MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and ten students completed a validated questionnaire on SOC and SDLR. The percentage of marks obtained by these students in their year-end examination was used as their academic performance. The SOC scores were further divided into three hierarchical clusters using cluster analysis. The data were analyzed to determine the difference in the SDLR scores and academic performance among the three clusters. Furthermore, the relationship between SOC scores, SDLR scores, and academic performance was assessed.
RESULTS: The SDLR scores significantly increased from the low SOC cluster to the high SOC cluster (P = 0.026). However, there was no significant change in academic performance. A positive relationship was found between the SOC and the academic performance (R = +0.025; P > 0.05). The SDLR had a significant positive relationship with both SOC and academic performance (R = +0.27; P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Although SOC may not have a direct influence on academic performance, SDLR can play an intermediary role. Early identification and timely intervention in students with a weak SOC and low SDLR can have a beneficial influence on their academic life.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40011-022-01443-2.
METHODS: SARS-CoV-2 antigens were immobilized on nitrocellulose membrane to capture human IgG, which was then detected with anti-human IgG conjugated gold nanoparticle (hIgG-AuNP). A total of 181 samples were analyzed in-house. Within which 35 were further evaluated in US FDA-approved CLIA Elecsys SARS-CoV-2 assay. The positive panel consisted of RT-qPCR positive samples from patients with both <14 days and >14 days from the onset of clinical symptoms. The negative panel contained samples collected from the pre-pandemic era dengue patients and healthy donors during the pandemic. Moreover, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of FT-DBA were evaluated against RT-qPCR positive sera. However, the overall efficacies were assessed with sera that seroconverted against either nucleocapsid (NCP) or receptor-binding domain (RBD).
RESULTS: In-house ELISA selected a total of 81 true seropositive and 100 seronegative samples. The sensitivity of samples with <14 days using FT-DBA was 94.7%, increasing to 100% for samples >14 days. The overall detection sensitivity and specificity were 98.8% and 98%, respectively, whereas the overall PPV and NPV were 99.6% and 99%. Moreover, comparative analysis between in-house ELISA assays and FT-DBA revealed clinical agreement of Cohen's Kappa value of 0.944. The FT-DBA showed sensitivity and specificity of 100% when compared with commercial CLIA kits.
CONCLUSION: The assay can confirm past SARS-CoV-2 infection with high accuracy within 2 minutes compared to commercial CLIA or in-house ELISA. It can help track SARS-CoV-2 disease progression, population screening, and vaccination response. The ease of use of the assay without requiring any instruments while being semi-quantitative provides the avenue of its implementation in remote areas around the globe, where conventional serodiagnosis is not feasible.
METHODS: In this study, twenty-five healthy subjects working in a SARS-COV-2 serodiagnostic assay development project were enrolled, and their sign and symptoms were followed up to six months. Three subjects showed COVID-19-like symptoms, and three subjects' antibody dynamics were followed over 120 days by analyzing 516 samples. We have developed 12 different types of in-house ELISAs to observe the kinetics of IgG, IgM, and IgA against four SARS-CoV-2 proteins, namely nucleocapsid, RBD, S1, and whole spike (S1+S2). For the development of these assays, 30-104 pre-pandemic samples were taken as negative controls and 83 RT-qPCR positive samples as positive ones.
RESULTS: All three subjects presented COVID-19-like symptoms twice, with mild symptoms in the first episode were severe in the second, and RT-qPCR confirmed the latter. The initial episode did not culminate with any significant antibody development, while a multifold increase in IgG antibodies characterized the second episode. Interestingly, IgG antibody development concurrent with IgM and IgA and persisted, whereas the latter two weans off rather quickly if appeared.
CONCLUSION: Antibody kinetics observed in this study can provide a pathway to the successful development of sero-diagnostics and epidemiologists to predict the fate of vaccination currently in place.
METHOD: Herein, we studied the antibody response to the first dose of AZD1222 in 86 Bangladeshi individuals using in-house ELISA kits. Study subjects were categorized into two groups, convalescent and uninfected, based on prior infection history and SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid-IgG profiles.
RESULTS: All the convalescent individuals presented elevated spike-1-IgG compared to 90% of uninfected ones after the first dose. Day >28 post-vaccination, the convalescent group showed six times higher antibody titer than the uninfected ones. The most elevated antibody titers for the former and later group were found at Day 14 and Days >28 post-vaccination, respectively. The spike-1-IgA titer showed a similar pattern as spike-1-IgG, although in a low-titer. In contrast, the IgM titer did not show any significant change in either group.
CONCLUSION: High antibody titer in the convalescent group, signify the importance of the first dose among the uninfected group. This study advocates the integration of antibody tests in vaccination programs in the healthcare system for maximizing benefit.
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to examine the extent and identify factors associated with psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study across 17 countries during Jun-2020 to Jan-2021. Levels of psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale), fear of COVID-19 (Fear of COVID-19 Scale), and coping (Brief Resilient Coping Scale) were assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 8,559 people participated; mean age (±SD) was 33(±13) years, 64% were females and 40% self-identified as frontline workers. More than two-thirds (69%) experienced moderate-to-very high levels of psychological distress, which was 46% in Thailand and 91% in Egypt. A quarter (24%) had high levels of fear of COVID-19, which was as low as 9% in Libya and as high as 38% in Bangladesh. More than half (57%) exhibited medium to high resilient coping; the lowest prevalence (3%) was reported in Australia and the highest (72%) in Syria. Being female (AOR 1.31 [95% CIs 1.09-1.57]), perceived distress due to change of employment status (1.56 [1.29-1.90]), comorbidity with mental health conditions (3.02 [1.20-7.60]) were associated with higher levels of psychological distress and fear. Doctors had higher psychological distress (1.43 [1.04-1.97]), but low levels of fear of COVID-19 (0.55 [0.41-0.76]); nurses had medium to high resilient coping (1.30 [1.03-1.65]).
CONCLUSIONS: The extent of psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping varied by country; however, we identified few higher risk groups who were more vulnerable than others. There is an urgent need to prioritise health and well-being of those people through well-designed intervention that may need to be tailored to meet country specific requirements.