• COVID-19
• Other research productsclose
• 2012-2021close
• DK close
• University of Southern Denmark Research Output close

Forskning i, hvordan stressfaktorer i forbindelse med udfordringer og hindringer påvirker performance, er vokset stærkt frem i litteraturen om organisatorisk stress. Vores forståelse af de mekanismer, som kan forklare disse effekter, er dog stadig begrænset. Denne artikelbaserede afhandling, som tager afsæt i udfordrings-/hindrings stressmodellen og transaktionsteori omkring stress, behandler i tre forskningsartikler spørgsmålet om, hvordan stressfaktorer påvirker performance ved at undersøge underliggende kognitive mekanismer og faktorer, som er relateret til disse effekter. Den første artikel har fokus på, hvordan udfordrings- og hindringsvurdering bidrager til vores forståelse af sammenhængen mellem stressfaktorer og performance. Artiklen præsenterer en oversigt over empiriske resultater, og stiller de studier, som måler vurderinger og de studier, der ikke tager vurderinger med i betragtning op overfor hinanden. Den konkluderer, at måling af vurderinger giver et mere detaljeret billede af sammenhængene mellem stressfaktorer og performancerelaterede resultater. Den anden artikel beskriver et præregistreret eksperimentelt studie, som har undersøgt virkningen af stressfaktorens styrke (opgavesværhedsgrad) på udfordrings-/hindringsvurderinger og performance af en krævende kognitiv opgave. Studiet fandt en ikke-lineære effekt af opgavesværhedsgrad på udfordringsvurderinger, mens effekten på hindringsvurderinger var lineær. Samtidig bekræfter det hindringsvurderingens medierende rolle i sammenhængen mellem opgavesværhedsgrad og performance. Den tredje artikel beskriver to studier. Studie 1 er et præregistreret eksperiment, som udforsker, hvilken rolle tidligere erfaringer og feedback spiller i det dynamiske stressforløb. Artiklen fokuserer især på, hvordan opgaveperformance, vist som en sideløbende performance feedback (dvs. simultan præsentation af opadgående social sammenligning og objektiv feedback) medierer ændringer i udfordrings- og hindringsvurderinger. Studie 1 underbygger delvist dets hypoteser om indirekte effekter. Studie 2 bygger på Studie 1 og anvender derudover eye-tracking til at undersøge sammenhængene mellem udfordrings-/hindringsvurderinger og opmærksomhed på de to nævnte aspekter af sideløbende feedback for at kaste lys på hvilke opmærksomhedsprocesser, der ligger bag de effekter, der blev fundet i Studie 1. Studie 2 er i øjeblikket i gang med dataindsamling og er ikke afsluttet på grund af COVID-19-inducerede restriktioner på laboratoriet. Denne afhandlings overordnede resultater anbefaler en gentænkning af den nuværende forståelsesramme for udfordrings-/hindrings stressmodellen ved at åbne for en mere kompleks konceptualisering af sammenhængen mellem stressfaktorer og performance i organisationer. Research on the effects of challenge and hindrance stressors on performance is burgeoning in organizational stress literature. Nevertheless, our understanding of the mechanisms explaining these effects is still limited. Grounded in the challenge-hindrance stressor framework and the transactional theory of stress, this article-based dissertation addresses the question of how stressors produce their effects on performance by investigating the underlying cognitive mechanisms and factors associated with these effects in three research papers. Specifically, to understand how challenge and hindrance appraisals contribute to our understanding of the stressor-performance link, the first paper presents a review of the empirical findings that contrasts the studies that measure appraisals with those that do not consider appraisals. It finds that measurement of appraisals offers more refined picture of the relationships between the stressors and performance-related outcomes. The second paper conducts a pre-registered experimental study to investigate the effects of the magnitude of a stressor (task difficulty) on challenge and hindrance appraisals and performance in a demanding cognitive task. It finds the non-linear effects of task difficulty on challenge appraisals, while the effects on hindrance appraisals were linear. In addition, it provides support for the mediating role of the hindrance appraisals in the task difficulty-performance relationships. The third paper consists of two studies. Study 1 carries out a pre-registered experiment to explore the role of prior experience and feedback in the dynamic stress process. Specifically, it examines how task performance, provided as in-task concurrent feedback, i.e., simultaneous presentation of upward social comparison and objective feedback, mediates change in challenge and hindrance appraisals. Study 1 finds partial support for the hypothesized effects. Study 2 examines the underlying effects found in Study 1 and employs eye-tracking to explore the associations between challenge and hindrance appraisals and attentional focus on the two elements of the in-task concurrent feedback to shed light on attentional processes. Study 2 is currently in the process of data collection and is not completed due to COVID-19 induced restrictions on the laboratory. The overall results of this dissertation encourage rethinking the existing state of the challenge-hindrance stressor framework by inviting a more complex conceptualization of the stressor-performance association in organizations.

