In Dec 2019, a novel pathogen emerged, and within weeks, led to the emergence of the biggest global health crises seen to date. The virus called ‘SARS-CoV-2’, causes coronavirus disease which was named ‘COVID-19’ by the World Health Organization (WHO). The speedy spread of this infection globally became a source of public worry and several unknowns regarding this new pathogen created a state of panic. Mass media became the major source of information about the novel coronavirus. Much like the previous pandemics of SARS (2003), H1N1 (2009), and MERS (2012), the media significantly contributed to the COVID-19 infodemics. In this review, we analyze the role of mass media and public health communications from December 31, 2019 to July 15, 2020, and make scientific inferences. The COVID-19 pandemic highlights multiple social, cultural, and economic issues arising from the media’s arguable role. The racial prejudices linked to the origin of the virus prevented collaborations among scientists to find a solution. Media coverage of coronavirus news during geographical lockdowns, extended quarantines, and financial and social hardships induced fear and caused psychological stress. Domestic and elderly abuse upsurged. The unscientific cures and unverified medicines endorsed by the politicians and fake doctors proved harmful. The media played a worldwide role in coronavirus disease tracking and updates through live updates dashboard. The media allowed for timely interventions by the Center For Disease Control And Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO), enabling a rapid and widespread reach of public health communications. We saw an upward trend for the promotion of health and hygiene practices worldwide by adaption of safe health practices such as increased hand washing, use of face coverings, and social distancing. Media reinforced illness-preventing guidelines daily, and people were encouraged to use telehealth to meet their healthcare needs. Mass media has an imperative role in today’s world and it can provide a unified platform for all public health communications, comprehensive healthcare education guidelines, and robust social distancing strategies while still maintaining social connections. It can enable equal access to healthcare, end discrimination, and social stigmatization. The role of media and public health communications must be understood and explored further as they will be an essential tool for combating COVID-19 and future outbreaks.

Pulmonary arterial hypertension is a deadly disease characterized by elevated pulmonary arterial pressures leading to right ventricular hypertrophy and failure. The confirmatory gold standard test is the invasive right heart catheterization. The disease course is monitored by pulmonary artery systolic pressure measurement via transthoracic echocardiography. A simple non-invasive test to frequently monitor the patients is much needed. Search for a novel biomarker that can be detected by a simple test is ongoing and many different options are being studied. Here we review some of the new and unique pre-clinical options for potential pulmonary hypertension biomarkers. These biomarkers can be broadly categorized based on their association with endothelial cell dysfunction, inflammation, epigenetics, cardiac function, oxidative stress, metabolism,extracellular matrix, and volatile compounds in exhaled breath condensate. A biomarker that can be detected in blood, urine or breath condensate and correlates with disease severity, progression and response to therapy may result in significant cost reduction and improved patient outcomes.

Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website.Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre -including this research content -immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

Background: Inadvertent perioperative hypothermia (< 36°C) occurs frequently during elective cesarean delivery and most institutions do employ perioperative active warming. The purpose of this retrospective observational cohort study was to determine if the addition of preoperative forced air warming in conjunction with intraoperative underbody forced air warming improved core temperature and reducing inadvertent perioperative hypothermia during elective repeat elective cesarean delivery with neuraxial anesthesia. Methods: We evaluated the addition of perioperative active warming to standard passive warming methods (preheated intravenous/irrigation fluids and cotton blankets) in 120 parturients scheduled for repeat elective cesarean delivery (passive warming, n = 60 vs. active + passive warming, n = 60) in a retrospective observational cohort study. The primary outcomes of interest were core temperature at the end of the procedure and a decrease in inadvertent perioperative hypothermia (< 36°C). Secondary outcomes were surgical site infections and adverse markers of neonatal outcome. Results: The mean temperature at the end of surgery after instituting the active warming protocol was 36.0 ± 0.5°C (mean ± SD, 95% CI 35.9-36.1) vs. 35.4 ± 0.5°C (mean ± SD, 95% CI 35.3-35.5) compared to passive warming techniques (p < 0.001) and the incidence of inadvertent perioperative hypothermia at the end of the procedure was less in the active warming group-68% versus 92% in the control group (p < 0.001). There was no difference in surgical site infections or neonatal outcomes. Conclusions: Perioperative active warming in combination with passive warming techniques was associated with a higher maternal temperature and lower incidence of inadvertent perioperative hypothermia with no detectable differences in surgical site infections or indicators of adverse neonatal outcomes.