as well as many proven to be ineffective), and these treatments implemented internationally. Validation of the effectiveness of dexamethasone therapy by the RECOVERY trial resulted in an estimated 12,000 lives saved in six months of implementation. The development of methodologies for efficient clinical trial management and coordination, along with the establishment of infrastructure for big data and health data management have positively impacted the research landscape. These investments will enhance our ability to face future pandemics and other population health challenges as well as continuing to support world-leading biomedical research. UKRI-funded research has provided government and clinical policy makers with data to inform decision- making in several key areas. These include transmission, variant evolution, population group variance in vulnerability, patient metabolic responses, susceptibilities and mortality, and the population compliance and response to government restrictions as well as the mental health effects of the pandemic. There is growing evidence that during the pandemic MRC researchers have engaged to a greater extent than usual with stakeholders to provide successful, rapid translation of knowledge into public policy or guidance. In surveys, MRC-funded researchers were able to tell us about the highly interactive relationships5 developed between academic researchers and policymakers. They also demonstrated their ability to modify research questions and direction to serve the needs of policy makers in a rapidly changing
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 23 April 2020 Update
    20 April – 23 April 2020 Contents I. Summary .............................................................................................................................1 II. European Union .................................................................................................................5 III. France ...............................................................................................................................6 IV. Italy ...................................................................................................................................7 V. Germany ............................................................................................................................8 VI. Spain ...............................................................................................................................10 VII. United Kingdom .............................................................................................................10 I. SUMMARY Number of cases: 1,009,762 (including the UK) Number of deaths: 108,223 • The EU Executive Steering Group on Shortages of Medicines Caused by Major Events held a meeting on 15 April to discuss the progress of the measures regarding availability of medicines for European patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. They also updated the Q&A document on regulatory expectations for medicinal products for human use during the COVID-19 pandemic on 20 April. On 21 April, they set-up the fast-track system to support essential medicines for COVID-19 treatment,
    [Show full text]
  • Coronavirus COVID-19 Outbreak in the EU – Fundamental Rights Implications”
    Coronavirus pandemic in the EU – Fundamental Rights Implications Country: Sweden Contractor’s name: Emerga Institute Date: 2 July 2020 DISCLAIMER: This document was commissioned under contract as background material for a comparative report being prepared by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) for the project “Coronavirus COVID-19 outbreak in the EU – fundamental rights implications”. The information and views contained in the document do not necessarily reflect the views or the official position of the FRA. The document is made available for transparency and information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or legal opinion. 1 Measures taken by government/public authorities 1.1 Emergency laws/states of emergency Provide information on emergency laws/declarations of states of emergency, including actions taken by police to enforce them and court rulings concerning the legality of such measures. Please include in particular information on developments relating to the protection of the right of association/demonstration; for example, with respect to the public gatherings that took place concerning the death of George Floyd, or other such events. In Sweden, the only constitutionally protected freedom or right that has been restricted for all inhabitants in connection with the spread of the corona virus is the freedom of assembly. According to section 1 of the Ordinance on prohibition on holding public gatherings and public events (Förordning [2020:114] om förbud mot att hålla allmänna sammankomster och offentliga tillställningar), general meetings and public events with more than 50 participants may not be held within Sweden until further notice.1 All other restrictions aimed at the public are posed as recommendations from the government and/or the relevant authorities and cannot be imposed by any actions taken by the police.
