From risk to resilience: An equity approach to COVID-19

thumbnail — Download in PDF format
(1.90 MB, 86 pages)

Organization: Public Health Agency of Canada

Published: October 2020

Chief Public Health Officer of Canada's Report on the State of Public Health in Canada 2020

Message from the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada
About this report
Section 1: COVID-19 in Canada
Section 2: COVID-19 is not impacting Canadians equally
Section 3: Moving forward from COVID-19
The way forward
Appendix 1: Timeline of selected milestones and public health interventions (December 2019 to June 2020)
Appendix 2: Methodology
- Process
- Limitations
Acknowledgements
Endnotes
References

Message from the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada

The COVID-19 pandemic is having a profound impact on the health, social and economic well-being of people in Canada and around the globe. It has led to fundamental changes in our daily lives. Sadly, many Canadians have experienced its tragic consequences, including the suffering and loss of loved ones, lost jobs and livelihoods, and reduced social connections and isolation.

While the COVID-19 pandemic affects us all, the health impacts have been worse for seniors, essential workers, racialized populations, people living with disabilities and women. We need to improve the health, social and economic conditions for these populations to achieve health equity and to protect us all from the threat of COVID-19 and future pandemics.

That is why this year, the focus of my annual report is on understanding COVID-19's broader consequences and offers evidence-based solutions. The data presented in this report covers the time period from January to August 2020.

It is important that we do not lose sight of how far we have come in our efforts to understand and control this virus. Looking back to earlier this year, I am reminded of the unprecedented situation we faced. Early in the crisis, with limited data and research on the virus, governments at all levels across the country put in place broad public health measures and were successful at flattening the curve together. Canadians reached out to check on neighbours or organized grocery deliveries for those required to self-isolate after returning from abroad. Canadian industry and businesses rapidly adapted their services and retooled their manufacturing for needed equipment and supplies. These are only a few of the actions which reflect the remarkable whole-of-society effort that collectively allowed Canada to slow the epidemic over the summer months.

But our work together is not over given the low level of immunity in the population. At the time of finalizing this report, cases of COVID-19 are once again beginning to rise across the country after a period of increasing social interactions. Yet we have more knowledge now on how to reduce virus spread, more tools to detect cases, trace contacts and support isolation and quarantine. We know more about the clinical manifestations of COVID-19 and are better able to manage those who are seriously ill. We know we must continue to follow public health advice and protect those at high risk while, at the same time, attending to the human, social and economic impacts our communities are experiencing. There are no easy solutions and difficult choices remain in the months ahead.

The COVID-19 pandemic has jolted our collective consciousness into recognizing that equity is vital for ensuring health security.

This means incorporating a health equity approach to pandemic preparedness, response, and recovery. It relies on leadership at all levels, commitment of all Canadians and support by a strong public health system.

The bottom line: no one is protected until everyone is protected.

Dr. Theresa Tam

Chief Public Health Officer of Canada

About this report

The annual report of the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada (CPHO) provides an opportunity to examine the state of public health in Canada and to stimulate dialogue about issues critical to the health of Canadians.

This year’s annual report describes the heavy toll that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on Canadian society, both directly and through the steps taken to mitigate its effect. Through this challenging time, there has been incredible collaboration across sectors and between individuals, community organizations, businesses, governments and scientists. The aim of this report is to suggest opportunities to build on this collaboration to strengthen our nation’s preparedness for future public health emergencies. In doing so, we can build a stronger society for all Canadians.

This report draws on previous work, which demonstrates that the health of Canadians is dependent on a set of fundamental social determinants^{Footnote 1}^{Footnote 2}. COVID-19 has underscored the inequities in health that are shaped by these determinants, highlighted how these inequities may be exacerbated in the context of a pandemic, and shown how they can aggravate and prolong the spread of disease, making the pandemic worse.

Section 1 sets the context with a brief description of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the evolving epidemiology of the COVID-19 crisis as it emerged globally and in Canada from January 2020 to August 2020.

Section 2 reviews the direct and indirect impacts of COVID-19 on the health and well-being of people in Canada. It reviews inequities prior to the emergence of COVID-19, and how these were exacerbated by the pandemic itself and the impacts of the public health measures put in place to slow the spread of the virus.

Section 3 draws upon the success stories from other health crises and preliminary indicators from the response to COVID-19. It suggests ways forward to rebuild from the COVID-19 pandemic with a view to improving health for all Canadians.

Note to the reader: Developed during the summer of 2020, this report reflects the evolving nature of the science and our understanding of the virus and the epidemic in Canada. Based on the best available evidence at the time, this document does not represent an exhaustive high-quality evidence review. Instead, it reflects some of the realities and challenges faced by scientists and decision-makers in the early stages of the epidemic to determine the actions needed to effectively counter the impacts of COVID-19 (i.e., “science to policy” decisions), while continuously adjusting to an evolving evidence base. In other words, the report tells the story of the initial stages of the pandemic, Canada’s response and the ongoing effects, but it was written with the knowledge that the story is continuing to change every day. While every effort has been made to ensure the validity of the presented findings, the possibility remains that some aspects of the report may have changed since the time of publication. Further details on the methods and limitations are contained in Appendix 2.

We respectfully acknowledge that the land on which we developed this report is in traditional First Nation, Inuit, and Métis territory, and we acknowledge their diverse histories and cultures. We strive for respectful partnerships with Indigenous peoples as we search for collective healing and true reconciliation. Specifically, this report was developed in Ottawa, on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin people; in Montreal, on the traditional unceded territory of the Mohawk people, and in Toronto, on the traditional territory of the Wendat, the Anishnaabeg, Haudenosaunee, Métis and the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation.

Section 1: COVID-19 in Canada

Introduction

The COVID-19 (Coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic poses an unprecedented threat to the health, social and economic well-being of Canadians^{Footnote 3}. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), it is the most severe global health emergency announced since 2005, when the Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) global alert system was first developed^{Footnote 4}^{Footnote 5}. Following the earliest known reports of this novel disease at the end of December 2019, by August 22, 2020, confirmed COVID-19 cases had been reported on all continents except Antarctica, with a cumulative total of over 22,800,000 cases and 790,000 deaths^{Footnote 6}^{Footnote 7}. For comparison, it has been estimated that on average, influenza causes about 390,000 global deaths per year^{Footnote 8}. While there was variation in how the responsible virus, SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2), spread through different parts of the world and across Canada, its high rate of transmission^{Footnote 9} and virulence^{Footnote 10} have had significant worldwide impacts^{Footnote 11}^{Footnote 12}:

Half of the world's population lived under strict confinement conditions in April 2020^{Footnote 13};
International air travel was estimated to experience its biggest decline in history with 44% to 80% fewer passengers in 2020^{Footnote 14};
Over 300 million full-time jobs were lost globally in the 2^nd quarter of 2020^{Footnote 15};
By the end of 2020, global economic growth could contract by 3 to 6%, increasing the risk of a recession to rival the 1930s Great Depression^{Footnote 16}; and,
87% of the global student population was affected by school closures by the end of March 2020^{Footnote 17}.

In this section, we provide a brief snapshot of the origins of the disease, its impact on various populations from January to August 2020, and the public health measures used to mitigate transmission.

Beginning of COVID-19

COVID-19 is a novel infectious disease caused by the virus SARS-CoV-2, believed to have evolved from a virus moving from bats to humans through an intermediary animal host that is yet to be identified^{Footnote 18}^{Footnote 19}. The first related human cases of a new “viral pneumonia of unknown cause” in China were identified by the WHO on December 31, 2019^{Footnote 20}. While the earliest human outbreaks were still being explored at the time of developing this report, within only a few weeks the virus spread rapidly around the globe^{Footnote 21}^{Footnote 22}^{Footnote 23}.

