SARS-CoV-2 is a newly identified member of the coronavirus family that has caused the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This rapidly evolving and unrelenting SARS-CoV-2 has disrupted the lives and livelihoods of millions worldwide. As of 23 August 2021, a total of 211,373,303 COVID-19 cases have been confirmed globally with a death toll of 4,424,341. A strong understanding of the infection pathway of SARS-CoV-2, and how our immune system responds to the virus is highly pertinent for guiding the development and improvement of effective treatments. In this review, we discuss the current understanding of neutralising antibodies (NAbs) and their implications in clinical practice. The aspects include the pathophysiology of the immune response, particularly humoral adaptive immunity and the roles of NAbs from B cells in infection clearance. We summarise the onset and persistence of IgA, IgM and IgG antibodies, and we explore their roles in neutralising SARS-CoV-2, their persistence in convalescent individuals, and in reinfection. Furthermore, we also review the applications of neutralising antibodies in the clinical setting—from predictors of disease severity to serological testing to vaccinations, and finally in therapeutics such as convalescent plasma infusion.

IMPORTANCE Olfactory impairment is highly prevalent and associated with multiple comorbidities, including neurodegenerative, cardiovascular, nutritional, and immune disorders. However, epidemiologic associations between olfactory impairment and mortality are discordant.OBJECTIVE To systematically clarify the epidemiologic associations between olfactory impairment and mortality.DATA SOURCES The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to August 13, 2021.STUDY SELECTION Two blinded reviewers selected observational studies published as full-length, English-language articles in peer-reviewed journals that reported the presence or severity of chronic olfactory impairment, whether objectively measured or self-reported, in association with any mortality estimate, among adults aged 18 years or older.DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Two reviewers independently extracted data, evaluated study bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and appraised the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines and a PROSPERO-registered protocol. Maximally adjusted estimates were pooled using mixed-effects models, heterogeneity was measured using I 2 statistics, sources of heterogeneity were investigated using meta-regression and subgroup meta-analyses, and publication bias was qualitatively and quantitatively assessed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESHazard ratios for all-cause mortality. RESULTSOne retrospective cohort study and 10 prospective cohort studies (with a total of 21 601 participants) from 1088 nonduplicated records were included. Ten studies had a low risk of bias, whereas 1 study had a moderate risk; exclusion of the latter did not alter conclusions. Nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. Olfactory loss was associated with a significantly higher pooled hazard of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.28-1.80; I 2 = 82%). Meta-regression sufficiently explained heterogeneity, with longer mean follow-up duration weakening the pooled association, accounting for 91.3% of heterogeneity. Self-reported and objective effect sizes were similar. Associations were robust to trim-and-fill adjustment and the Egger test for publication bias. The overall quality of evidence was moderate. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThe findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that olfactory impairment is associated with all-cause mortality and may be a marker of general health and biological aging. Further research is required to establish the underlying mechanisms and the scope for interventions.

No abstract

Libraries (IJDL) brings together a selection of high-quality papers that were presented at the 22nd International Conference on Asia-Pacific Digital Libraries (ICADL 2020) including also the best paper award winner and the runner up paper. ICADL is an annual international interdisciplinary conference that, together with JCDL and TPDL conference, is one of the three top venues for connecting digital library, computer science and library as well as information science communities.The 22nd International Conference on Asia-Pacific Digital Libraries was held online from November 30 to December 1, 2020. ICADL 2020 was planned as a forum for researchers to exchange ideas and discuss together across domains for an innovative digital information environment especially during a time of pandemic, upheavals in work, culture, health services and so on. The theme of the conference was: Digital Libraries at Times of Massive Societal Transition-Collaborating and Connecting Community during Global Change.As best papers, the articles in this special issue of IJDL have gone through a rigorous review process. The top highly evaluated and scored papers at ICADL2020 were first selected and then invited to be published at the special issue after their extension. They were then peer-reviewed by three experts to help the authors make substantive changes for improving their work. The papers were then again evaluated to check if they have addressed the feedback from the IJDL reviewers. The five papers contained in this special issue that emerged from our editorial process are as follows:Our first paper, "SchenQL: In-Depth Analysis of a Query Language for Bibliographic Metadata" by