    [Show full text]
  • Urgent SOS from Longcovid Sufferers
    Recognition · Research · Rehab www.longcovidsos.org [email protected] @LongCovidSOS 07 July 2020 Urgent SOS from LongCovid sufferers To: Rt Hon Boris Johnson MP, Prime Minister Rt Hon Matt Hancock MP, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Prof Chris Whitty, Chief Medical Officer for England, UK Government Chief Medical Adviser Dr Patrick Vallance, UK Government Chief Scientific Adviser Mr Simon Stevens, Chief Executive Officer NHS England John Connaghan CBE, Chief Executive NHS Scotland Mr Andrew Goodall, Chief Executive NHS Wales Mrs Valerie Watts, Chief Executive of The Health and Social Care Board for Northern Ireland Mr Duncan Selbie, Chief Executive Public Health England We are writing on behalf of thousands of forgotten victims of Covid-19 who have been sick since the early days of the outbreak. They are struggling to get help from the medical community for their continuing disease and feel abandoned by the government. The Covid-19 pandemic is estimated by the ONS to have infected around 7% of the UK population [1], [2] or approximately 4.6 million people; other studies suggest that the proportion infected could be as high as 25% [3]. In the early stages of the UK epidemic, government briefings and press reports were focussed on those who had severe symptoms and were at risk of being admitted to intensive care. People who had what were described as ‘mild’ symptoms were advised to stay in place and only present to hospital if their condition became critical. As a result, a significant number of sufferers battled with their symptoms at home, relying on advice from 111 which was not always helpful.
    [Show full text]
  • UK Set to Extend Coronavirus Lockdown 16 April 2020
    UK set to extend coronavirus lockdown 16 April 2020 rules not to go out except for exercise and to buy essential items. "I don't want to put all of that good effort to waste," said Hancock, who himself has also had coronavirus but recovered quickly. "Because if we just released all the measures then this virus would run rampant once again, and we can't let that happen." He did not say how long the lockdown would continue, but the law states that the measures must be reviewed every 21 days. Credit: CC0 Public Domain England's chief medical officer, Chris Whitty, said Wednesday that the outbreak was peaking but warned the numbers of deaths would keep rising. The British government was on Thursday expected Health ministry figures show 12,868 people in to extend a nationwide lockdown for another three hospital in Britain have so far died, making it one of weeks, amid signs the coronavirus outbreak is the worst affected countries in the global outbreak. peaking but also warnings of more deaths to come. Testing concerns Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab, who is standing The main opposition Labour party supports in for Prime Minister Boris Johnson as he extending the lockdown, but has called for the recuperates after spending a week in hospital with government to set out its exit strategy—a demand COVID-19, met with ministers and officials to ministers say is premature. finalise the plans. There are particular concerns about the slow An announcement is due later but the government expansion of testing for coronavirus, something has already said that, with the death toll many people believe is crucial to easing the approaching 13,000 and still rising, now is not the confinement measures.
    [Show full text]
  • Workshop Reports PDF 2.8 MB
    Workshop reports Data science and AI in the age of COVID-19 Reflections on the response of the UK’s data science and AI community to the COVID-19 pandemic Below are the individual reports from the research. Another example of collaboration return to a context in which advances achieved workshops that were convened by The Alan between organisations was the development of during the pandemic would not be possible Turing Institute and the Centre for Facilitation adaptive clinical trials (e.g. RECOVERY8). once the COPI regulations come to an end, in November and December 2020, following despite evidence indicating public support for Challenges the Turing’s ‘AI and data science in the age of the use of health data in research.12 COVID-19’ conference. The workshops were The ability of the data science community to Workshop participants also reported that data summarised by the facilitators and theme respond more successfully to the challenge of sources could benefit from being better linked leads, and the editorial team of the primary the pandemic was hindered by several hurdles. to each other – despite more collaboration, report then applied light editing. These reports many UKRI-funded studies (ISARIC4C,13 are a reflection of the views expressed by Better standardisation and documentation PHOSP-COVID14) are still relatively standalone. workshop participants, and do not necessarily of clinical data (and other forms of data, e.g. Connecting expertise – the right people to reflect the views of The Alan Turing Institute. location) would have been beneficial. Some positive examples of standardisation could the right data to the right problem – was Several of the reports end with references have been replicated for far wider benefit.