4.6 Editorial Material

HIV and COVID-19: Intersecting Epidemics With Many Unknowns

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 190, 期 1, 页码 10-16

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwaa158

关键词

COVID-19; engagement in care; HIV; mental health; substance use; telemedicine

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [K01 AA028193, R00 MH112413]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The impact of COVID-19 on people living with HIV remains uncertain due to contradictory data. Future studies should differentiate between various risks and consider the unique health challenges faced by PLWH beyond COVID-19.
As of July 2020, approximately 6 months into the pandemic of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), whether people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV; PLWH) are disproportionately affected remains an unanswered question. Thus far, risk of COVID-19 in people with and without HIV appears similar, but data are sometimes contradictory. Some uncertainty is due to the recency of the emergence of COVID-19 and sparsity of data; some is due to imprecision about what it means for HIV to be a risk factor for COVID-19. Forthcoming studies on the risk of COVID-19 to PLWH should differentiate between 1) the unadjusted, excess burden of disease among PLWH to inform surveillance efforts and 2) any excess risk of COVID-19 among PLWH due to biological effects of HIV, independent of comorbidities that confound rather than mediate this effect. PLWH bear a disproportionate burden of alcohol, other drug use, and mental health disorders, as well as other structural vulnerabilities, which might increase their risk of COVID-19. In addition to any direct effects of COVID-19 on the health of PLWH, we need to understand how physical distancing restrictions affect secondary health outcomes and the need for, accessibility of, and impact of alternative modalities of providing ongoing medical, mental health, and substance use treatment that comply with physical distancing restrictions (e.g., telemedicine).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据