Explore the vast range of titles available.

Leptospirosis is a leading zoonotic disease worldwide with more than 1 million cases in the general population per year. With leptospirosis being an emerging infectious disease and as the world's environment changes with more floods and environmental disasters, the burden of leptospirosis is expected to increase. The objectives of the systematic review were to explore how leptospirosis affects pregnancy, its burden in this population, its effects on maternal and fetal outcomes and the evidence base surrounding treatment options. We performed a systematic review of published and unpublished literature using automated and manual methods to screen nine electronic databases since inception, with no language restriction. Two reviewers independently screened articles, completed the data extraction and assessment of risk of bias. Due to significant heterogeneity and paucity of data, we were unable to carry out a meta-analysis, but we conducted a pooled analysis of individual patient data from the case reports and case series to examine the patient and disease characteristics, diagnostic methods, differential diagnoses, antibiotic treatments, and outcomes of leptospirosis in pregnancy. The protocol for this review was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, PROSPERO: CRD42020151501. We identified 419 records, of which we included eight observational studies, 21 case reports, three case series and identified four relevant ongoing studies. Overall the studies were with moderate bias and of 'fair' quality. We estimated the incidence of leptospirosis in pregnancy to be 1.3 per 10,000 in women presenting with fever or with jaundice, but this is likely to be higher in endemic areas. Adverse fetal outcomes were found to be more common in pregnant patients who presented in the second trimester compared with patients who presented in the third trimester. There is overlap between how leptospirosis presents in pregnancy and in the general population. There is also overlap between the signs, symptoms and biochemical disturbances associated with leptospirosis in pregnancy and the presentation of pregnancy associated conditions, such as Pre-Eclampsia (PET), Acute Fatty Liver of Pregnancy (AFLP) and HELLP Syndrome (Haemolysis Elevated Liver enzymes Low Platelets). In 94% of identified cases with available data, there was an indicator in the patient history regarding exposure that could have helped include leptospirosis in the clinician's differential diagnosis. We also identified a range of suitable antibiotic therapies for treating leptospirosis in pregnancy, most commonly used were penicillins. This is the first systematic review of leptospirosis in pregnancy and it clearly shows the need to improve early diagnosis and treatment by asking early, treating early, and reporting well. Ask early-broaden differential diagnoses and ask early for potential leptospirosis exposures and risk factors. Treat early-increase index of suspicion in pregnant patients with fever in endemic areas and combine with rapid field diagnosis and early treatment. Report well-need for more good quality epidemiological studies on leptospirosis in pregnancy and better quality reporting of cases in literature.

Minoritised can be a more useful term as it describes intersectional forms of discrimination, and acknowledges the active processes involved in differential allocations of power, resources and ultimately health. In health literature, ‘Asia(n)’ continues to be shorthand for the entire continent, or to specific parts (eg, East and Southeast Asia) based on the largely unchallenged assumption that, ‘due to the ethnic, genetic, environmental and cultural differences, clinical data of the Western populations may not be representative of Asian countries’.5 6 The implicit assumption is that the ‘West’ is the default ‘reference population’ with which ‘Asians’ are compared—notwithstanding the fact that even with the most restrictive definitions, ‘Asians’ make up three fifths of the world’s population. Adhikari,2 who makes a case for embracing the Coloured identity, stated ‘coloured identity is also very much the product of its bearers who, I would argue, were in the first instance primarily responsible for articulating the identity and subsequently determining its form and content’. [...]these terms do not cross borders with the term Coloured being pejorative in the USA and the UK, but embraced by some in South Africa. 4. Universality of minoritising power structures We recommend the term minoritised, which emphasises active processes,17 shifting beyond binary discussion of minority versus majority.17 18 We build on existing explanations19 to define minoritised, as ‘individuals and populations, including numerical majorities, whose collective cultural, economic, political and social power has been eroded through the targeting of identity in active processes that sustain structures of hegemony.’

Internationally, we have witnessed the vilification of particular nationalities, with overt forms of sinophobia.6 Politically, xenophobia has been weaponised to enforce border controls against particular nationalities and undermine migrant rights.7 In the UK, minoritised ethnic groups are more likely to contract a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and, subsequently, face a higher risk of a severe form of illness. People from minoritised ethnic groups are more likely to work as key workers in frontline jobs that expose them to SARS-CoV-2, and are more likely to live in overcrowded accommodation, meaning social distancing is not an option.8 They are then more likely to have barriers to accessing health services, meaning that they present late in a worse condition, and with a higher probability of underlying illnesses that put them at greater risk of death. [...]racism is more than this, it is a fundamental cause of ill health.10 At all socioeconomic levels, people of colour have poorer health outcomes.11 Racism cumulates over the lifecourse, leading to activation of stress responses and hormonal adaptations, increasing the risk of non-communicable diseases and biological ageing.12 This trauma is also transmitted intergenerationally and affects the offspring of those initially affected through complex biopsychosocial pathways.13 The root of these so-called biological causes is racism, not race itself.