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reaction to the SARS-Cov-2 Virus Is the Most Reckless and Grossly Irresponsible 'Public Health' Response in History
    Elizabeth Hart <[email protected]> The reaction to the SARS-CoV-2 virus is the most reckless and grossly irresponsible 'public health' response in history Elizabeth Hart <[email protected]> Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 9:42 PM Bcc: Elizabeth Hart <[email protected]> Please see below my email to Sir Patrick Vallance and Chris Whitty, UK Scientific and Medical Advisers, challenging them about the grossly disproportionate and ill-targeted response to SARS-CoV-2/Covid-19. This really is the most dire 'public health' response in history, and the bigger picture is very sinister. Elizabeth Hart Independent person investigating the over-use of vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Elizabeth Hart <[email protected]> Date: Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 3:34 PM Subject: The reaction to the SARS-CoV-2 virus is the most reckless and grossly irresponsible 'public health' response in history To: Patrick Vallance, Chris Whitty Cc: Fiona Godlee, Sharon Davies, Peter Doshi, Kamran Abbasi, Theodora Bloom, Allyson Pollock, John Ioannidis, Simon Wain-Hobson, Richard Ebright, Marc Lipsitch, Michael Osterholm, Tom Inglesby, Carl Heneghan, Michael Levitt, Martin Kulldorff, Jayanta Bhattacharya, Sucharit Bhakdi, Gus Dalgleish, Karol Sikora, Anders Tegnell, Johan Giesecke, Ian Frazer, Peter Doherty, Peter Collignon, Roy Anderson, Peter Openshaw, Adrian Smith, David Cannadine, Venki Ramakrishnan, Andrew Goddard, Chris Conlon, Dan Sumners, John Shine, Robert Clancy, Sunetra Gupta, Andrew Pollard, Heidi Larson, Graham Medley, Melinda Mills, John Bell, David Kennedy, Andrew Read, Neil Ferguson For the attention of: Sir Patrick Vallance, UK Government Chief Scientific Adviser Professor Chris Whitty, UK Chief Medical Adviser Sir Patrick Vallance and Professor Whitty The reaction to the SARS-CoV-2 virus is the most reckless and grossly irresponsible 'public health' response in history.
    [Show full text]
  • Rigorous Clinical Trial Design in Public Health Emergencies Is Essential
    1 Rigorous Clinical Trial Design in Public Health Emergencies Is Essential Susan S. Ellenberg (Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania); Gerald T. Keusch (Departments of Medicine and Global Health, Boston University Schools of Medicine and Public Health); Abdel G. Babiker (Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, University College London); Kathryn M. Edwards (Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine); Roger J. Lewis (Department of Emergency Medicine, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center); Jens D. Lundgren( Department of Infectious Diseases, University of Copenhagen); Charles D. Wells (Infectious Diseases Unit, Sanofi-U.S.); Fred Wabwire-Mangen (Department of Epidemiology, Makerere University School of Public Health); Keith P.W.J. McAdam (Department of Clinical and Tropical Medicine, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) Keywords: randomized clinical trial; Ebola; ethics Running title: Research in public health emergencies Key Points: To obtain definitive information about the effects of treatments and vaccines, even in public health emergencies, randomized clinical trials are essential. Such trials are ethical and feasible with efforts to engage and collaborate with the affected communities. Contact information, corresponding author: Susan S. Ellenberg, Ph.D. University of Pennsylvania 423 Guardian Drive, Room 611 Philadelphia, PA 19104 [email protected]; 215-573-3904 Contact information, alternate corresponding author: Gerald T. Keusch, MD Boston University School of Medicine 620 Albany St Boston, MA 02118 [email protected]; 617-414-8960 2 ABSTRACT Randomized clinical trials are the most reliable approaches to evaluating the effects of new treatments and vaccines. During the 2014-15 West African Ebola epidemic, many argued that such trials were neither ethical nor feasible in an environment of limited health infrastructure and severe disease with a high fatality rate.