The knowledge of COVID-19 continues to evolve. COVID-19 is more contagious than many other respiratory diseases, including seasonal influenza, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) (2003), pandemic influenza (H1N1 2009) or Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) (2012)^{Footnote 24}^{Footnote 25}^{Footnote 26}. Research has demonstrated that some people can have no symptoms or very different symptoms (e.g., gastrointestinal symptoms, loss of sense of smell) than those first identified, and that asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission can fuel disease spread^{Footnote 27}^{Footnote 28}^{Footnote 29}. Overall, up to 15% of people with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 develop more serious forms of the disease, requiring hospitalization and up to 5% may require admission to an intensive care unit (ICU)^{Footnote 30}. Post-infection immune and inflammatory response as well as possible long-term outcomes still need to be further characterised^{Footnote 31}^{Footnote 32}^{Footnote 33}.

Epidemiological snapshot of COVID-19

Globally

Following COVID-19 emergence in China, the epicentre of the COVID-19 pandemic shifted first to other Asian countries, then Europe and then to the Americas at the time of writing this report^{Footnote 34}. On April 26, 2020, 6 countries (Belgium, France, Italy, Spain, UK and the USA) accounted for three quarters of the global COVID-19 deaths, even though they make up only 7.5% of the global population. The COVID-19 death rate in these countries was 27 per 100,000 inhabitants, which was 39 times higher than the rest of the world's average of 0.7 per 100,000^{Footnote 35}. The relatively high death rate in these countries may be attributed to epidemic spread affecting a high proportion of individuals in vulnerable populations, groups and settings, such as seniors, disadvantaged and congregate living settings, and overwhelmed healthcare systems^{Footnote 36}^{Footnote 37}^{Footnote 38}.

From a global perspective, Canada ranked #79 out of 210 countries with respect to total cases per million inhabitants and #26 for total deaths per million, as of August 22, 2020^{Footnote 39}. The disproportionately higher ranking based on fatality rates was largely driven by outbreaks in long-term care homes, which are further discussed below. Overall, based on the comparison of daily cases reported by country, Canada's COVID-19 epidemic evolved similar to the average of Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries (Figure 1). Relative to some other countries, such as the US, Canada managed to slow the growth of the epidemic more quickly, which may at least in part be attributable to the rapid implementation of a coordinated national public health response. At the time of writing this report, case counts continue to rise around the world, including in certain countries that were initially successful in containing the virus such as Japan, thereby highlighting the insidious nature and persistence of SARS-CoV-2 spread. Since diverse factors have influenced the course of the pandemic and the detection, reporting, classification of cases, and deaths in different countries, their respective data must be interpreted with caution^{Footnote 40}. Nonetheless, Canada continues to learn from the experience of other countries as they have employed a range of public health measures and approaches in an effort to minimise the impact of COVID-19 while resuming economic and social activities.

**Figure 1. Daily COVID-19 cases by country**

Country data as per selected time points
OECD country	Days since 100th reported case in country (selected time points)	7-day moving average of daily cases per 100,000 population
Canada	0	>0.1
25	3.5
50	4.3
75	2.9
100	1.0
125	0.9
150	1.0
167	1.1
France	0	>0.1
25	3.4
50	3.7
75	0.8
100	0.5
125	0.9
150	1.4
178	5.7
Germany	0	>0.1
25	4.9
50	3.2
75	1.0
100	0.4
125	0.5
150	0.7
178	1.6
Italy	0	>0.1
25	6.1
50	6.4
75	2.3
100	0.7
125	0.4
150	0.4
184	1.6
Japan	0	>0.1
25	>0.1
50	0.4
75	0.2
100	0.3
125	>0.1
150	0.4
186	0.7
United Kingdom	0	>0.1
25	3.5
50	7.2
75	4.3
100	1.6
125	0.9
150	0.9
175	1.6
United States	0	>0.1
25	3.7
50	9.4
75	6.9
100	6.4
125	14.7
150	20.0
176	12.9
OECD country average	0	>0.1
25	3.3
50	3.4
75	1.6
100	1.8
125	2.3
150	3.3
179	3.8

Nationally

The first confirmed Canadian case of COVID-19 on January 25, 2020 was linked to international travel^{Footnote 42}. The progressive implementation of public health measures aimed at countering the epidemic, such as advice against non-essential travel, border screening measures, public health information for travellers, quarantine measures and travel restrictions effectively reduced the importation of travel-related cases by the beginning of April (Figure 2). As contact tracing efforts confirmed new cases that were not linked to incoming travellers, community transmission quickly became the main driver of the epidemic in Canada, marked by several outbreaks in vulnerable populations and settings. In March, restrictive public health measures were escalated at the federal, provincial, territorial and municipal levels in an effort to contain the virus. By mid-April, the epidemiological curve was flattening across the population. With continued decline in the infection rate, areas that had achieved a low and manageable level of COVID-19 burden began a slow and cautious loosening of restrictive public health measures. Figure 2 provides an epidemiological overview of the national COVID-19 epidemic from December 31, 2019 to August 31, 2020. Here, the number of confirmed cases in Canada is shown over time with information on the source of acquisition (international travel or community) as well as key outbreaks and public health measures. Note that in the graph of the epidemic curve, “date of illness onset”, which is ascertained retrospectively, is not the same as the “reporting date” (e.g., when public health authorities report their daily case counts). More detailed information, including all supporting references, can be found in text box Activating the pan-Canadian public health response and in Appendix 1.

**Figure 2. Overview of Canada’s epidemic with selected key milestones (December 2019 to August 2020)**

Number of cumulative cases per month and by category of transmission
Date	Community transmission	Information pending	International travel
2019-12-31	0	0	0
2020-01-31	1	0	7
2020-02-29	105	2	78
2020-03-31	13715	516	3905
2020-04-30	42436	2838	339
2020-05-31	29102	994	115
2020-06-30	10094	434	194
2020-07-31	9906	516	306
2020-08-31	4575	821	135

Timeline of selected outbreaks and public health measures
Date	Event	Type
Dec. 31	First reports of a “pneumonia of unknown cause” in Wuhan, China	Outbreak
Jan. 22	Canada implements coronavirus screening requirements for travellers returning from Wuhan, China	Public health measure
Jan. 25	First Canadian novel coronavirus case linked to travel from Wuhan, China confirmed	Outbreak
Feb. 20	First recorded case in Canada linked to non-China travel (i.e., Iran)	Outbreak
Feb. 23	First recorded case in Canada linked to community transmission	Outbreak
Feb. 24	First recorded case in Canada linked to travel to the US	Outbreak
Mar. 7	First long-term care home outbreak (BC)	Outbreak
Mar. 11	Canada surpasses 100 reported cases	Outbreak
Mar. 12 -22	Physical distancing measures, including school and business closures, implemented across Canada	Public health measure
Mar. 13 -19	Canada implements additional travel advisories and restrictions for international travellers	Public health measure
Mar. 28	First reported outbreak among temporary foreign farm workers (BC)	Outbreak
Apr. 7	Council of Chief Medical Officers of Health issue statement supportive of wearing non-medical masks as an additional layer of protection	Public health measure
Apr. 14	Largest known outbreak in a shelter living setting, with 164 cases (ON)	Outbreak
Apr. 15	Public health measures implemented to control largest correctional facility outbreak, involving 162 cases (ON)	Public health measure
Apr. 17	First reported outbreak in an isolated northern community (SK)	Outbreak
Apr. 24	NB becomes the first province to ease physical distancing measures	Public health measure
May 6	Largest known single location outbreak at a meat processing plant, involving 1,560 cases (AB)	Outbreak
June 17	First confirmed outbreak in a Canadian religious-cultural community, involving 285 cases by Aug. 31 (SK)	Outbreak

It is important to note that the national picture masks regional differences that occur in different jurisdictions and sub-populations. These are highlighted as part of the epidemiological summary of COVID-19 in Canada, which is based on geographic, demographic and disease outcome indicators, in Figure 3 and Table 1 below.

