Research Infrastructure Challenges in Non-Establishment Research During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The unprecedented situation we are facing has strongly disrupted the clinical research rules. Nevertheless, for the scientific community, it may represent the opportunity to learn important lessons. The COVID-19 pandemic suggests that it is possible to alleviate redundancy in clinical trials, and while preserving the rigour of a study, can offer a new, less burdened and more inclusive vision of clinical research for the scientific community of tomorrow. This perspective article describes clinicians’ vision of how the pandemic could change the roles of clinical research. Since the beginning of the SARS-COV2 outbreak in Wuhan, more than 24 million people have been infected all around the world and more than 800 000 have died from the disease so far. In this scenario, Europe is facing one of the worst crises that our National Health Systems have ever encountered in the last 50 years. Six months after the first COVID-19 diagnosis, the lockdown is being eased in European countries and our lives are slowly adapting to ‘a new normality’. Providing care to immunocompromised patients with cancer during this pandemic has been extremely challenging and oncologists face many challenges in providing cancer care during the COVID-19 outbreak. Data from China reported that patients with cancer who are infected with COVID-19 are at 3.5 times the risk of requiring mechanical ventilation or intensive care unit (ICU) admission, compared with the general population.1 Additionally, the limitation of resources in outpatient settings, including administrative staff and specialists, has hindered the routine care of patients.2 National and international cancer societies published priority-driven guidelines for the management of oncohaematological patients on therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic and recommended considering treatment delays and modifications on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the characteristics of the patient and the disease.3 In addition to routine patient care, the imperative of …

Child and adolescent psychiatry research during the COVID-19 pandemic

Stalking, a widespread and distressing phenomenon, has recently garnered considerable attention. The advent of digital platforms has revolutionized the landscape of stalking, presenting new avenues and challenges for research. However, the impact of the coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic on stalking remains underexplored, despite extensive studies on similar crimes such as intimate partner violence and domestic violence. To address this gap, our study focused on Reddit, a prominent online platform with a diverse user base and open discussion. Through an analysis of posts from the subreddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/Stalking/), we sought to compare the discourse on stalking before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. We found notable shifts in stalking-related posts before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly with the emergence of new topics centered on cyberstalking. We also observed that the experiences of stalking victims have significantly changed following the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on our findings, we discussed the implications for policies to help stalking victims.

Effectiveness and cost analysis of methods used to recruit older adult sedative users to a deprescribing randomized controlled trial during the COVID-19 pandemic

What is next for occupational cancer epidemiology?

Electric load forecasting based on Long-Short-Term-Memory network via simplex optimizer during COVID-19