    [Show full text]
  • Written Evidence from Spotlight on Corruption1 (PGG18) the Public
    Written evidence from Spotlight on Corruption1 (PGG18) The Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee Propriety of governance in light of Greensill inquiry Introduction The revelations arising from the Greensill affair and its fallout, coming alongside other recent and ongoing scandals, have exposed significant weaknesses in the UK system for managing conflicts of interest, lobbying, and business appointments. This is a vital opportunity to bring the UK’s standards landscape up to date, and to ensure that integrity and ethics in government are regulated in a way that befits a modern democracy. Taking action to strengthen the UK’s integrity and ethics framework would benefit the UK by helping to: build trust in politicians and government; strengthen the stability, predictability and attractiveness of the UK as a place to do business; give the UK greater credibility on the international stage in promoting democracy and good governance; and implement outstanding recommendations made by international bodies such as the UN and Council of Europe about how the UK can improve its integrity and ethics framework to prevent and tackle corruption. Key Recommendations 1. Integrity and Ethics legislation. The government should consult on the introduction of an Integrity and Ethics Bill, by the spring of 2022, which gives legislative effect to: the Law Commission’s recommendations on the introduction of a corruption in public office offence; recommendations made by international bodies to put ACOBA and the Independent Advisor on Ministerial Interests on a statutory footing; recommendations that are likely to be made by the Committee on Standards in Public Life’s Standards Matters 2.0 review in the Autumn of 2021; and recommendations likely to be made from both the Boardman review and parliamentary committees such as PACAC, including legislative reform to the Lobbying Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcriptional Biomarkers for Predicting Development of TB: Progress and Clinical Considerations
    Early View ERJ Methods Transcriptional biomarkers for predicting development of TB: progress and clinical considerations Hanif Esmail, Frank Cobelens, Delia Goletti Please cite this article as: Esmail H, Cobelens F, Goletti D. Transcriptional biomarkers for predicting development of TB: progress and clinical considerations. Eur Respir J 2020; in press (https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.01957-2019). This manuscript has recently been accepted for publication in the European Respiratory Journal. It is published here in its accepted form prior to copyediting and typesetting by our production team. After these production processes are complete and the authors have approved the resulting proofs, the article will move to the latest issue of the ERJ online. Copyright ©ERS 2020 Transcriptional biomarkers for predicting development of TB: progress and clinical considerations Hanif Esmail1,2,3, Frank Cobelens4, Delia Goletti5* 1. Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, London, UK 2. Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK 3. Wellcome Centre for Infectious Diseases Research in Africa, Institute of Infectious Diseases and Molecular Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa 4. Dept of Global Health and Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 5. Translational Research Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Preclinical Research, “L. Spallanzani” National Institute for Infectious Diseases (INMI), IRCCS, Via Portuense 292, 00149 Rome, Italy * Corresponding author Key words: Transcriptional biomarkers, incipient tuberculosis, latent tuberculosis Introduction Achieving the ambitious targets for global tuberculosis (TB) control, will require an increased emphasis on preventing development of active disease in those with latent TB infection (LTBI) by preventative treatment or vaccination[1].
    [Show full text]
  • Chadox1 Ncov-19 Vaccine Prevents SARS-Cov-2 Pneumonia in Rhesus Macaques
    Article ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine prevents SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia in rhesus macaques https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2608-y Neeltje van Doremalen1,4, Teresa Lambe2,4, Alexandra Spencer2, Sandra Belij-Rammerstorfer2, Jyothi N. Purushotham1,2, Julia R. Port1, Victoria A. Avanzato1, Trenton Bushmaker1, Received: 13 May 2020 Amy Flaxman2, Marta Ulaszewska2, Friederike Feldmann3, Elizabeth R. Allen2, Hannah Sharpe2, Accepted: 24 July 2020 Jonathan Schulz1, Myndi Holbrook1, Atsushi Okumura1, Kimberly Meade-White1, Lizzette Pérez-Pérez1, Nick J. Edwards2, Daniel Wright2, Cameron Bissett2, Ciaran Gilbride2, Published online: 30 July 2020 Brandi N. Williamson1, Rebecca Rosenke3, Dan Long3, Alka Ishwarbhai2, Reshma Kailath2, Check for updates Louisa Rose2, Susan Morris2, Claire Powers2, Jamie Lovaglio3, Patrick W. Hanley3, Dana Scott3, Greg Saturday3, Emmie de Wit1, Sarah C. Gilbert2,5 ✉ & Vincent J. Munster1,5 ✉ Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 20191,2 and is responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic3. Vaccines are an essential countermeasure and are urgently needed to control the pandemic4. Here we show that the adenovirus-vector-based vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, which encodes the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, is immunogenic in mice and elicites a robust humoral and cell-mediated response. This response was predominantly mediated by type-1 T helper cells, as demonstrated by the profling of the IgG subclass and the expression of cytokines. Vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (using either a prime-only or a prime–boost regimen) induced a balanced humoral and cellular immune response of type-1 and type-2 T helper cells in rhesus macaques.