**Figure 3. National case distribution by health region (as of August 31, 2020)**

National case distribution by health region
Province or territory	Health region	Cumulative number of cases per 100,000 population
Alberta	Calgary Zone	447.7
Alberta	Central Zone	122.6
Alberta	Edmonton Zone	214.3
Alberta	North Zone	200.5
Alberta	South Zone	568.5
British Columbia	Fraser Health	159.3
British Columbia	Interior Health	55.1
British Columbia	Northern Health	52.0
British Columbia	Vancouver Coastal Health	156.5
British Columbia	Vancouver Island Health	20.7
Manitoba	Interlake-Eastern Regional Health Authority	57.5
Manitoba	Northern Regional Health Authority	5.3
Manitoba	Prairie Mountain Health	261.4
Manitoba	Southern Health	126.4
Manitoba	Winnipeg Regional Health Authority	54.0
New Brunswick	Zone 1 (Moncton area)	18.9
New Brunswick	Zone 2 (Saint John area)	15.9
New Brunswick	Zone 3 (Fredericton area)	31.1
New Brunswick	Zone 4 (Edmundston area)	14.5
New Brunswick	Zone 5 (Campbellton area)	210.3
New Brunswick	Zone 6 (Bathurst area)	2.6
New Brunswick	Zone 7 (Miramichi area)	4.5
Newfoundland and Labrador	Central Regional Health Authority	13.2
Newfoundland and Labrador	Eastern Regional Health Authority	77.8
Newfoundland and Labrador	Labrador-Grenfell Regional Health Authority	16.6
Newfoundland and Labrador	Western Regional Health Authority	5.2
Northwest Territories	Northwest Territories	11.2
Nova Scotia	Zone 1 - Western	27.6
Nova Scotia	Zone 2 - Northern	45.1
Nova Scotia	Zone 3 - Eastern	33.3
Nova Scotia	Zone 4 - Central	196.9
Nunavut	Nunavut	0.0
Ontario	Brant County Health Unit	106.6
Ontario	Chatham-Kent Health Unit	342.2
Ontario	City of Hamilton Health Unit	172.1
Ontario	City of Ottawa Health Unit	288.5
Ontario	City of Toronto Health Unit	541.0
Ontario	Durham Regional Health Unit	272.2
Ontario	Grey Bruce Health Unit	73.3
Ontario	Haldimand-Norfolk Health Unit	402.0
Ontario	Haliburton, Kawartha, Pine Ridge District Health Unit	119.0
Ontario	Halton Regional Health Unit	149.1
Ontario	Hastings and Prince Edward Counties Health Unit	28.7
Ontario	Huron Perth	82.9
Ontario	Kingston, Frontenac and Lennox and Addington Health Unit	53.7
Ontario	Lambton Health Unit	255.6
Ontario	Leeds, Grenville and Lanark District Health Unit	205.5
Ontario	Middlesex-London Health Unit	144.3
Ontario	Niagara Regional Area Health Unit	195.8
Ontario	North Bay Parry Sound District Health Unit	27.0
Ontario	Northwestern Health Unit	56.5
Ontario	Peel Regional Health Unit	496.8
Ontario	Peterborough County-City Health Unit	70.3
Ontario	Porcupine Health Unit	85.5
Ontario	Renfrew County and District Health Unit	30.6
Ontario	Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit	119.1
Ontario	Southwestern	117.9
Ontario	Sudbury and District Health Unit	45.9
Ontario	The District of Algoma Health Unit	23.1
Ontario	The Eastern Ontario Health Unit	92.0
Ontario	Thunder Bay District Health Unit	65.1
Ontario	Timiskaming Health Unit	56.2
Ontario	Waterloo Health Unit	244.0
Ontario	Wellington-Dufferin-Guelph Health Unit	180.9
Ontario	Windsor-Essex County Health Unit	588.3
Ontario	York Regional Health Unit	293.3
Prince Edward Island	Prince Edward Island	28.0
Quebec	Région de Lanaudière	941.9
Quebec	Région de Laval	1434.9
Quebec	Région de Montréal	1453.6
Quebec	Région de l'Abitibi-Témiscamingue	124.0
Quebec	Région de l'Estrie	255.4
Quebec	Région de l'Outaouais	209.5
Quebec	Région de la Capitale-Nationale	274.7
Quebec	Région de la Chaudière-Appalaches	142.3
Quebec	Région de la Côte-Nord	140.0
Quebec	Région de la Gaspésie et Îles-de-la-Madeleine	235.8
Quebec	Région de la Mauricie et du Centre-du-Québec	412.5
Quebec	Région de la Montérégie	655.8
Quebec	Région des Laurentides	683.1
Quebec	Région des Terres-Cries-de-la-Baie-James	55.2
Quebec	Région du Bas-Saint-Laurent	37.5
Quebec	Région du Nord-du-Québec	58.7
Quebec	Région du Nunavik	120.6
Quebec	Région du Saguenay et Lac-Saint-Jean	135.7
Saskatchewan	Central	175.5
Saskatchewan	Far North	923.0
Saskatchewan	North	122.3
Saskatchewan	Regina	44.4
Saskatchewan	Saskatoon	78.9
Saskatchewan	South	268.5
Yukon	Yukon	36.7

Table 1. Summary of key national statistics (as of August 21, 2020)
People tested	5,034,059^{Footnote a}
Cases	124,372^{Footnote a}
Median age (range)	47 years (<1 to 112)^{Footnote b}
Females	66,485 (55%)^{Footnote b}
Males	54,295 (45%)^{Footnote b}
Other sex/gender	15 (<1%)^{Footnote b}
Recovered cases	110,648 (89%)^{Footnote a}
Deaths	9,064 (7.3%)^{Footnote a}
Hospitalizations	11,370 (14%)^{Footnote c}
ICU admissions	2,314 (3%)^{Footnote c}
ICU median age (range)	63 years (<1 to 102)
Source: COVID-19 situational awareness dashboard^{Footnote 44} and epidemiological research data^{Footnote 43}.

Variations of the epidemic in Canada

From January to August 2020, the overall course of the COVID-19 epidemic was marked by the following key observations:

International travel and community transmission have played a significant role

A detailed analysis of the origin of international travel-related cases reported from January to March 2020 revealed that 35% of these cases entered Canada from the US, 10% from the UK and France, and 1.4% from China (i.e., the original epicentre for the emergence and spread of COVID-19)^{Footnote 45} . Further, although COVID-19 originated abroad, with significantly reduced international travel following implementation of travel restrictions in mid-March, by August 2020, 91% of all reported cases were linked to transmission within Canada and only 4% were linked to international travel, with a further 5% pending exposure information^{Footnote 46}.

