The purpose of this study was to examine the changes in severity of anxiety and depression symptoms, stress and sleeping quality after three months of mass quarantine for COVID-19 among undergraduate fresh students compared to their pre-COVID-19 measures. We used participants from the Chinese Undergraduate Cohort (CUC), a national prospective longitudinal study to examine the changes in anxiety and depression symptoms severity, stress and sleep quality after being under mass quarantine for three months. Wilcoxon matched pair signed-rank test was used to compare the lifestyle indicators. Severity of anxiety, depression symptoms, stress and sleep quality were compared with Wilcoxon signed-rank test. We used generalized estimating equation (GEE) to further quantify the change in mental health indicators and sleep quality after the COVID-19 mass quarantine compared to baseline. This study found that there was no deterioration in mental health status among Chinese new undergraduate students in 2020 after COVID-19 mass quarantine compared with the baseline measures in 2019. There was an improvement in sleep quality and anxiety symptoms. After adjusting for age, sex, exercise habit, time spent on mobile gadgets, and time spent outdoors, year 2020 was significantly associated with severity of depression symptoms in males (OR:1.52. 95%CI:1.05–2.20, p-value = 0.027). Year 2020 was significantly associated with the improvement of sleeping quality in total (OR:0.45, 95%CI:0.38–0.52, p < 0.001) and in all the subgroups. This longitudinal study found no deterioration in mental health status among Chinese new undergraduate students after three months of mass quarantine for COVID-19.

While ambitious carbon reduction policies are needed to avoid dangerous levels of climate change, the costs of these policies can be balanced by wide ranging health benefits for local communities. Cities, responsible for ~70% of the world's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and home to a growing majority of the world's population, offer enormous opportunities for both climate action and health improvement. We aim to review the current state of knowledge on key pathways leading from carbon mitigation to human health benefits, and to evaluate our current ability to quantify health benefits for cities around the world. For example, because GHGs and air pollutants are both released during fuel combustion, reducing fuel burning can reduce both GHGs and air pollutants, leading to direct health benefits. Air quality improvements may be particularly important for city-scale climate action planning because the benefits occur locally and relatively immediately, compared with the global and long-term (typically, decades to centuries) benefits for the climate system. In addition to improved air quality, actions that promote active transport in cities via improved cycling and pedestrian infrastructure can reap large cardiovascular health benefits via increased physical activity. Exposure to green space has been associated with beneficial health outcomes in a growing number of epidemiological studies and meta-analyses conducted around the world. Finally, noise is an underappreciated environmental risk factor in cities which can be addressed through actions to reduce motor vehicle traffic and other noise sources. All of these environmental health pathways are supported by well-conducted epidemiological studies in multiple locales, providing quantitative exposure–response data that can be used as inputs to health impact assessments (HIAs). However, most epidemiologic evidence derives from studies in high-income countries. It is unclear to what extent such evidence is directly transferable for policies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This gap calls for a future focus on building the evidence based in LMIC cities. Finally, the literature suggests that policies are likely to be most effective when they are developed by multidisciplinary teams that include policy makers, researchers, and representatives from affected communities.

No abstract

This is a repository copy of The role of regime-level processes in closing the gap between sustainable city visions and action.

Background: It is crucial to understand the benefits to human health from decarbonisation to galvanise action among decision makers. Most of our existing evidence comes from modelling studies and little is known about the extent to which the health co-benefits of climate change mitigation actions are realised upon implementation. We aim to analyse evidence from mitigation actions that have been implemented across a range of sectors and scales, to identify those that can improve and sustain health, while accelerating progress towards a zero-carbon economy. Objectives: To understand the implementation process of actions and the role of key actors; explain the contextual elements influencing these actions; summarise what effects, both positive and negative, planned and unplanned they may have on emissions of greenhouse gases and health; and to summarise environmental, social, or economic co-benefits. Data: We will review evidence collected through partnership with existing data holders and an open call for evidence. We will also conduct a hand search of reference lists from systematic reviews and websites of organisations relevant to climate change mitigation. Screening: Screening will be done by two reviewers according to a pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Analysis: We will identify gaps where implementation or evaluation of implementation of mitigation actions is lacking. We will synthesise the findings to describe how actions were implemented and how they achieved results in different contexts, identifying potential barriers and facilitators to their design, implementation, and uptake. We will also synthesise their effect on health outcomes and other co-benefits. Quantitative synthesis will depend on the heterogeneity of outcomes and metrics. Conclusions: Findings will be used to identify lessons that can be learned from successful and unsuccessful mitigation actions, to make inferences on replicability, scalability, and transferability and will contribute to the development of frameworks that can be used by policy makers.