    [Show full text]
  • Read the Report As a PDF Exploring the Covid-19
    Contents Contents 1 About 2 Executive summary 3 Introduction 5 Landscape review 5 Key findings at this stage 6 A number of symptom trackers in the ecosystem 6 Ecosystem structure 6 Lack of collaboration 6 Lack of transparency around data collection 6 Open data availability 6 User base 7 Specific types of users 7 Location 7 Data discovery 8 Types of data 8 Observations about types of data 9 Commonly asked questions 9 Data standards 9 Representation of communities 10 Changes over time 10 Mental health and wellbeing 11 Outputs 11 Individual guidance 11 Research insights 11 Improvements to existing services 11 How does the data collected relate to the outputs? 12 The symptom tracking data ecosystem 13 The UK symptom tracking data ecosystem 13 Where is value being created in this example? 14 Barriers to impact 14 Opportunities 15 International variations 15 A single source approach 15 A more collaborative approach 16 Where is value being created in this example 17 Open Data Institute 2020 / Report Exploring the Covid-19 symptom-tracking ecosystem 1 Discussion 18 Data discovery 18 Legal complexities 18 Technical barriers 20 Trust and trustworthiness 20 Recommendations 20 Standards for data 21 Enabling hub to facilitate interactions 21 Building trust with the public through ethical approaches 22 Appendices 23 About This report has been researched and produced by the Open Data Institute, and published in January 2021. Its lead author was James Maddison with contributions from Olivier Thereaux and Jeni Tennison. If you want to share feedback by email or would like to get in touch, contact the Open Covid-19 project team at [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Metformin Does Not Affect Cancer Risk: a Cohort Study in the U.K
    2522 Diabetes Care Volume 37, September 2014 Metformin Does Not Affect Cancer Konstantinos K. Tsilidis,1,2 Despoina Capothanassi,1 Naomi E. Allen,3 Risk: A Cohort Study in the U.K. Evangelos C. Rizos,4 David S. Lopez,5 Karin van Veldhoven,6–8 Clinical Practice Research Carlotta Sacerdote,7 Deborah Ashby,9 Paolo Vineis,6,7 Ioanna Tzoulaki,1,6 and Datalink Analyzed Like an John P.A. Ioannidis10 Intention-to-Treat Trial Diabetes Care 2014;37:2522–2532 | DOI: 10.2337/dc14-0584 OBJECTIVE Meta-analyses of epidemiologic studies have suggested that metformin may re- 1Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Uni- duce cancer incidence, but randomized controlled trials did not support this versity of Ioannina School of Medicine, Ioannina, hypothesis. Greece 2Cancer Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, EPIDEMIOLOGY/HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Oxford, U.K. 3 A retrospective cohort study, Clinical Practice Research Datalink, was designed to Clinical Trial Service Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, U.K. investigate the association between use of metformin compared with other anti- 4Lipid Disorders Clinic, Department of Internal diabetes medications and cancer risk by emulating an intention-to-treat analysis Medicine, University Hospital of Ioannina, Ioan- as in a trial. A total of 95,820 participants with type 2 diabetes who started taking nina, Greece 5 metformin and other oral antidiabetes medications within 12 months of their Division of Epidemiology, University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, TX diagnosis (initiators) were followed up for first incident cancer diagnosis without 6Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, regard to any subsequent changes in pharmacotherapy.
    [Show full text]