Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected over 145 million infected people and 3 million deaths worldwide. There has been limited data to recommend either for or against use of antiviral regimens in mild COVID-19 patients. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes between mild COVID-19 patients receiving antiviral drugs and those without. Method Thai patients diagnosed with COVID-19 at field hospital affiliated to Thammasat University Hospital, Thailand were evaluated between January 1, 2020 and April 13, 2021. Patients’ data, clinical presentation, past medical history, laboratory results, and treatment outcomes were extensively reviewed. Results Five hundred patients with positive tests were included in the study. The mean age was 35.9 years; 46% males. There were 225 (45%), 207 (41.4%), 44 (8.8%), 18 (3.6%), 6 (1.2%) patients with asymptomatic, mild, moderate, severe, and critical COVID-19, respectively. Of 207 mild COVID-19 patients, 9 (4.3%) received lopinavir/ritonavir or darunavir/ritonavir, 17 (8.2%) received favipiravir, while 175 (84.5%) had only supportive care. Mild COVID-19 patients receiving antiviral treatment had longer median length of hospital stay [13 days (IQR 11–14) vs. 10 days (IQR 8–12), p < 0.001] than patients having only supportive treatment. Antiviral drug use was significantly associated with longer hospital stay (>10 days) in mild COVID-19 patients (OR 5.52; 95%CI 2.12–14.40, p < 0.001). Adverse drug reactions such as diarrhea, abdominal pain, and hepatitis were also demonstrated in our COVID-19 patients with antiviral treatments. Majority of patients (97.6%) recovered without any complications and were discharged home. Two deaths were caused by acute respiratory distress syndrome from severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Conclusion Antiviral treatment could not provide superior clinical outcomes to supportive care in mild COVID-19 patients. Mild COVID-19 patients receiving antiviral medication had longer length of hospital stay than those without. Standard supportive care and regular monitoring of disease progression might be keys for successful management of mild COVID-19.

Purpose Global adoption of the internet and mobile usage results in a huge variation in the cultural backgrounds of consumers who generate and consume electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM). Unsurprisingly, a research trend on cross-cultural eWOM has emerged. However, there has not been an attempt to synthesize this research topic. This paper aims to bridge this gap. Methodology This research paper conducts a systematic literature review of the current research findings on cross-cultural eWOM. Journal articles published from 2006 to 2021 are included. This study then presents the key issues in the extant literature and suggests potential future research. Findings The findings show that there has been an upward trend in the number of publications on cross-cultural eWOM since the early 2010s, with a relatively steeper increase toward 2020. The findings also synthesize cross-cultural eWOM research into four elements and suggest potential future research avenues. Value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, there is currently no exhaustive/integrated review of cross-cultural eWOM research. This research fills the need to summarize the current state of cross-cultural eWOM literature and identifies research questions to be addressed in the future.

Electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) is a prominent source of information that significantly influences consumer purchase decisions. Recent literature has extensively explored the impact of eWOM on consumers-generated reviews and purchase decisions. However, few studies have analyzed the role of culture on eWOM. We use a novel dataset of Airbnb eWOM messages in order to empirically extend the findings by Banerjee and Chai (2019). We find that the sentiment of individualistic customers is worse than that of their collectivistic counterparts when both groups experience the same level of negative disconfirmations. Furthermore, guests from a relatively more distant culture rely less on heuristics. In particular, quality signals, such as the "superhost" status, are more influential to consumers from a less distant cultural background.

This article documents the "neighbor effect" on the organ donation decision via living area type, offering an alternative exposition in raising the organ donation rate. In shifting the society norm toward organ donation consent, policy-makers should acknowledge the benefit of urbanization on organ donation decision derived from resourceful urban areas. Moreover, raising education levels does improve not only citizens' well-being but also their tendency to exhibit an altruistic act toward others.

No abstract