Journal of Child and Adolescent PsychopharmacologyVol. 31, No. 10 Brief ReportsFree AccessLetter to the Editor: The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Mental Health of Youth with Developmental DisabilitiesMaria Valicenti-McDermott, Erin Rivelis, Carla Bernstein, and Marie Joane CardinMaria Valicenti-McDermottAddress correspondence to: Maria Valicenti-McDermott, MD, MS, R.F.K. Children's Evaluation and Rehabilitation Center, Children's Hospital at Montefiore, The University Hospital for Albert Einstein College of Medicine, 1225 Morris Park Avenue, Bronx, NY 10461, USA E-mail Address: [email protected]https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6606-5948R.F.K. Children's Evaluation and Rehabilitation Center, Children's Hospital at Montefiore, The University Hospital for Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA.Search for more papers by this author, Erin RivelisR.F.K. Children's Evaluation and Rehabilitation Center, Children's Hospital at Montefiore, The University Hospital for Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA.Search for more papers by this author, Carla BernsteinR.F.K. Children's Evaluation and Rehabilitation Center, Children's Hospital at Montefiore, The University Hospital for Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA.Search for more papers by this author, and Marie Joane CardinR.F.K. Children's Evaluation and Rehabilitation Center, Children's Hospital at Montefiore, The University Hospital for Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:16 Dec 2021https://doi.org/10.1089/cap.2021.0003AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB Permissions & CitationsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookXLinked InRedditEmail To the Editor:The COVID-19 pandemic represents a major life stressor for those with developmental disabilities (Aman and Pearson 2020). Given challenges related to developmental disabilities, mental health concerns are often overlooked in this population, as usually the focus of treatment is on daily living skills. Youth with developmental disabilities and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are particularly vulnerable to the distress caused by the pandemic, and might display increased emotional/behavioral problems (Bobo et al. 2020; Zhang et al. 2020). Given these challenges and uncertainties about school openings and education, there is a significant need to study the impact of the pandemic on mental health for youth with developmental disabilities and ADHD.The objective of this study was to examine the impact of the pandemic on anxiety, depression, externalizing behaviors, and suicidal ideation in youth with developmental disabilities and ADHD receiving weekly psychotherapy in an inner city university-affiliated multidisciplinary center that evaluates/treats youth with developmental disabilities. Patients receiving services undergo evaluation before therapy starts and quarterly throughout treatment, including informal and formal assessment (e.g., Conners 3 [Conners et al. 2008], Screen for Child Anxiety Related Disorders [SCARED; Birmaher et al. 1997] self-reports). In March 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, services in the center moved from in-person visits to telehealth.A chart review of rates of behaviors was performed, comparing findings pre-COVID-19 (assessed January/February 2020) to postlockdown (assessed April/May 2020) in all children and adolescents with developmental disabilities and ADHD who were receiving weekly psychotherapy, age 7–21 years. Other information collected included therapist's impression postlockdown (progress, no progress, and worse), demographics, type of developmental disabilities, COVID-19 exposure, psychotherapy attendance, and medication compliance. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate, describe, and summarize the collected information. Statistical analysis included chi-square for categorical data, independent t-test for continuous data, and Mann–Whitney U-test calculator for nominal data such as race. