Background: The global COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare worldwide. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where people may have limited access to affordable quality care, the COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to have a particularly adverse impact on the health and healthcare of individuals with noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). A World Health Organization survey found that disruption of delivery of healthcare for NCDs was more significant in LMICs than in high-income countries. However, the study did not elicit insights into the day-to-day impacts of COVID-19 on healthcare by front-line healthcare workers (FLHCWs). Aim: To gain insights directly from FLHCWs working in countries with a high NCD burden, and thereby identify opportunities to improve the provision of healthcare during the current pandemic and in future healthcare emergencies. Methods: We recruited selected frontline healthcare workers (general practitioners, pharmacists, and other medical specialists) from nine countries to complete an online survey (n = 1347). Survey questions focused on the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on clinical practice and NCDs; barriers to clinical care during the pandemic; and innovative responses to the many challenges presented by the pandemic. Findings: The majority of FLHCWs responding to our survey reported that their care of patients had been impacted both adversely and positively by the public health measures imposed. Most FLHCs (95%) reported a deterioration in the mental health of their patients. Conclusions: Continuity of care for NCDs as part of pandemic preparedness is needed so that chronic conditions are not exacerbated by public health measures and the direct impacts of the pandemic.

No abstract

We sought to gain insights into the impacts of COVID-19 and associated control measures on health and health care of patients from low- and middle-income countries with cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and mental health conditions, using an online survey during the COVID-19 pandemic. The most common concern for the 1487 patients who took part was contracting COVID-19 when they accessed health care. Of those infected with COVID-19, half said that their health had been worse since being infected. Collectively, most people reported an increase in feelings of stress and loneliness. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a range of health care impacts on patients with noncommunicable diseases, including constraints on access to care and health effects, particularly mental well-being.

Background:Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) is a common form of developmental disability but may be poorly understood by professionals working with people with FASD. The aim of the research is to understand the FASD knowledge, attitudes, awareness, and practices among people employed by the education sector in Aotearoa New Zealand and identify gaps in knowledge. Methods: We conducted an online survey of New Zealand Education professionals. The survey focused on the following areas: Awareness of FASD; Knowledge and beliefs about FASD; Impact of FASD on professional practice; and Training needs. Results: Of the 419 participants, most had some knowledge of FASD and its effects on learning; however, there are still gaps that need to be addressed so educators can provide support to individuals living with FASD. Conclusion: There is a need to improve workforce capacity and develop guidelines that address the needs of front-of-line staff working with children with FASD in education settings.

We present a systematic review and a meta‐analysis comparing the differential outcomes procedure to a nondifferential outcomes procedure among clinical and nonclinical populations. Sixty distinct experiments were included in the systematic review, 43 of which were included in the meta‐analysis. We calculated pooled effect sizes for accuracy (overall accuracy, test accuracy, transfer accuracy) and acquisition outcomes (latency, errors, and trials to mastery). The meta‐analysis revealed significant medium‐to‐large effect sizes for all three accuracy measures (pooled effect size range, 0.57 to 1.30). We found relatively greater effect sizes among clinical populations (effect size = 1.04). The single‐subject experimental literature included in the systematic review was consistent with the findings from the group studies, demonstrating improvements in accuracy and speed of learning for the majority of participants. Moderator and subgroup analyses suggest that discrimination difficulty may induce relatively larger differential outcomes effects. The results indicate that the differential outcomes procedure can be a valuable addition to reinforcement‐based interventions.