The COVID-19 situation has unfolded differently across the country

Quebec and Ontario have reported the highest incidence rates, exceeding the overall national average, while Nunavut is the only jurisdiction that had not reported any confirmed cases as of mid-August^{Footnote 42}^{Footnote 43}. High rates of international and domestic travel early in the pandemic have been proposed as an important contributor to differential COVID-19 burden across the country. For instance, spring break in Quebec, a time of increased international travel, occurred just prior to the federal government’s recommendation to avoid non-essential travel to all countries^{Footnote 47}. In addition, over 1 million Canadians and permanent residents heeded the advice from Global Affairs Canada to return home in order to avoid becoming “stranded” abroad during the same period, potentially accounting for a significant number of travel-related cases that were subsequently reported across the country^{Footnote 48}.

COVID-19 impacts have varied depending on individual health status

The severity of COVID-19 outcomes can be influenced by underlying medical conditions. For instance, one study from the US reports that 92% of hospitalized COVID-19 patients had at least one underlying health condition^{Footnote 49}. Although these types of data are not routinely collected in Canada, preliminary findings were similar. As of August 27, 2020, and based on 700 reports from a sentinel hospital surveillance network in Canada, 86% of hospitalized COVID-19 cases had at least one underlying health condition, such as vascular illness including hypertension (64%), cardiac illness (32%), and diabetes (30%)^{Footnote d}^{Footnote 50}. In addition, among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who died in hospital, 98% also had one or more underlying medical conditions^{Footnote d}^{Footnote 50}. To put this in context, 44% of Canadian adults live with at least one common chronic condition and the likelihood of living with a chronic disease increases with age^{Footnote 51}^{Footnote 52}^{Footnote 53}^{Footnote 54}. While more research is needed to fully understand the contribution of an underlying medical condition^{Footnote 55}, a number of studies have suggested an increased risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes in association with diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, immunosuppression, obesity, respiratory disease, or chronic kidney disease^{Footnote 56}^{Footnote 57}^{Footnote 58}^{Footnote 59}^{Footnote 60}^{Footnote 61}.

COVID-19 impacts vary across age

The risk of serious COVID-19 health impacts increases with age. Among all age groups, adults over 60 years of age experience the largest proportion of serious COVID-19 outcomes, accounting for 70% of all hospitalizations, 60% of intensive care unit admissions and 97% of deaths by the end of August. In contrast, children and youth aged 19 years or younger account for only 9% of all cases, 1% of hospitalizations and 0.01% deaths^{Footnote 43}. Although children, youth, and young adults face generally lower COVID-19 risks than older age groups, they may still experience severe or prolonged symptoms^{Footnote 62}. In children, preliminary studies have further identified a small increased risk of developing serious forms of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C)^{Footnote 63}.

COVID-19 burden not equal across populations in Canada

Some individuals and groups face disproportionately higher risks for infection and impacts than others in Canada. The reasons for this differential impact will be explored in Section 2, but the available data on cases and outcomes are summarized below:

Long-term care home residents and workers

At the time of writing this report at the end of August, residents and staff of long-term care (LTC) facilities^{Footnote e} have been the most affected group, comprising about 15% of all cases and residents alone making up 80% of all COVID-19-related deaths associated with long-term care (Table 2)^{Footnote 64}. Multiple factors contribute to the high mortality rate. Long-term care home residents face an inherently high risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes due to their advanced age and higher prevalence of chronic underlying medical conditions^{Footnote 65}. For example, many residents have dementia which may make infection control difficult^{Footnote 66}^{Footnote 67}.

In addition, pandemic preparedness did not extend into these settings leaving residents vulnerable to the introduction, spread and impact of a novel virus. LTC facilities faced challenges early on to prevent infection and spread. For instance, limited support for infection prevention and control measures, including a short supply of personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare workers^{Footnote f}, increased the frequency of reciprocal viral transmission between caregivers and patients^{Footnote 68}^{Footnote 69}. Accordingly, over 10% of national COVID-19 cases were long-term care workers^{Footnote 70}. Many healthcare workers were initially employed in multiple facilities, potentially contributing to the spread of the virus^{Footnote 71}. Other factors which were identified as contributing to the spread of COVID-19 were overcrowding in some LTC facilities^{Footnote 72}, old infrastructure with poor ventilation^{Footnote 73} and chronic understaffing^{Footnote 74}.

Table 2: COVID-19 deaths by province or territory attributed to long-term care facilities
Province or territory	Total COVID-19 deaths	Total COVID-19 deaths linked to LTC
BC	200	145
AB	228	153
SK	22	2
MB	12	1
ON	2,796	2,026
QC	5,733	4,819
NL	3	0
NB	2	2
NS	64	57
PEI	0	0
YT	0	0
NT	0	0
NU	0	0
Total	9,060	7,205
Source: As of August 21, 2020, compiled from publicly reported data, including media reports, not validated by province and territories^{Footnote 43}

Age-related trends

In light of planned school openings in the fall of 2020, there has been considerable attention paid to how to interpret the limited and emerging evidence about the broader relationship between age and COVID-19, including infection, transmission and illness severity among children. Emerging research findings suggest that COVID-19 is generally milder among children and that many cases in children may be asymptomatic or involve mild symptoms^{Footnote 75}. For instance, a multi-country study that included Canada estimated that people aged 19 years or younger are approximately half as susceptible to COVID-19 as older people^{Footnote 76}. Children can transmit the virus, although it is not clear how easily that occurs and requires further study^{Footnote 77}. Under the age of 10 years, children may be less likely to transmit the virus to others compared to adults, while over the age of 10 years, they may be as likely as adults to transmit the virus^{Footnote 78}.

From early July to August 2020, the highest incidence of COVID-19 was reported among 20 to 39 year olds. This contrasts with the previous trend observed until mid-June, when people 80 years of age and older had the highest incidence^{Footnote 79} .

COVID-19 affects the sexes differently

While much remains unknown, observed differences in COVID-19 impacts between the sexes^{Footnote g} seem to be associated with biological and situational factors^{Footnote 80}^{Footnote 81}. By the end of August 2020, 55% of all reported cases were female and 45% were male^{Footnote 43}. Risk factors have been proposed to account for the observed differences. For instance, two out of three long-term care home residents are female^{Footnote 82} . In addition, the majority of healthcare workers are female, thereby increasing their risk of COVID-19 infection due to viral exposure from residents, patients or colleagues^{Footnote 83} . Among those hospitalized, 25% of males experienced severe symptoms requiring ICU admission compared to only 16% of females^{Footnote 43}. The higher ICU rate in males remains poorly understood, but may be linked to differences in healthcare seeking behaviour, immune response, viral host cell receptor levels and the presence of risk factors, such as smoking, compared to females^{Footnote 84}.

Risks for essential workers

Essential workers^{Footnote h} experience higher risks of viral exposure in their work environment or while commuting to/from work than people confined in their homes^{Footnote 85}. The burden is especially high among healthcare workers, who are estimated to account for 19% of all national cases of people with COVID-19 by mid-August^{Footnote 86}. As of mid-August, 2020 there have been 23 COVID-19 outbreaks across Canada in agricultural workplace settings, representing close to 1,800 linked cases and 4 deaths, and involving over 600 temporary foreign workers^{Footnote 43}^{Footnote 64}. While some foreign workers were infected prior to arrival and tested positive during their 14-day quarantine period, others were thought to have acquired COVID-19 in Canada^{Footnote 86}. A number of factors may have led to these outbreaks, including close physical proximity among workers and other socio-cultural factors, which are further discussed in Section 2.