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05, with two-tailed tests used throughout. All analyses were performed using SPSS software (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL). This study was approved by the office of human research affairs from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine Institutional Review Board.Of 62 children and adolescents who attended psychotherapy during the COVID-19 pandemic, 20 were excluded (5 were older than 21 years and 15 did not have an ADHD diagnosis). This cohort with developmental disabilities and ADHD (n = 42) was primarily male (69%) and Hispanic (57%) or Black (23%) (Table 1). Mean age was 12 ± 3 years old. Developmental diagnoses included language disorder (76%), learning disabilities (54%), and autism (19%); other diagnoses included anxiety disorder (40%), oppositional defiant disorder (14%), and depressive disorder (7%). Twenty-two (57%) patients were taking psychotropic medication and 33 (79%) attended at least 75% of psychotherapy sessions; 6 (13%) had COVID-19 exposure and 2 (4%) had relatives who died from COVID-19. Four patients (10%) had a history of suicidal ideation and two experienced suicidal ideation during lockdown, one of whom was hospitalized; no suicide attempts were reported.Table 1. Demographic Characteristics and Diagnoses (n = 42) n% Gender Male2969 Female1331 Race Hispanic2457 Black/African American1023 Caucasian49 Developmental diagnoses Language disorder3276 Learning disabilities2354 Autism819 Other diagnoses Anxiety disorder1740 Oppositional defiant disorder614 Depressive disorder37 MeanSDRangeAge in years1237–20SD, standard deviation.Based on pre- and post-testing, children self-reported increased hyperactivity (Conners T = 67 ± 5 to T = 74 ± 4 p = 0.04) and mild anxiety (SCARED total score = 28 ± 15 to 30 ± 15 p = 0.06). Based on therapist report, 9 patients made progress (22%) whereas 33 (78%) did not make progress or behaviors worsened. Children taking psychotropic medication (n = 22) were more likely to do worse (41% vs. 12% p = 0.05) than those who were not. There were no other differences by demographics, other developmental disabilities, or COVID-19 exposure.In conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown impacted internalizing and externalizing behaviors of youth with developmental disabilities. Limitations of this report include the retrospective nature and the use of different measures to assess behaviors. Yet overall, children with developmental disabilities and ADHD receiving psychotherapy reported increased levels of hyperactivity and anxiety, were unlikely to progress in psychotherapy during lockdown, and those taking psychotropic medication struggled most. Strategies to improve the well-being of youth with developmental disabilities and ADHD as well as their parents during lockdown are strongly recommended.DisclosuresNo competing financial interests exist.ReferencesAman M, Pearson D: Challenges for child and adolescent psychiatric research in the era of COVID-19. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol 30:280–284. Google ScholarBirmaher B, Khetarpal S, Brend D, Cully M, Balach L, Kaufman J, Neer SM: The screen for child anxiety related emotional disorders (SCARED): Scale construction and psychometric characteristics. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 36:545–553, 1997. Crossref, Medline, Google ScholarBobo E, Acquaviva R, Caci H, Franc N, Gamon L, Pico MC, Pupier F, Speranca M, Falissard B, Purper-Ouakil D: How do children and adolescents with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) experience lockdown during the COVID-19 outbreak? Encephale 46:S85–S92, 2020. Crossref, Medline, Google ScholarConners CK: Conners Manual, 3rd. North Tonawanda, NY, Multi-Health Systems, 2008. Google ScholarZhang J, Shuai L, Yu H, Wang Z, Qiu M, Lu L, Cau X, Xia W, Wang Y, Chen R: Acute stress, behavioural symptoms and mood states among school-age children with attention-deficit/hyperactive disorder during the COVID-19 outbreak. Asian J Psychiatry 51:102077, 2020. Crossref, Medline, Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byCOVID-19 Vaccines for Children with Developmental Disabilities: Survey of New York State Parents' Willingness and Concerns2 September 2022 | Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, Vol. 43, No. 9Caregiver Perspective on the Impact of COVID-19 on the Psychosocial and Behavioral Health of Children with ASD in the United States: A Questionnaire-Based Survey20 July 2022 | COVID, Vol. 2, No. 7 Volume 31Issue 10Dec 2021 InformationCopyright 2021, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishersTo cite this article:Maria Valicenti-McDermott, Erin Rivelis, Carla Bernstein, and Marie Joane Cardin.Letter to the Editor: The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Mental Health of Youth with Developmental Disabilities.Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology.Dec 2021.697-698.http://doi.org/10.1089/cap.2021.0003Published in Volume: 31 Issue 10: December 16, 2021Online Ahead of Print:June 15, 2021PDF download

