IntroductionThe work of carrying water falls mainly on women and children, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa and rural areas. While concerns have been raised, how water carriage is associated with health of the water carrier is not clear. The aim of this review is to summarise evidence on whether, and how, water carriage is associated with the water carrier’s health.MethodsA systematic review of literature was conducted, searching Embase; Medline; Web of Science Social Sciences Citation Index; Web of Science Arts and Humanities Citation Index; International Initiative for Impact Evaluation website; WHO Virtual Health Sciences Library and WHO African index medicus, from inception to 8 November 2017.ResultsForty-two studies were included. Their ability to demonstrate cause and effect relationships was limited by study design and fair or poor methodological quality. Overall, the studies suggest that water carriage is associated with negative aspects of the water carriers’ health. There is moderate quantitative and strong qualitative evidence that water carriage is associated with pain, fatigue, perinatal health problems and violence against vulnerable people, and inconclusive evidence of an association with stress or self-reported mental health and general health status.ConclusionIn many circumstances, water carriage is a potential barrier to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 target ‘universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all’ and SDG 3 ‘ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages’. Efforts should focus on providing water on premises, and where this is not possible, providing water close to home and reducing risk of gender-based violence.

In the light of the urgency raised by the COVID-19 pandemic, global investment in wildlife virology is likely to increase, and new surveillance programmes will identify hundreds of novel viruses that might someday pose a threat to humans. To support the extensive task of laboratory characterization, scientists may increasingly rely on data-driven rubrics or machine learning models that learn from known zoonoses to identify which animal pathogens could someday pose a threat to global health. We synthesize the findings of an interdisciplinary workshop on zoonotic risk technologies to answer the following questions. What are the prerequisites, in terms of open data, equity and interdisciplinary collaboration, to the development and application of those tools? What effect could the technology have on global health? Who would control that technology, who would have access to it and who would benefit from it? Would it improve pandemic prevention? Could it create new challenges? This article is part of the theme issue ‘Infectious disease macroecology: parasite diversity and dynamics across the globe’.

BackgroundCommunicable diseases are a major concern during complex humanitarian emergencies (CHEs). Descriptions of risk factors for outbreaks are often non-specific and not easily generalisable to similar situations. This review attempts to capture relevant evidence and explore whether it is possible to better generalise the role of risk factors and risk factor cascades these factors may form.MethodsA systematic search of the key databases and websites was conducted. Search terms included terms for CHEs (United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs definition) and terms for communicable diseases. Due to the types of evidence found, a thematic synthesis was conducted.Results26 articles met inclusion criteria. Key risk factors include crowded conditions, forced displacement, poor quality shelter, poor water, sanitation and hygiene, lack of healthcare facilities and lack of adequate surveillance. Most identified risk factors do not relate to specific diseases, or are specific to a group of diseases such as diarrhoeal diseases and not to a particular disease within that group. Risk factors are often listed in general terms but are poorly evidenced, not contextualised and not considered with respect to interaction effects in individual publications. The high level of the inter-relatedness of risk factors became evident, demonstrating risk factor cascades that are triggered by individual risk factors or clusters of risk factors.ConclusionsCHEs pose a significant threat to public health. More rigorous research on the risk of disease outbreaks in CHEs is needed, from a practitioner and from an academic point of view.

We investigated likelihood to vaccinate and reasons for and against accepting a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine among adult residents of Finland. Vaccine acceptance declined from 70% in April to 64% in December 2020. Complacency and worry about side effects were main reasons against vaccination while concern about severe disease was a strong motive for vaccination. Convenience of vaccination and recommendations by healthcare workers were identified as enablers for vaccination among those aged under 50 years. Understanding barriers and enablers behind vaccine acceptance is decisive in ensuring a successful implementation of COVID-19 vaccination programmes, which will be key to ending the pandemic.