Gender differences (GD) in mental health have come under renewed scrutiny during the COVID-19 pandemic. While rapidly emerging evidence indicates a deterioration of mental health in general, it remains unknown whether the pandemic will have an impact on GD in mental health. To this end, we investigate the association of the pandemic and its countermeasures affecting everyday life, labor, and households with changes in GD in aggression, anxiety, depression, and the somatic symptom burden. We analyze cross-sectional data from 10,979 individuals who live in Germany and who responded to the online survey “Life with Corona” between October 1, 2020 and February 28, 2021. We estimate interaction effects from generalized linear models. The analyses reveal no pre-existing GD in aggression but exposure to COVID-19 and COVID-19 countermeasures is associated with sharper increases in aggression in men than in women. GD in anxiety decreased among participants with children in the household (with men becoming more anxious). We also observe pre-existing and increasing GD with regards to the severity of depression, with women presenting a larger increase in symptoms during the hard lockdown or with increasing stringency. In contrast to anxiety, GD in depression increased among participants who lived without children (women > men), but decreased for individuals who lived with children; here, men converged to the levels of depression presented by women. Finally, GD in somatic symptoms decreased during the hard lockdown (but not with higher stringency), with men showing a sharper increase in symptoms, especially when they lived with children or alone. Taken together, the findings indicate an increase in GD in mental health as the pandemic unfolded in Germany, with rising female vulnerability to depression and increasing male aggression. The combination of these two trends further suggests a worrying mental health situation for singles and families. Our results have important policy implications for the German health system and public health policy. This public health challenge requires addressing the rising burden of pandemic-related mental health challenges and the distribution of this burden between women and men, within families and for individuals who live alone.

One of the main hypotheses formulated to explain why marsh birds, wildfowl, and shorebirds forage at night postulates that the birds prefer to feed at night because the feeding opportunities are most profitable then. To investigate this hypothesis, we compare day- and night-time availability and describe the diel abundance rhythm of swimming and benthic organisms inhabiting the shallow waters of a tropical lagoon complex in northeastern Venezuela. Three sampling techniques were used by day and by night: net sampling for swimming organisms, core sampling for those in the sediments (10 cm deep), and sight counts for organisms on the surface of substrata. Overall, in the case of swimming organisms, fishes, isopods, amphipods, shrimps (Penaeus spp.), and corixids were 3–30 times more abundant at night than during daytime. In general, infaunal organisms were about equally abundant during the day and the night, or slightly more abundant during the day. At the surface, isopods, amphipods, and polychaetes were greater than 10 times more abundant at night than during the day. However, gastropods were slightly more numerous during daytime on the substrata, while pelecypods were about equally numerous during day- and night-time. Fiddler crabs (Uca sp.) were generally more available during daytime. Considering all organisms together, the prey for marsh birds, wildfowl, and shorebirds were significantly more abundant at night. In conclusion, tactile-foraging species (e.g., spoonbills, skimmers, ibises, dabbling ducks, and several species of shorebirds) should profit by foraging only at night and resting during the day, and foraging during daylight only to top up a nighttime deficit. On the other hand, despite limited nighttime visual capacity, some sight-feeding species (e.g., herons, plovers) may take advantage of increased prey availability at night, at least on moonlit nights.

Purpose COVID-19 pandemic has multifaceted presentations with rising evidence of immune-mediated mechanisms underplay. We sought to explore the outcomes of severe COVID-19 patients treated with a multi-mechanism approach (MMA) in addition to standard-of-care (SC) versus patients who only received SC treatment. Materials and methods Data were collected retrospectively for patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). This observational cohort study was performed at five institutions, 3 in the United States and 2 in Honduras. Patients were stratified for MMA vs. SC treatment during ICU stay. MMA treatment consists of widely available medications started immediately upon hospitalization. These interventions target immunomodulation, anticoagulation, viral suppression, and oxygenation. Primary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and length of stay (LOS) for the index hospitalization and were measured using logistic regression. Results Of 86 patients admitted, 65 (76%) who had severe COVID-19 were included in the study; 30 (46%) patients were in SC group, compared with 35 (54%) patients treated with MMA group. Twelve (40%) patients in the SC group died, compared with 5 (14%) in the MMA group (p-value = 0.01, Chi squared test). After adjustment for gender, age, treatment group, Q-SOFA score, the MMA group had a mean length of stay 8.15 days, when compared with SC group with 13.55 days. ICU length of stay was reduced by a mean of 5.4 days (adjusted for a mean age of 54 years, p-value 0.03) and up to 9 days (unadjusted for mean age), with no significant reduction in overall adjusted mortality rate, where the strongest predictor of mortality was the use of mechanical ventilation. Conclusion The finding that MMA decreases the average ICU length of stay by 5.4 days and up to 9 days in older patients suggests that implementation of this treatment protocol could allow a healthcare system to manage 60% more COVID-19 patients with the same number of ICU beds.

No abstract

Graphical abstract