Observational research is critical to inform guidelines, policy, and the practice of HIV service delivery [1]. The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected healthcare systems and health behaviours world-wide, including at clinics and research sites that undergird global observational HIV research [2]. We consider the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the capture of relevant HIV data, indicator fidelity and analytic approaches when investigating effects of COVID-19 itself or accounting for COVID-related changes in service delivery and care-seeking. Observational HIV research relies on robust data sources that accurately reflect the delivery of routine patient care, which is the underlying data-generating mechanism. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, patient health behaviours and HIV clinical care models have changed. Patients may be unable to attend clinic due to COVID-19 health concerns, reduced transportation and stay-at-home orders. Clinics globally have responded with increased remote interactions through telehealth, electronic patient portals, social media platforms and text and email messaging, as well as decentralized antiretroviral therapy (ART) delivery. However, new types of care and medication delivery may not be recorded consistently in paper or electronic health record systems and many providers working off-site may not have access to those systems for documentation [2, 3]. Even if these interactions are recorded, data may be inaccessible to researchers if stored in new systems or data fields [4]. Linked data sources such as pharmacy systems may also experience changes in data quality and content, as prescriptions are dispensed in batches for community delivery or transferred to pharmacies offering reduced-contact dispensing [2, 3]. Mortality and other registries may experience data entry delays due to reporting delays and reduced staffing. These pandemic-related changes are likely to be as heterogeneous across the globe as the pandemic itself, disrupting the data sources researchers have used to assess trends in key HIV-related outcomes, resulting in unreliable and invalid measures of care [2]. The HIV care continuum has become the preferred framework for understanding individual movement through various stages of HIV care, from testing and linkage to care, to retention in care, ART receipt, and ultimately, viral suppression. Barriers at various stages of the continuum have been conceptualized as "leaks," with gaps, delays and transitions out of care seen as undesirable events that should be mitigated through intervention [5, 6]. HIV testing, diagnosis and linkage to care have been delayed due to suspension or limitation of testing programs during mandatory public quarantine or social distancing measures. Outpatient clinic visits have been shifted to remote encounters when possible, and non-urgent care has been postponed [2, 7]. Individuals that appear to be lost to follow-up at their usual site of care may be seeking care elsewhere and medical records may not travel with them. Delays in ART initiation and refills have occurred due to loss of insurance, limited pharmacy dispensing capabilities, and/or limited outpatient activities. CD4 and viral load monitoring – central to HIV care – may also be delayed due to less available phlebotomy services or co-opting of equipment for COVID-related testing [3]. Both improved data capture and alteration of care continuum metrics may therefore be required to assess the extent of care/service disruptions and reduce measurement error and misclassification [8]. More sensitive definitions of engagement and retention accounting for non-traditional interactions may also be warranted. Many current retention metrics require clinical interactions every three to six months, but individuals successfully managed on ART and virally suppressed may need less frequent visits [6, 9]. A conditional retention measure, based on ART receipt and viral suppression prior to clinic service disruption or upon return to clinic, may therefore be more informative about the care continuum than attended or even missed visit counts alone. For example we could redefine retention status such that an individual would be successfully retained if they were virally suppressed and receiving ART both before local social isolation measures were imposed and after return to the clinic. Such a measure would be a more meaningful indication of the current state of a patient's engagement in the HIV care continuum, even if their recorded HIV care visits were not frequent enough to meet current retention definitions. In addition to changes in data collection and measurement during study design and conduct, we will also need to use analytic approaches that address the potential for artifactual temporal changes in HIV indicators due to COVID-19, selection biases and measurement errors in the data-generating mechanisms of the care continuum. If patients attending telehealth visits are not representative of the entire cohort, if outcomes are unreliably ascertained among those lost to care, if certain measures are self-reported remotely instead of being collected on-site, or if discontinuities such as disruptions in care persist, appropriate epidemiologic and biostatistical methods such as inverse probability weighting, multiple imputation, double-sampling and regression calibration should be considered [10-12]. To facilitate longer-term trend assessments which span the COVID-19 pandemic, analyses should also accommodate maximum flexibility, for example through the use of restricted cubic splines, piecewise regression or parametric mixture models [13, 14]. We must continue to assess the local clinical context to obtain more information relevant to HIV care changes induced by the COVID-19 pandemic and inform these approaches [15]. Future HIV-related studies and public health goals require a new COVID-19-informed paradigm for the collection and use of observational cohort data. HIV cohorts must capture pandemic-driven changes in data sources, clinic activities and local policies to inform analyses. Our ability to leverage epidemiologic evidence to inform clinical, programmatic and public health practice is only as strong as the inferences derived from these analyses are valid and robust to the challenges in HIV care and research that we now face due to the pandemic. Healthcare organizations and public health agencies should revise HIV care continuum measures and analytic strategies. Funding for such work is critical, even in times of economic crisis, so that COVID-19 does not derail the global fight to End the HIV Epidemic. The authors declare no competing interests. PFR, SND and KNA developed the idea and wrote the initial draft. KKW and DN revised the manuscript and provided expert input. All authors approved the final manuscript. None declared. The International Epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) is supported by the U.S. National Institutes of Health's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the National Cancer Institute, the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, the Fogarty International Center, and the National Library of Medicine: CCASAnet, U01AI069923; Central Africa, U01AI096299; East Africa, U01AI069911; NA-ACCORD, U01AI069918. Informatics resources are supported by the Harmonist project, R24AI124872. PFR received additional funding from NIAID (K01-AI131895, R21-AI145686). This work is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of any of the institutions mentioned above.