Confined working conditions fuel transmission

Confined group working conditions among essential workers can fuel viral transmission, especially in situations where physical distancing between workers is difficult. For example, Canada’s largest single COVID-19 outbreak by the time of report writing occurred in a meat processing plant, infecting close to 1,500 people^{Footnote 87}^{Footnote 88}. In this regard, it is important to acknowledge the contribution of additional intersectional determinants, such as environmental and socio-cultural factors, which are further discussed in Section 2.

Group living conditions may promote viral spread

Confined group living conditions can create situations where physical distancing, good hygiene and sanitary standards are difficult to maintain, thereby promoting the spread of infectious disease. For example, by August 20, 2020, 360 COVID-19 cases were reported among inmates in 6 federal correctional facilities and 80 cases among correctional officers^{Footnote 64}. As of August 6, 1,496 COVID-19 tests had been conducted with incarcerated populations in federal custody, with 24% of these tests being positive^{Footnote 89}. The situation is also problematic for those without stable housing: in a Canadian study, the majority of surveyed communities reported difficulties providing adequate spaces to adhere to COVID-19 isolation and quarantine guidelines in shelters for those experiencing homelessness^{Footnote 90}.

Indigenous and remote communities face increased COVID-19 risks in the light of possible exacerbating conditions, such as limited access to clean water, lack of health professionals/services, a high prevalence of chronic diseases and crowded living conditions^{Footnote 91}. For instance, by August 2020, 22% of all COVID-19 cases in Saskatchewan were linked to an outbreak in the far north, in a community with a relatively high concentration of Indigenous peoples^{Footnote 92}. Despite facing an elevated risk, many Indigenous communities took measures and were successful in protecting their members from COVID-19 (see text boxes Limiting the transmission rates in remote and isolated northern communities and Indigenous populations and COVID-19: Examples of leadership, resilience and success).

Marginalization increased risk

While national data are not available, evidence is beginning to emerge to suggest that racialized communities who have been marginalized through structural factors (such as racism) may experience higher rates of COVID-19 infection. This is discussed further in Section 2^{Footnote 93}.

Protecting the healthcare system from being overwhelmed

Controlling a public health crisis requires collaborative decision-making across a complex set of health and social settings, often with incomplete or changing information and data. Learning from the COVID-19 epidemics in other countries where healthcare systems were being overwhelmed, Canadian public health measures were combined with efforts to increase and protect healthcare capacity. A variety of measures were taken by provinces and territories, including the cancellation of surgical procedures and planned treatments, and the procurement of medical equipment such as ventilators. At the same time, the implementation of strict physical distancing measures helped prevent intensive care units from being overwhelmed. A modelling study looking at mitigation strategies in Ontario concluded that “restrictive physical distancing” was likely to have the best success of decreasing intensive care unit (ICU) use as a result of COVID-19^{Footnote 94}. Epidemiological data indicates that the implemented public health measures, including physical distancing, were successful as there was a sustained decrease in the number of daily new national COVID-19 cases in late April and early May^{Footnote 42}. Between April and August 2020, overall ICU occupancy rates in hospitals did not exceed 65%, indicating that Canada’s ICU capacity was not exceeded^{Footnote i}^{Footnote 95}, as was the situation in other parts of the world, such as Italy or New York City^{Footnote 96}^{Footnote 97}^{Footnote 98}.

Canada's public health response

An optimal pandemic response is one that is rapid, decisive, adaptable and coordinated. Decision-making during a pandemic is complex and reflects an environment where knowledge is constantly changing, there is often a lack of or unclear research and evidence, data may not be standardized, and decisions need to reflect multiple needs. Within the Canadian context, the division of responsibilities between the federal, provincial/territorial and municipal levels of government, each with their own ability to make independent decisions, presents an added layer of complexity.

Preparedness planning takes place within a network of legislated requirements and emergency frameworks at all levels of governments and in collaboration with several international partners. The public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada has been guided by the Canadian Pandemic Influenza Plan: Planning Guidance for the Health Sector^{Footnote 99}. Federal, provincial and territorial governments worked together to update the plan in 2018 after the H1N1 pandemic to include new actions such as strengthened linkages across surveillance activities, epidemiology capacity and primary care.

The objectives of the plan are two-fold: first to minimize serious illness and overall deaths, and second to minimize societal disruption among Canadians^{Footnote 100}. To mitigate the threat to the health, social and economic well-being of Canadians of the pandemic, a “whole-of-government” approach was implemented. Canada’s response included simultaneous actions in economic, agricultural, social and health sectors.

Public health measures were selected based on pandemic planning in all jurisdictions including learning from countries that experienced outbreaks earlier than Canada^{Footnote 100}^{Footnote 101}^{Footnote 102}. Canada’s health sector response consisted of the following actions taken as part of an objective-driven response that began with a containment approach and transitioned to mitigation and control activities as dictated by regional epidemiology and local context (see Appendix 1 for additional details)^{Footnote 3}^{Footnote 100}^{Footnote 101}.

Border measures and travel advisories to slow the importation of new travel-related cases;
Case detection, contact tracing, communication and isolation, in order to identify and isolate or quarantine people at risk of spreading the disease;
Research activities to understand SARS-CoV-2, its effects and possible interventions;
Surveillance and predictive modelling to monitor the disease characteristics, spread and rate of growth to support evidence-informed decision-making for response planning and interventions;
Rapid outbreak identification and containment activities;
Provision of public health guidance across health, healthcare and non-healthcare settings to facilitate evidence-informed, risk-based approaches;
Frequent and consistent communication and outreach to promote public health advice and the importance of infection control strategies such as hand washing, maintaining 2 metres physical distance from others and wearing a non-medical mask or face covering when distancing is difficult; and,
Measures to minimize person-to-person spread (e.g., closing schools, non-essential work places and social meeting places).

Without a vaccine or effective treatment, meeting the primary goals of reducing the health impact while minimizing social disruption of COVID-19 has been difficult. Since COVID-19 is a novel disease, the implementation of broad community-based public health measures are critical to control the epidemic because, at the time of writing this report, effective pharmaceutical interventions (e.g., treatments, vaccine) are not available.

Activating the pan-Canadian public health response

**Figure 4. Timeline of the pan-Canadian public health response**

Whole-of-society approach

While the Public Health Agency of Canada has co-led coordination of public health actions with other ministries of Health and Public Health agencies across the country, other sectors have been instrumental in developing programs geared to maintaining economic and social stability through income supplements^{Footnote 107}, agricultural supports^{Footnote 108}, and border measures (e.g., maintaining essential supply chains and services)^{Footnote 109}^{Footnote 110}. Provincial^{Footnote 111}, territorial^{Footnote 112} and municipal governments^{Footnote 113} amended legislation and implemented measures to support public health goals. Community organizations^{Footnote 114}, businesses and manufacturers^{Footnote 115} and Canadians worked to change service delivery models and retool processes to create needed services and products (e.g., medical masks and hand sanitizers). These collaborative efforts were united in the overarching goal of slowing the growth rate of the epidemic by limiting the person-to-person spread and trying to minimize the social and economic disruption created by millions of Canadians being in lockdown.

The concerted effort between the federal, provincial and territorial governments to limit the spread of COVID-19 by closing areas exposing people to higher risks of infection (work, schools, and all but essential retail and services) resulted in high compliance by Canadians. According to a national survey, 9 out of 10 Canadians followed physical distancing guidelines in April, such as staying home and avoiding crowds and large gatherings^{Footnote 116} . High numbers of respondents also reported practicing physical distancing when out in public and this number increased from 87% in April to 92% in May, which was critical in reducing the spread of the virus. An international study using Google mobility data found that even small decreases in people’s mobility were associated with lower numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths. It was estimated that across included countries (one of which was Canada), on average a 1% weekly increase in people staying home led to about 70 fewer weekly COVID-19 cases and about 7 fewer weekly deaths. A weekly decrease of 1% in visits to public transit stations led to about 33 fewer weekly COVID-19 cases and about 4 fewer weekly deaths^{Footnote 117}. Further, research from the United States identified an association between school closures and decreased COVID-19 spread, though other simultaneous public health measures could have also played a role^{Footnote 118}.

