9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Geographies of infections: built environment and COVID-19 pandemic in metropolitan Melbourne

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This paper uses spatial statistical techniques to reflect on geographies of COVID-19 infections in metropolitan Melbourne. We argue that the evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has become widespread since early 2020 in Melbourne, typically proceeds through multiple built environment attributes – diversity, destination accessibility, distance to transit, design, and density. The spread of the contagion is institutionalised within local communities and postcodes, and reshapes movement practices, discourses, and structures of administrative politics. We demonstrate how a focus on spatial patterns of the built environment can inform scholarship on the spread of infections associated with COVID-19 pandemic and geographies of infections more broadly, by highlighting the consistency of built environment influences on COVID-19 infections across three waves of outbreaks. A focus on the built environment influence seeks to enact visions of the future as new variants emerge, illustrating the importance of understanding geographies of infections as global cities adapt to ‘COVID-normal’ living. We argue that understanding geographies of infections within cities could be a springboard for pursuing sustainable urban development via inclusive compact, mixed-use development and safe public transport.

          Related collections

          Most cited references53

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Geographically Weighted Regression: A Method for Exploring Spatial Nonstationarity

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Travel and the Built Environment

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Hospital admission and emergency care attendance risk for SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) compared with alpha (B.1.1.7) variants of concern: a cohort study

              Background The SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) variant was first detected in England in March, 2021. It has since rapidly become the predominant lineage, owing to high transmissibility. It is suspected that the delta variant is associated with more severe disease than the previously dominant alpha (B.1.1.7) variant. We aimed to characterise the severity of the delta variant compared with the alpha variant by determining the relative risk of hospital attendance outcomes. Methods This cohort study was done among all patients with COVID-19 in England between March 29 and May 23, 2021, who were identified as being infected with either the alpha or delta SARS-CoV-2 variant through whole-genome sequencing. Individual-level data on these patients were linked to routine health-care datasets on vaccination, emergency care attendance, hospital admission, and mortality (data from Public Health England's Second Generation Surveillance System and COVID-19-associated deaths dataset; the National Immunisation Management System; and NHS Digital Secondary Uses Services and Emergency Care Data Set). The risk for hospital admission and emergency care attendance were compared between patients with sequencing-confirmed delta and alpha variants for the whole cohort and by vaccination status subgroups. Stratified Cox regression was used to adjust for age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, recent international travel, area of residence, calendar week, and vaccination status. Findings Individual-level data on 43 338 COVID-19-positive patients (8682 with the delta variant, 34 656 with the alpha variant; median age 31 years [IQR 17–43]) were included in our analysis. 196 (2·3%) patients with the delta variant versus 764 (2·2%) patients with the alpha variant were admitted to hospital within 14 days after the specimen was taken (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2·26 [95% CI 1·32–3·89]). 498 (5·7%) patients with the delta variant versus 1448 (4·2%) patients with the alpha variant were admitted to hospital or attended emergency care within 14 days (adjusted HR 1·45 [1·08–1·95]). Most patients were unvaccinated (32 078 [74·0%] across both groups). The HRs for vaccinated patients with the delta variant versus the alpha variant (adjusted HR for hospital admission 1·94 [95% CI 0·47–8·05] and for hospital admission or emergency care attendance 1·58 [0·69–3·61]) were similar to the HRs for unvaccinated patients (2·32 [1·29–4·16] and 1·43 [1·04–1·97]; p=0·82 for both) but the precision for the vaccinated subgroup was low. Interpretation This large national study found a higher hospital admission or emergency care attendance risk for patients with COVID-19 infected with the delta variant compared with the alpha variant. Results suggest that outbreaks of the delta variant in unvaccinated populations might lead to a greater burden on health-care services than the alpha variant. Funding Medical Research Council; UK Research and Innovation; Department of Health and Social Care; and National Institute for Health Research.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Sustain Cities Soc
                Sustain Cities Soc
                Sustainable Cities and Society
                Published by Elsevier Ltd.
                2210-6707
                2210-6715
                11 March 2022
                11 March 2022
                : 103838
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia
                [2 ]College of Engineering and Science, Victoria University, Footscray VIC 3011, Australia
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author: Dr Eric Gaisie, Architecture, Building and Planning, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia
                Article
                S2210-6707(22)00165-2 103838
                10.1016/j.scs.2022.103838
                8915450
                35291308
                e1474209-2e6d-4db0-90c8-8e4ee3883550
                © 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

                Since January 2020 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.

                History
                : 23 December 2021
                : 9 March 2022
                : 10 March 2022
                Categories
                Article

                covid-19,built environment,melbourne,spatial patterns,post-pandemic sustainability

                Comments

                Comment on this article