The COVID-19 pandemic, which has had a profound impact on people’s lives around the world, has also affected international social work practice and research on social issues. This article explores how international social work research can draw lessons from bilateral research collaborations during the COVID-19 pandemic. In May 2021, an international collaborative research project was commenced to examine the practical experiences of social workers in Sri Lanka, with the overall purpose of contributing to development of socio-culturally relevant social work training. Trial semi-structured interviews were conducted using remote tools with five social workers in government or private organisations. The narratives of the interviewees were qualitatively analysed to identify their personal backgrounds of social work education and practice, their experiences of working during the pandemic and their perspectives and values as social workers. Lessons learnt were discussed focussing on the objectives and perspectives of the study, the preliminary arrangements for the research, the methods and considerations. In a context where it is important for social work researchers to promote international studies during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, this paper provides an example of a feasible international cooperative study.

Colchicine treatment in COVID-19: the remaining unsolved question

As a result of extreme modifications in human activity during the COVID-19 pandemic, the status of air quality has recently been improved. This bibliometric study was conducted on a global scale to quantify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on air pollution, identify the emerging challenges, and discuss the future perspectives during the course of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. For this, we have estimated the scientific production trends between 2020 and 2021 and investigated the contributions of countries, institutions, authors, and most prominent journals metrics network analysis on the topic of COVID-19 combined with air pollution research spanning the period between January 01, 2020, and June 21, 2021. The search strategy retrieved a wide range of 2003 studies published in scientific journals from the Web of Sciences Core Collection (WoSCC). The findings indicated that (1) publications on COVID-19 pandemic and air pollution were 990 (research articles) in 2021 with 1870 citations; however, the year 2020 witnessed only 830 research articles with a large number 16,600 of citations. (2) China ranked first in the number of publications (n = 365; 18.22% of the global output) and was the main country in international cooperation network, followed by the USA (n = 278; 13.87% of the global output) and India (n = 216; 10.78 of the total articles). (3) By exploring the co-occurrence and links strengths of keywords “COVID-19” (1075; 1092), “air pollution” (286; 771), “SARS-COV-2” (252; 1986). (4) The lessons deduced from the COVID-19 pandemic provide defined measures to reduce air pollution globally. The outcomes of the present study also provide useful guidelines for future research programs and constitute a baseline for researchers in the domain of environmental and health sciences to estimate the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on air pollution.

The distributed Integrated European Long-Term Ecosystem, critical zone and socio-ecological Research Infrastructure &amp;#8211; eLTER RI &amp;#8211; comprises ecosystem research sites and socio-ecological research platforms. The in-situ facilities are designed to measure standardized observation variables for each of the five ecosystem spheres &amp;#8211; sociosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere, geosphere, biosphere. Optimisation of the spatial distribution of in-situ facilities within a research infrastructure is often based on analyses of transferability or representativity revealing under-, well or overrepresented conditions and locations. However, these current conditions shift dramatically due to Global Change, posing fundamental research challenges. For eLTER RI, land use change (LUC) and climate change manifesting as climatic pressures on ecosystems were identified as important emerging research challenges.Therefore, we investigated both the current coverage of environmental and socio-ecological gradients by the eLTER RI as well as its fitness for research challenges. To investigate the current state, we (i) conducted a survey to describe the emerging eLTER RI and (ii) identified the most critical gaps in its coverage of six Reference Parameters. To investigate the suitability of the eLTER RI to address the two key research challenges, we iii) derived metrics that reflect said research challenges, iv) estimated eLTER RI&amp;#8217;s fitness for these future research challenges, and v) compared the eLTER RI's coverage of current environmental and socio-ecological gradients with its fitness for future research challenges. Finally, we vi) derived recommendations for the further development of the eLTER RI.In its current state, three distinct geospatial gaps were identified: the Iberian Gap, the Eastern Gap, and the Nordic Gap. These gaps resulted mainly from the underrepresentation of agricultural lands, regions with low economic density, mesic and dry regions as well as the Mediterranean, Continental and Boreal biogeoregions. The patterns of underrepresentation appeared to be driven by access to funding resources. Several sites that responded to the survey but do currently not fulfil the infrastructural requirements of the eLTER RI bear potential to contribute to gap closure. Additionally, incorporating research facilities from other research infrastructures or monitoring networks into the eLTER RI could cost-efficiently counteract gaps. Regarding the fitness for research challenges, the derived metrics depicted the relevant research challenges well and spatial patterns of the emerging research challenges were consistent between scenarios. The eLTER RI covers all facets of emerging research challenges, but is tremendously spatially biased. Climatic hotspots regarding biotemperature and the seasonality of water availability will be overemphasised by the eLTER RI, while precipitation and LUC hotspots are underrepresented. Gaps that were assumed to be stable for a variety of potential futures manifested in the Southern Iberian Peninsula, Poland, Finland, Sweden and Norway.Closing gaps regarding the current coverage of environmental and socio-ecological gradients is of highest priority for the spatial network development. Primarily, regions where overlap to gaps in the Fitness for Research Challenges exists should be targeted. Consequently, this work suggests that the development of the eLTER RI and other research infrastructure should be adapted based on current and anticipated future conditions, since the spatial design can and should be optimised for both simultaneously.