While there continue to be regional differences across Canada, physical distancing measures, along with other public health measures, have had a positive effect: by early May, the number of new daily cases reported nationally began to decline^{Footnote 43}. Additionally, at that time, all provinces were showing a decrease in the effective reproduction number (R_t - the average number of people infected by each person at a given time during the epidemic) for the virus, demonstrating that transmission rates had declined^{Footnote 119}.

Communicating evolving public health science and actions

Accurate, timely and clear communication is a key element in the response to COVID-19. This includes sharing real-time information on the status of the epidemic and public health measures. Until a safe and effective treatment or vaccine is available for widespread and lasting COVID-19 control, it is individual and collective actions that will work to control the pandemic.

Throughout the pandemic to date, we have witnessed a number of communication challenges such as the:

Vast amount and varying quality of information: Canadians have been exposed to a deluge of information or infodemic, often unfiltered, from the professional news media, social media, friends and family^{Footnote 120}, including mis and disinformation. This underscores the need for public health officials to regularly confirm the state of the pandemic and outline priority actions.

Local context of a global pandemic: COVID-19 outbreaks across Canada have had different effects on different populations. Effective public health measures seek to recognize and target these local contexts and regional differences. In turn, information needs to be tailored and locally contextualized, while at the same time balanced with consistent key messaging being shared across the country.

Rapidly evolving public health science: In January 2020, what is now known as SARS-CoV-2 was a completely novel pathogen. Since then, the global research community has come together to fill the tremendous knowledge gap that is required to identify effective public health interventions. There are now estimates that over 19,000 scientific publications were released from December 2019 through June 2020^{Footnote 121} and others have suggested that the number of journal articles has been doubling every 20 days since January^{Footnote 122}. As the knowledge evolves so too must our policies, practices and approaches across all areas of the response.

Environment of uncertainty and fear: It is important to consider the impact of the high degree of uncertainty created by a population-wide health emergency. The scale and extent of the crisis can feel overwhelming and not surprisingly, there has been an increase in reports of distress across populations, worldwide^{Footnote 123}^{Footnote 124}. It is in this environment that Canadians receive evolving information and advice on the virus and the recommended actions to control it.

Canadians have reported high trust in public health officials, indicating that they turn to them to provide credible information during the pandemic^{Footnote 125}. Public health officials were quick to positively reframe epidemiological and social scientific concepts when they appeared to have unintended consequences^{Footnote 126}. For example, this included shifting “social distancing” to “physical distancing.” The general public was rapidly introduced to, and engaged with, scientific concepts that were previously unfamiliar including epidemic curves (#flattenthecurve or #plankthecurve), reproduction rate (R_t), percentage of positive tests, viral load, contact tracing, isolation and quarantine. Research is still evaluating the role of exposure to these concepts and their role in potentially increasing scientific and health literacy.

Responses to facilitate transitioning towards living with COVID-19

As long as COVID-19 remains a threat and the population remains at risk, multiple layers of prevention and control, including personal protective practices and public health measures, will be needed to ensure the ongoing control of COVID-19. Once the first phase of the epidemic was controlled, initial public health measures were relaxed in phases to reduce social and economic disruptions^{Footnote 3}^{Footnote 127}. Provinces and territories continue to monitor local, regional and provincial surveillance data and adapt their guidance and public health measures based on the epidemiology within their jurisdictions. As governments at all levels prepare for resurgence of the virus, lessons learned from applying blanket public health measures during the first wave need to inform planning and decision-making during subsequent waves. More restrictive public health actions can be applied in tailored ways in order to balance the risk of a resurgence with the health and social impacts of these measures and reduce societal disruption.

The following public health interventions are necessary when the virus is controlled yet still exists in communities:

Maintaining transparency by providing continuous and up-to-date COVID-19 related information and guidance;
Effectively identifying and isolating confirmed and possible COVID-19 cases and tracing and quarantining their contacts to minimize further spread;
Continuing to promote strong personal hygiene measures to limit risk of infection and spread to others;
Maintaining physical distancing guidelines and recommending the use of additional personal protection (e.g., wearing non-medical masks or face coverings) in situations as appropriate and where distancing is difficult; and,
Minimizing the possibility of case importation through non-essential travel^{Footnote 128}.

Multiple layers and varying degrees of public health measures will be necessary until safe and effective pharmaceutical interventions, such as a vaccine, become widely available^{Footnote 129}. As soon as there are resurgences that are not controllable with the measures listed above, more restrictive public health measures are required to protect the health of the population. This underscores the importance of the individual and collective actions required to keep work places and schools open, maintain routine health services and support social interactions. The Special Advisory Committee (see text box Activating the pan-Canadian public health response) has released a plan for the ongoing management of COVID-19. The plan is a longer-term common approach to provide federal, provincial and territorial health officials, Indigenous partners and health system leaders with advice on actions to undertake until the pandemic activity in Canada can come to an end^{Footnote 3}.

Limiting the transmission rates in remote and isolated northern communities

Northern communities have been hard hit during past infectious disease outbreaks^{Footnote 130}^{Footnote 131}. For these communities, there was a need to balance travel restrictions with the need for the movement of essential supplies and healthcare workers into the community. Federal, provincial, territorial and community leadership undertook concrete actions to successfully protect residents against COVID-19. By end of August 2020, there was little evidence of community spread - COVID-19 cases in the territories remained low and no COVID-19 deaths were reported. Some key actions are described below.

The governments of the Yukon, the Northwest Territories (NWT) and Nunavut restricted travel into their territories at the beginning of the pandemic^{Footnote 132}^{Footnote 133}^{Footnote 134}. The Yukon government closed its border to non-essential travel, while the NWT and Nunavut closed their borders to non-residents (with limited exceptions). Many remote and isolated northern communities also imposed strict measures such as checkpoints, border closures, lockdowns, etc. In Nunavut, travel between communities or populated areas was also not allowed even for residents. The NWT recommended that families who traditionally maintain camps or cabins on the land move there to implement physical distancing instead of staying in overcrowded communities. Support was provided for families who needed funds for the extra costs of supplies such as fuel and transportation^{Footnote 135}.

Many northern communities are also sites of resource extraction and face in and out migration of workers on a regular basis. In order to mitigate the potential for transmission in these communities, efforts were undertaken to minimize shift changes and to limit travel^{Footnote 136}. The NWT public health authorities developed physical distancing protocols for outside essential workers.

As of August 31, 2020, the NWT had recorded 5 cases of COVID-19; no local case has been associated with outside essential workers^{Footnote 137}^{Footnote 138}, and Nunavut is the only jurisdiction in Canada without a reported case of COVID-19^{Footnote 139}.

Section 2: COVID-19 is not impacting Canadians equally

It was critical to enact public health measures to control the spread of COVID-19 and to protect those at high risk for serious health outcomes. However, existing health inequities meant that some groups most at risk from COVID-19 were the same populations disproportionately impacted by public health measures. The impact of the pandemic crosses many spheres of life, from health and well-being to employment and income, influencing how we engage with others and where we spend our time. While the pandemic affects all Canadians, we did not all have access to the same resources and choices before or during the pandemic, leading to different health, social and economic impacts.