Climate change has a broad range of health impacts and tackling climate change could be the greatest opportunity for improving global health this century. Yet conversations on climate change and health are often incomplete, giving little attention to structural discrimination and the need for racial justice. Racism kills, and climate change kills. Together, racism and climate change interact and have disproportionate effects on the lives of minoritised people both within countries and between the Global North and the Global South. This paper has three main aims. First, to survey the literature on the unequal health impacts of climate change due to racism, xenophobia, and discrimination through a scoping review. We found that racially minoritised groups, migrants, and Indigenous communities face a disproportionate burden of illness and mortality due to climate change in different contexts. Second, this paper aims to highlight inequalities in responsibility for climate change and the effects thereof. A geographical visualisation of responsibility for climate change and projected mortality and disease risk attributable to climate change per 100 000 people in 2050 was conducted. These maps visualise the disproportionate burden of illness and mortality due to climate change faced by the Global South. Our third aim is to highlight the pathways through which climate change, discrimination, and health interact in most affected areas. Case studies, testimony, and policy analysis drawn from multidisciplinary perspectives are presented throughout the paper to elucidate these pathways. The health community must urgently examine and repair the structural discrimination that drives the unequal impacts of climate change to achieve rapid and equitable action.

This Series shows how racism, xenophobia, discrimination, and the structures that support them are detrimental to health. In this first Series paper, we describe the conceptual model used throughout the Series and the underlying principles and definitions. We explore concepts of epistemic injustice, biological experimentation, and misconceptions about race using a historical lens. We focus on the core structural factors of separation and hierarchical power that permeate society and result in the negative health consequences we see. We are at a crucial moment in history, as populist leaders pushing the politics of hate have become more powerful in several countries. These leaders exploit racism, xenophobia, and other forms of discrimination to divide and control populations, with immediate and long-term consequences for both individual and population health. The COVID-19 pandemic and transnational racial justice movements have brought renewed attention to persisting structural racial injustice.

Racism, xenophobia, and discrimination are key determinants of health and equity and must be addressed for improved health outcomes. We conclude that far broader, deeper, transformative action is needed compared with current measures to tackle adverse effects of racism on health. To challenge the structural drivers of racism and xenophobia, anti-racist action and other wider measures that target determinants should implement an intersectional approach to effectively address the causes and consequences of racism within a population. Structurally, legal instruments and human rights law provide a robust framework to challenge the pervasive drivers of disadvantage linked to caste, ethnicity, Indigeneity, migratory status, race, religion, and skin colour. Actions need to consider the historical, economic, and political contexts in which the effects of racism, xenophobia, and discrimination affect health. We propose several specific actions: a commission that explores how we action the approaches laid out in this paper; building a conversation and a series of events with international multilateral agency stakeholders to raise the issue and profile of racism, xenophobia, and discrimination within health; and using our multiple platforms to build coalitions, expand knowledge, highlight inequities, and advocate for change across the world.

Despite being globally pervasive, racism, xenophobia, and discrimination are not universally recognised determinants of health. We challenge widespread beliefs related to the inevitability of increased mortality and morbidity associated with particular ethnicities and minoritised groups. In refuting that racial categories have a genetic basis and acknowledging that socioeconomic factors offer incomplete explanations in understanding these health disparities, we examine the pathways by which discrimination based on caste, ethnicity, Indigeneity, migratory status, race, religion, and skin colour affect health. Discrimination based on these categories, although having many unique historical and cultural contexts, operates in the same way, with overlapping pathways and health effects. We synthesise how such discrimination affects health systems, spatial determination, and communities, and how these processes manifest at the individual level, across the life course, and intergenerationally. We explore how individuals respond to and internalise these complex mechanisms psychologically, behaviourally, and physiologically. The evidence shows that racism, xenophobia, and discrimination affect a range of health outcomes across all ages around the world, and remain embedded within the universal challenges we face, from COVID-19 to the climate emergency.