Local area community cumulative incidence (per 1,000 population) Health care personnel with positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (%) Abbreviation: COVID-19 = coronavirus disease 2019. * Calculated as the total number of reported community COVID-19 cases within a hospital-area county or counties between the beginning of the pandemic and 7 days after the first day of health care personnel enrollment at the hospital divided by population of the county or counties x 1,000.
Background:The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted cancer services globally. New Zealand has pursued an elimination strategy to COVID-19, reducing (but not eliminating) this disruption. Early in the pandemic, our national Cancer Control Agency ( Te Aho o Te Kahu ) began monitoring and reporting on service access to inform national and regional decision-making. In this manuscript we use high-quality, nationallevel data to describe changes in cancer registrations, diagnosis and treatment over the course of New Zealand's response to COVID-19. Methods: Data were sourced (2018-2020) from national collections, including cancer registrations, inpatient hospitalisations and outpatient events. Cancer registrations, diagnostic testing (gastrointestinal endoscopy), surgery (colorectal, lung and prostate surgeries), medical oncology access (first specialist appointments [FSAs] and intravenous chemotherapy attendances) and radiation oncology access (FSAs and megavoltage attendances) were extracted. Descriptive analyses of count data were performed, stratified by ethnicity (Indigenous M āori, Pacific Island, non-M āori/non-Pacific). Findings: Compared to 2018-2019, there was a 40% decline in cancer registrations during New Zealand's national shutdown in March-April 2020, increasing back to pre-shutdown levels over subsequent months. While there was a sharp decline in endoscopies, pre-shutdown volumes were achieved again by August. The impact on cancer surgery and medical oncology has been minimal, but there has been an 8% year-todate decrease in radiation therapy attendances. With the exception of lung cancer, there is no evidence that existing inequities in service access between ethnic groups have been exacerbated by COVID-19. Interpretation: The impact of COVID-19 on cancer care in New Zealand has been largely mitigated. The New Zealand experience may provide other agencies or organisations with a sense of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer services within a country that has actively pursued elimination of COVID-19. Funding: Data were provided by New Zealand's Ministry of Health, and analyses completed by Te Aho o Te Kahu staff.
Due to COVID-19, universities with limited expertise with the digital environment had to rapidly transition to online teaching and assessment. This transition did not create a new problem but has offered more opportunities for contract cheating and diversified the types of such services. While universities and lecturers were adjusting to the new teaching styles and developing new assessment methods, opportunistic contract cheating providers have been offering $50 COVID-19 discounts and students securing the services of commercial online tutors to take their online exams or to take advantage of real-time assistance from ‘pros’ while sitting examinations. The article contributes to the discourse on contract cheating by reporting on an investigation of the scope and scale of the growing problems related to academic integrity exacerbated by an urgent transition to online assessments during the COVID-19 pandemic. The dark reality is the illegal services are developing at a faster pace than the systems required to curb them, as demonstrated by the results. The all-penetrating issues indicate systemic failures on a global scale that cannot be addressed by an individual academic or university acting alone. Multi-level solutions including academics, universities and the global community are essential. Future research must focus on developing a model of collaboration to address this problem on several levels, taking into account (1) individual academics, (2) universities, (3) countries and (4) international communities.
Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.
Introduction Demand for radiation therapy is expected to increase over time. In Aotearoa/New Zealand, the radiation oncology workforce experiences high numbers of clinical hours but an intervention rate that is lower than in comparable countries, suggesting unmet treatment need. Accurate models on the supply and demand for radiation oncologists (ROs) are needed to ensure adequate staffing levels. Methods We developed a demand model that predicted the future number of ROs required, using national data from the Radiation Oncology Collection (ROC) and a survey of ROs. Radiation therapy intervention and retreatment rates (IR/RTRs), and benign and non‐cancer conditions being treated, were derived from the ROC and applied to Census population projections. Survey data provided definitions of treatment by complexity, time spent in different activities and time available for work. Results were linked to radiation oncology workforce forecasts from a supply model developed by the Ministry of Health. Results The demand model showed that 85 ROs would be needed in 2031, if current IR/RTRs were maintained, an increase from 68 in 2021. The supply model predicted a decrease in ROs over time, leaving a significant shortfall. Model parameters could be modified to assess the impact of workforce or practice changes; more ROs would be needed if average working hours reduced or IR/RTRs increased. Conclusion Workforce models based on robust data collections are an important tool for workforce planning. The RO demand model presented here combines detailed information on treatment and work activities to provide credible estimates that can be used to inform actions on training, recruitment and retention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.