The health and well-being of people in Canada varied before the pandemic. Differential access to material resources, privilege and power, and the resulting health inequities, influenced COVID-19 morbidity and mortality (illness and death). These factors also drove differences in the impact of public health measures necessary to address the pandemic.

The many impacts of COVID-19 can be examined as being direct (i.e., from infection with SARS-CoV-2) and indirect, (i.e., those arising from the public health measures). To better illustrate the direct and indirect impacts of COVID-19 on Canadians and how these impacts varied across populations, we have adapted a conceptual framework based on existing health equity models^{Footnote 1Footnote 2Footnote 140}. Health equity models which explore the underlying conditions contributing to positive and negative health outcomes can help to clarify how disease can affect groups of people differently. This framework (Figure 5) explores how the determinants of health influenced the differential risk of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality by drawing on research which considered the factors that influence exposure, susceptibility and treatment in the context of influenza^{Footnote 141}. We then use the model to explore these factors with respect to the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

The adapted framework also helps explore the differential impact of public health measures implemented to protect Canadians during the pandemic. While public health measures created restrictions for all Canadians, some have privileges that allowed them to adapt to the restrictions while still protecting their health. For others, whose choices about work and housing were more limited, the restrictions meant even fewer opportunities to protect their physical and mental health while also meeting their basic needs.

This means that some populations, already experiencing poorer health and fewer opportunities to achieve good health, faced the pandemic at a greater risk of direct impacts (i.e., illness and death) and carried a greater burden of the public health measures.

**Figure 5. Direct and indirect consequences of COVID-19**

The health of people in Canada was inequitable before COVID-19

Inequalities in health outcomes such as life expectancy and the likelihood of contracting chronic and infectious diseases have been well documented in both Canada and around the world. These observed disparities are influenced by differential access to factors such as housing, income and employment^{Footnote 140}^{Footnote 142}^{Footnote 143}.

The structural determinants of health — such as social and economic policies, governance structures and societal values and norms — drive health inequities because they shape the ways that power, money, and resources are distributed in society which provide individuals with greater or lesser ability to have control over their health^{Footnote 140}. Stigma and discrimination are embedded in these systems and influence who has power and privilege. For example, people can occupy different positions on the social or economic hierarchy, based on how society treats them according to factors such as their perceived race, sexual orientation, ability, sex, gender, religion or age. The CPHO's 2019 Annual Report detailed research on the experiences of stigma and discrimination among Canadians and outlined the impact of these experiences on health^{Footnote 2}.

Canada has a history of systemic racism, colonization and discrimination^{Footnote 144}^{Footnote 145}^{Footnote 146}^{Footnote 147}^{Footnote 148}. Indigenous peoples in Canada continue to live with the legacy of forced displacement from traditional territories, residential school experiences of abuse and neglect and the disruption of traditional culture and practices, the trauma of which continues to affect their health and well-being^{Footnote 149}. African, Caribbean and Black Canadians live with Canada's history of colonialization and slavery and the resulting racism and discrimination^{Footnote 2}^{Footnote 146}^{Footnote 147}^{Footnote 148}^{Footnote 150}.

Social and economic policies and the rules that govern society (the structural determinants of health) can reflect bias and discrimination and reinforce the fallacy that some people are better or more deserving than others. These structures impact access to the resources and opportunities necessary to support well-being, including during a pandemic. This includes an influence over the conditions in which we live, such as^{Footnote 141}^{Footnote 142}:

material circumstances (e.g., income, housing, workplace conditions, neighbourhood characteristics);
psychosocial factors (e.g., social connections and networks, job stress);
biological factors (e.g., genetics);
health behaviours (e.g., nutrition, physical activity, substance use); and
the healthcare system (e.g., access and quality).

Differences in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality

Reports from around the globe have demonstrated that there are real differences in who is more likely to contract COVID-19 and the severity of their illness. Importantly, these differences are not random, but fall along the lines of populations that have historically experienced health and social inequities.

As the pandemic evolved in Canada, emerging research identified groups at greatest risk of COVID-19. This includes clinical data on the biological risk factors that increase the severity of COVID-19 illness, related to sex, age, comorbidity, etc. It also includes epidemiological data that highlights the underlying social, material and economic factors that may increase the likelihood of the infection risk and the severity of illness (see Section 1). By exploring how these factors influence the conditions in which different groups live, grow, work and age, we can see how the structures of society influence exposure, susceptibility and care related to COVID-19 for different groups of Canadians (Figure 5).

Researchers have examined the factors that contribute to differential exposure, susceptibility and treatment in the context of the impact of pandemics. Exposure, susceptibility and treatment are influenced by material circumstances such as housing and employment, biology and health behaviours, or access to and experiences with, health services^{Footnote 141}^{Footnote 151} . Stigma and discrimination also influence risk and resources^{Footnote 2}. By using these factors to explore how COVID-19 has affected the experience of people in Canada, we are able to unpack how experiences intersect to influence disparities in COVID-19 infection and illness.

Intersectionality and COVID-19

There are overlapping and compounding risks related to sex, gender, racialization, income, housing, employment, and other socioeconomic factors. For example, racialization intersects with employment: in Canada, approximately 41% of meat processing workers are members of racialized groups, compared to 21% of the workforce in general^{Footnote 152}. Elevated risk can also be shaped by the intersection of gender and racialization. For example, the vast majority of staff in nursing and residential care facilities, as well as home care, are women, including the majority of nurses' aides, orderlies and client service associates. From 1996 to 2016, the share of immigrants in these occupations grew more quickly than in all other occupations, from 22% to 36%. Of all Canadian workers in these positions in 2016, 31% were immigrant women and the proportions were higher in larger metropolitan areas such as Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary where over 70% of these positions were filled by immigrants, the majority of these immigrant women^{Footnote 153}. Further, 12% of all workers in these occupations were Black and 11% were Filipino despite Black and Filipino workers only making up 3% of workers in all other occupations^{Footnote 153}.

In Toronto, individual-level case data collected on community cases (not including LTC cases) from mid-May to mid-July 2020 revealed that racialized populations were overrepresented in COVID-19 infections, making up over 80% of cases (despite making up only slightly more than half the city's population)^{Footnote 154} . Racialized groups overrepresented in reported COVID-19 cases included Arab, Middle Eastern or West Asian people, Black people, Latin American people, South Asian or Indo-Caribbean people and Southeast Asian people^{Footnote 154}. Individuals from lower-income households (where the household income is less than $50,000) were just over half of reported COVID-19 cases, although only one-third of Toronto's population lived in lower-income households^{Footnote 154}. The City of Toronto also reported that over one-quarter of cases were among individuals living in households of 5 or more people^{Footnote 154}. While the reasons for greater risk among some populations are unclear, Toronto Public Health noted that they may be related to pre-existing health disparities, the stress of racism and discrimination, difficulty complying with public health recommendations due to roles as essential workers or overcrowding at home, as well as inequities in healthcare and social service accessibility^{Footnote 154}.

When public health data on COVID-19 cases in neighbourhoods in Montreal was analysed using census data, there were strong positive correlations between COVID-19 cases per 100,000 residents and the percentage of Black residents^{Footnote 155}. There were also correlations to the concentrations of residents who were healthcare workers, low-income earners and in unsuitable housing^{Footnote 155}. As of mid-May, 2020, there were 2.5 times more people with COVID-19 in the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods when compared to the most affluent^{Footnote 156}. A number of factors may influence differential rates; the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods have more essential workers (care attendants, clerks, cashiers, taxi drivers, etc.), more crowded or densely populated buildings, and little access to outdoor space for physical activity^{Footnote 156}.