Objectives: There is a lack of knowledge about the challenges of researchers who continued in-person research during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design: Electronic survey assessing work-related exposure to COVID-19, logistical challenges, and procedural changes during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical research. Setting: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-sponsored Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury Clinical Trial Network Centers. Subjects: Research staff at research Network Sites. Measurements and Main Results: The 37-question survey was completed by 277 individuals from 24 states between 29 September 2020, and 12 December 2020, yielding a response rate of 37.7%. Most respondents (91.5%) indicated that non-COVID-19 research was affected by COVID-19 research studies. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, 20% of respondents were reassigned to different roles at their institution. Many survey takers were exposed to COVID-19 (56%), with more than 50% of researchers requiring a COVID-19 test and 8% testing positive. The fear of infection was 2.7-times higher compared to pre-COVID-19 times. Shortages of personal protective equipment were encountered by 34% of respondents, primarily due to lack of access to N95 masks, followed by gowns and protective eyewear. Personal protective equipment reallocation from research to clinical use was reported by 31% of respondents. Most of the respondents (88.5%), despite these logistical challenges, indicated their willingness to enroll COVID-19 patients. Conclusions: During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, members of the research network were engaged in COVID-19 research despite logistical challenges, limited access to personal protective equipment, and fear of exposure. The research network’s survey experience can inform ongoing policy discussions to create research enterprises that can dexterously refocus research to address the knowledge gaps associated with novel public health emergencies while mitigating the effect of pandemics on existing research projects and research personnel.

The COVID-19 pandemic has ravaged many nations economically and socially. This study attempts to analyze Malaysia researchers at the tertiary level on their perspectives towards challenges in research and innovation during the Pandemic Era throughout almost two-year of the lockdown. This article undertakes an analysis of researchers based on issues and challenges as the main sources of reference by adopting the document analysis method. Therefore, this study used a qualitative method with a protocol of observation and analysis of several sources to get data and information. The outcome of this article suggests that higher institutions have to consider all aspects in supporting the continuity of research and innovation to ensure no researchers are left behind. Researchers are majorly concerned about their research competency with none to minimal exposure to laboratory settings. All stakeholders’ well-being, including mental health, should be prioritized, should this mode of delivery continue in these times of uncertainty. This paper clarifies that the methods and point solutions to the challenges faced by the researcher and innovators are considered a new issue and are supposed to be handled by all parties to enhance the top quality of research and innovation in Malaysia.

The Covid-19 pandemic and lockdown represents a significant challenge for qualitative researchers due to social distancing measures restricting face-to-face data collection. At the time of ethical approval (early April 2020), all face-to-face research projects facilitated by the Scottish Prison Service and most prison jurisdictions were paused. In response to these methodological challenges, a participatory action correspondence methodology was designed in order for people in custody to influence the direction of this project by suggesting research questions and themes. This article analyses the potential of this approach, what this illuminated and critically engages with the challenges of implementing this qualitative methodology. Eight participants were selected due to previous participation in a Participatory Action Research project at one Scottish prison. After consent was given via post, eight letters were sent to the participants. This paper analyses the questions relating to, and aspects of Covid-19 that were important to the participants, in the hope that these insights will influence other qualitative research on the impacts of Covid-19 within prison settings. Methodologically and theoretically, this paper illustrates the potential and challenges relating to using a qualitative correspondence method to facilitate unique insights into life in custody during what emerges as a particularly challenging time in prison settings. More widely the paper reiterates and restates the importance of qualitative research methods as methods that provide unique and rich insights into the Covid-19 pandemic.