Abstract

As climate change drives increasingly severe heatwaves, the strain on public health systems continues to grow, particularly for vulnerable populations. Our work argues for the integration of digital health technologies into heatwave action plans, drawing lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic's success in deploying such tools. It explores the potential of digital communication strategies, telemedicine, and data-driven simulations to enhance public awareness, maintain healthcare accessibility, and improve real-time crisis responses. Despite their effectiveness, digital solutions remain underutilized in existing European heat-health action plans. We emphasize the need for a proactive, systems-based approach to optimize heatwave management and ensure equitable healthcare access, particularly for at-risk communities. Integrating digital health innovations can transform heatwave response strategies, making them more flexible, efficient, and capable of saving lives.

Abstract
Background: We assessed the pertinence of updating the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) risk classification yearly in people with diabetes by quantifying the changes in the risk group and its accuracy in identifying those developing an ulcer (DFU) in a primary care setting. Methods: In our retrospective cohort study, we included all people with diabetes with a foot assessment registry between January 2016 and December 2018 in the Baixo Alentejo Local Health Unit. Foot-related data were collected at baseline after one and two years. DFU and/or death until December 2019 were registered. The proportion of people changing their risk status each year was calculated. Accuracy measures of the IWGDF classification to predict DFU occurrence at one, two, and three years were calculated. Results: A total of 2097 people were followed for three years, during which 0.1% died and 12.4% developed a DFU. After two years, 3.6% of the participants had progressed to a higher-risk group. The IWGDF classification presented specificity values superior to 90% and negative predictive values superior to 99%. Conclusion: Foot risk status can be safely updated every two years instead of yearly, mainly for those at very low risk. The IWGDF classification can accurately identify those not at risk of DFU.

Abstract
Objectives Our research question was: what are the most frequent baseline clinical characteristics in adult patients with COVID-19? Our major aim was to identify common baseline clinical features that could help recognise adult patients at high risk of having COVID-19. Design We conducted a scoping review of all the evidence available at LitCovid, until 23 March 2020. Setting Studies conducted in any setting and any country were included. Participants Studies had to report the prevalence of sociodemographic characteristics, symptoms and comorbidities specifically in adults with a diagnosis of infection by SARS-CoV-2. Results In total, 1572 publications were published on LitCovid. We have included 56 articles in our analysis, with 89% conducted in China and 75% containing inpatients. Three studies were conducted in North America and one in Europe. Participants' age ranged from 28 to 70 years, with balanced gender distribution. The proportion of asymptomatic cases were from 2% to 79%. The most common reported symptoms were fever (4%-99%), cough (4%-92%), dyspnoea/shortness of breath (1%-90%), fatigue (4%-89%), myalgia (3%-65%) and pharyngalgia (2%-61%), while regarding comorbidities, we found cardiovascular disease (1%-40%), hypertension (0%-40%) and cerebrovascular disease (1%-40%). Such heterogeneity impaired the conduction of meta-analysis. Conclusions The infection by COVID-19 seems to affect people in a very diverse manner and with different characteristics. With the available data, it is not possible to clearly identify those at higher risk of being infected with this condition. Furthermore, the evidence from countries other than China is, at the moment, too scarce.

Abstract
Background: We assessed the pertinence of yearly updating the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) risk classification in people with diabetes by quantifying the changes in the risk group and its accuracy in identifying those developing an ulcer (DFU) in a primary care setting. Methods: In our retrospective cohort study, we included all people with diabetes with a foot as-sessment registry between January 2016 and December 2018 in the Baixo Alentejo Local Health Unit. Foot-related data was collected at baseline after one and two years. DFU and/or death until December 2019 were registered. The proportion of people changing their risk status each year was calculated. Accuracy measures of the IWGDF classification to predict DFU occurrence at one, two, and three years were calculated. Results: A total of 2097 people were followed for three years, during which 0.1% died, and 12.4% developed a DFU. After two years, 3.6% of the participants had progressed to a higher-risk group. The IWGDF classification presented specificity values superior to 90% and negative predictive values superior to 99%. Conclusion: Foot risk status can be safely updated every two years instead of yearly. The IWGDF classification can accurately identify those not at risk of DFU.