Objectives: The study aimed to assess and compare the global development in six-month-old infants before and during the pandemic restrictive social distancing measures.Methods: This cross-sectional nested study involved infants assessed through the Griffiths Scales of Child Development (GSCD) between September 2019 and April 2021. Infants were classified in a pre-COVID or a COVID group, considering the evaluation date and the restrictive measures in place. GSCD subscales and General Development Scores (GDS) were calculated and compared.Results: One hundred and four healthy term-born infants were evaluated. GDS in the COVID group (n:70; median: 94; IQR: 90–100) appeared significantly lower than in the pre-COVID group (n:34; median: 98; IQR: 97–103; p < 0.001). Language and personal-social-emotional subareas scores appeared the most affected. A decreasing trend of GDS along with the severity of restriction was observed.Conclusion: A reduction in infant development scores was observed during pandemic social distancing. Further studies are needed to systematize these findings and to address effective public health policies for infants and families during long-term forced isolation periods.

There is evidence in literature that the spread of COVID-19 can be influenced by various geographic factors, including territorial features, climate, population density, socioeconomic conditions, and mobility. The objective of the paper is to provide an updated literature review on geographical studies analysing the factors which influenced COVID-19 spreading. This literature review took into account not only the geographical aspects but also the COVID-19-related outcomes (infections and deaths) allowing to discern the potential influencing role of the geographic factors per type of outcome.

Globalized supply chains make it harder to regulate hazardous chemicals in products. These include some phthalates with reproductive and developmental toxicity that maybe found in a variety of products. The European Union (EU) was among the first economies to implement policies to limit their use, yet vulnerable populations (children, pregnant women) are exposed to restricted phthalates. Phthalates' regulation varies significantly by product or chemical compound, but literature lacks systematization of current EU legislation. We examined EU regulatory framework for 19 major phthalates (DMP, DEP, DPrP, DiPrP, DMOEP, DBP, DiBP, DPeP, DiPeP, BBP, DHxP, DCHP, DHpP, DEHP, DHNUP, DPHP, DnOP, DiNP, DiDP) and 2 substitutes (DINCH, DEHTP). We reviewed official institutional websites and regulatory agencies to assess uses and bans in food contact materials (FCMs), toys and childcare articles, cosmetics, and medical devices. The European Chemical Agency (ECHA) is the main authority supervising chemical use in the EU and regulates phthalates mainly through the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulation. Most reviewed phthalates are severely restricted in FCMs. Phthalates classified as toxic for reproduction are limited in toys and childcare articles above 0.1% by weight; they are banned in cosmetics and restricted in medical devices. The EU has reduced exposure to phthalates through stringent regulations, effectively protecting newborns and infants. However, gaps remain, as many everyday items may still represent sources of exposure. Ongoing regulatory revisions and international cooperation are essential to ensure safer cross-border commerce and international compliance, to further reduce phthalate exposure and protect public health.

Most symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections produce mild to moderate symptoms. Although most patients are managed in the outpatient setting, little is known about the effect of general practitioners’ (G...

Up to now, studies on environmental, climatic, socio-economic factors, and non-pharmacological interventions (NPI) show diverse associations, often contrasting, with COVID-19 spread or severity. Most studies used large-scale, aggregated data, with limited adjustment for individual factors, most of them focused on viral spread than severe outcomes. Moreover, evidence simultaneously evaluating variables belonging to different exposure domains is scarce, and none analysing their collective impact on an individual level. Our population-based retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the comprehensive role played by exposure variables belonging to four different domains, environmental, climatic, socio-economic, and non-pharmacological interventions (NPI), on individual COVID-19-related risk of hospitalization and death, analysing data from all patients (no. 68472) tested positive to a SARS-CoV-2 swab in Modena Province (Northern Italy) between February 2020 and August 2021. Using adjusted Cox proportional hazard models, we estimated the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes, investigating dose-response relationships through restricted cubic spline modelling for hazard ratios. Several significant associations emerged: long-term exposure to air pollutants (NO₂, PM₁₀, PM_2.5) was linked to hospitalization risk in a complex way and showed an increased risk for death; while humidity was inversely associated; temperature showed a U-shaped risk; wind speed showed a linear association with both outcomes. Precipitation increased hospitalization risk but decreased mortality. Socio-economic and NPI indices showed clear linear associations, respectively negative and positive, with both outcomes. Our findings offer insights for evidence-based policy decisions, improving precision healthcare practices, and safeguarding public health in future pandemics. Refinement of pandemic response plans by healthcare authorities could benefit significantly.

Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of SARS-CoV2 vaccination in preventing ordinary or intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and deaths among cases registered during a variant transitional pandemic phase in the geographically and culturally unique territory of the Province of Bolzano (South Tyrol), an Italian region with low vaccination coverage.Methods: We collected data from 93,643 patients registered as positive for SARS-CoV-2 by health authorities during the winter of 2021–22. The data were analyzed retrospectively using descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression.Results: 925 patients were hospitalized (0.99%), 89 (0.10%) were in intensive care, and 194 (0.21%) died. Vaccinated patients had a significantly lower risk of being hospitalized: adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR): 0.39; 95% CI: 0.33–0.46, ICU admission: aOR: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.09–0.29 and death: aOR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.29–0.58. Similar risk reductions were also observed in booster-vaccinated patients, independent of sex, age, and predominant variant. Furthermore, the median length of stay (LoS) in the ICU was significantly longer for unvaccinated individuals compared to vaccinated subjects (9 vs. 6 days; p < 0.003).Conclusion: Primary series vaccination and ongoing campaign booster doses were effective in preventing all severe disease-related outcomes and in reducing ICU Length of Stay, even during a transitional pandemic phase and in a unique territorial context.