Due to enforced social distancing as a direct consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, many on-site health care services are unavailable. This study seeks to investigate the comparative effectiveness of an alternative on-line delivery model of exercise and education compared to on-site delivery in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Due to the extraordinary events of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, finding alternative delivery-models of treatment has come to the forefront of public health services worldwide. Consequently, on-line treatment is rapidly becoming an integral part of public health service. For patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), where non-pharmacological and non-surgical treatment is considered first-line treatment, on-line delivered exercise has already shown promise and may be a viable treatment option, especially when traditional on-site exercise delivery models are unavailable. However, further studies are needed to clarify the relative effectiveness of on-line exercise and education when compared to on-site exercise and education programs.This study aims to evaluate the effects of on-line exercise and education in knee OA compared to a cohort of similar knee OA patients completing the same exercise and education program through on-site delivery.This study includes two cohorts of knee OA patients receiving the same exercise and education program through different delivery models (on-line vs. on-site). The on-line cohort is a new treatment delivery initiative, born out of the COVID-19 enforced shutdown of all non-critical on-site health care. The on-site cohort is comprised of knee OA patients from a patient registry, collecting outcome data as part of the exercise and education program.The exercise and education program is called Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D), and consists of two to three disease-specific educational sessions and 12 neuromuscular exercise sessions (NEMEX-TJR). GLA:D originates from Denmark and has currently been implemented in Australia, Canada, China, Switzerland and New Zealand.This study will primarily compare outcomes of pain, function and quality of life between the two different treatment delivery models and will provide important insights in effectiveness of alternative delivery models of recommended first-line care for patients with knee OA.

We model and simulate the COVID-19 infection andhealthcare dynamics in Denmark from the onset till March 5,2021. The simulation is matched and calibrated to hospitaland death data as well as antibody population measurement.In this work we focus on comparing the time evolution of theestimated infection level with the daily identified infected individuals based on the national testing and contact tracingprogram. We find that the national testing program on average identifies 1/3 of the infected individuals July 1, 2020 -March 5, 2021. Our investigations indicate the current program does not have a proper balance between random probing, focused contact tracing, and testing prioritization. Toomuch of the program operates as a semi-random daily sampling of part of the population. We propose a policy with afocus on local infection tracing and interventions.

In the Covid-19 pandemic, it seems that African countries have been largely spared from the devastating effects observed elsewhere. Working and living in Guinea-Bissau, one of the poorest and most fragile countries in the world located in West Africa, we wonder: How can the world know that there are only few Covid-19 cases in a country where the health system is weak and access to Covid-19 tests very limited? How can the world know that there is a low Covid-19 mortality in a country without a reliable civil registration and vital statistic system? In this article, we explore the (too) many unknowns of Covid-19 in Guinea-Bissau. The article was chosen as the 1st place winner of the 2020 Eye on Global Health Writing Competition.

We are writing this openly-published letter to express deep concerns regarding the paper recently published in JAMA Network Open: Estimation of US Children’s Educational Attainment and Years of Life Lost Associated With Primary School Closures During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.28786The paper by Christakis, Van Cleve, and Zimmerman(2020,abbrev. CVZ) is built upon multiple critically flawed assumptions, obvious misuse of the standard analytical tools, and clear mistakes in study design. Additionally, the analysis presented contains crucial mathematical and statistical errors that completely revert the main results, sufficient that if the estimates had been calculated according to the declared methodology, the results would completely contradict the stated conclusions and policy recommendations. These are not idle criticisms. This study has received enormous public attention, and its results immediately appeared in discussions of public health policies around schools worldwide. The central question is resolving an evidence base for the inevitable tradeoff between (a) the very real harms of missed education provoked by policies that decrease viral spread vs. (b) the resumption of education as a social good which increases viral spread. This is an incredibly important public health question, and it demands careful cost-benefit analysis. To that end, this paper adds no usable evidence whatsoever.