These trends are similar to findings internationally. In England and Wales, accounting for age, Black males and females are more than 4 times more likely to die from COVID-19 than White populations^{Footnote 157} . For males of Bangladeshi and Pakistani ethnicity, the risk of death from COVID-19 was 1.8 times higher after controlling for age, socio-demographic characteristics and measures of self-reported health and disability; this was 1.6 times more likely among females^{Footnote 157}.

In the United States, racialized groups are more likely to test positive, be hospitalized, or die from COVID-19^{Footnote 158} . For example, Black and American Indian/Alaska Native populations have hospitalization rates approximately 5.6 times that of White persons, while Black and Hispanic/Latinx have a rate approximately 4.6 times that of White persons^{Footnote 158}.

Factors that shape the differential direct impacts of COVID-19

Many factors influence the differences in direct impacts, or morbidity and mortality, of infectious disease across populations, as outlined in Figure 5. This section examines social factors that can limit access to protective resources and choices using a model of pandemic health disparities developed for influenza. That research examined the structural and intermediary determinants of health by grouping them into differential exposure to the virus, differential susceptibility to infection, and differential treatment^{Footnote 141}^{Footnote 151}. By examining these three areas, we can use an equity lens to explore how COVID-19 has differential impacts across populations.

Differential exposure is connected to the material circumstances of life, as it relates to the inability to maintain physical distancing. This includes occupational factors such as the inability to work from home, access to sick leave, job security, reliance on childcare outside the home, etc. At home, exposure could be influenced by living in an urban area, living in a building with two or more units, having a larger number of children in the household, having a lower number of rooms than household members, and generally having a larger household size. Use of public transportation can also play a role in differential exposure^{Footnote 141}^{Footnote 151}.

Differential susceptibility is shaped by a number of biological factors that could influence susceptibility after exposure, including age, underlying health issues such as heart disease, diabetes and stress as well as health behaviours such as smoking or nutritional status^{Footnote 141}^{Footnote 151}. Many of these factors are related to the social and structural determinants of health and are not simply the result of individual choices.

Differential treatment can be affected by a number of factors related to access to and experiences with the healthcare system, including access to outpatient and inpatient medical care, financial and logistic (e.g., transportation, language) obstacles, quality of care, appropriate treatment and having experienced discrimination by the healthcare system^{Footnote 141}^{Footnote 151}.

Differential exposure to COVID-19

Exposure at work: Who can and cannot work from home?

Public health measures to close, or limit, in-person work for non-essential services/businesses were put in place to reduce the spread of COVID-19. Working from home is one significant way that Canadians can reduce their exposure to the coronavirus. However, there are considerable differences in who can work from home related to education, income, gender and age.

Working from home is strongly associated with educational attainment; two-thirds of primary earners with a bachelor's degree or higher can work from home compared to less than one-third of those with a high school diploma^{Footnote 159} . It is also connected to income, with both earners able to work from home in over 50% of two-income families in the top ten percent for earnings, while only 8% of two-income families in the lowest ten percent for earnings were able to have both people work at home^{Footnote 159}.

Generally, women are more likely to have jobs that can be done from home, partly because more men work in jobs such as agriculture or construction that cannot be done from home^{Footnote 159}. However, women are well represented in the healthcare sector, making up more than 86% of registered nurses and 40% of physicians working in Canada^{Footnote 160}. Healthcare workers are often employed for work which involves close or very close physical contact; in 2019, almost 90% reported these conditions of work compared with 50% of other employed Canadians^{Footnote 160}.

Age may also influence the ability to work from home. Just over 20% of young workers – those under the age of 25 years – are estimated to have the ability to telework, compared to almost 45% of those aged 35 to 44, 42% of those aged 45 to 54 and 38% of those aged 55 to 64 years^{Footnote 161}.

Exposure at work: How risky is work, for those who cannot work from home?

Emerging research has focused on (1) epidemiological data of infections or deaths linked to employment at individual- or neighbourhood-levels or (2) calculations of potential risk, based on physical proximity to others as well as frequency of virus exposure at work. From these data, we can identify occupations or working conditions that increase the risk of exposure to COVID-19.

In Canada, while data collection methodologies vary across the provinces and territories, to date, approximately 19% of cases of COVID-19 in Canada are healthcare workers and healthcare workers represent at least 27 known deaths^{Footnote 86}. Each province and territory includes different occupations within this category and we know that many outbreaks have occurred within long-term care facilities, with both residents and workers affected^{Footnote 104}.

Outbreaks have been identified at other Canadian workplaces, with limited national epidemiological data on the connection between occupation and COVID-19. However, research has identified the potential risk associated with various characteristics of one's job^{Footnote 162}^{Footnote 163}^{Footnote 164} as well as by employment type or quality^{Footnote 165}.

Some jobs place Canadians at greater risk of exposure, due to close contact with other people at work and the frequency of exposure to infection or disease^{Footnote 162}^{Footnote 163}^{Footnote 164}. In an analysis of these factors by occupation, alongside 2016 census data, Canadian research has identified occupations and populations that may experience greater risk^{Footnote 162}. The research assumes a context where all workplaces are open and employees are working as they did prior to COVID-19. In that context, the occupations that pose the greatest risk based on employees working in close contact with others and/or the level of exposure to infection or disease include health occupations, sales and service occupations, and occupations in education, law and social, community and government services^{Footnote 162}. Research found that workers in low-income occupations are working in jobs that put them at greater risk; this is particularly true for women, immigrants, and racialized workers^{Footnote 162}. Aside from health occupations, almost all other occupational classifications also involved differential risk by education level, with workers with a Bachelor degree or more likely to experience lower risks of exposure^{Footnote 162}.

While the research above is based on occupation types associated with greater potential risk, it is focused on a pre-COVID-19 context where all workers are at work. To understand the differential risks associated with work during public health shutdowns, it is necessary to focus on essential workers unable to work from home, as well as the protections, security and supports available to them.

This is particularly consequential for essential workers who are precariously employed. This is because workers in precarious employment — jobs outside of the standard employment relationship, meaning not full-time, permanent, and accompanied by benefits — are less likely to have important employment and economic protections, particularly among those who are low-income^{Footnote 166}. The absence of these protections is challenging at any time, but, during a pandemic, the consequences can be more severe and may increase risk of virus exposure and transmission. These disadvantages include economic and employment insecurity, a lack of paid sick leave, and the need to work multiple jobs to make ends meet^{Footnote 166}. For example, these factors were identified as consequential for personal support workers in long-term care homes^{Footnote 72}^{Footnote 74}^{Footnote 165}.

Meat processing plants emerged as common outbreak sites in Canada

A number of intersecting factors may influence risk to meat processing workers, including risks at work and at home. While there are no Canadian data at present, the Canadian Institute for Health Research announced funding to review the outbreak at a meat processing plant in Alberta^{Footnote 87}. Facility risk assessments in 19 American states allowed the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to identify common characteristics among meat and poultry processing facilities and their workers that might increase risk for transmitting or acquiring SARS-CoV-2^{Footnote 167}. This includes difficulty maintaining a two-metre distance, particularly on production lines, during breaks, and when entering or exiting the facility. Further, the nature of work — including the physical demands and pace — made it difficult to adhere to face-covering recommendations, and some sites were not adhering to heightened cleaning and disinfection guidance. The CDC also identified additional factors that influence risk, including the need for educating and training in multiple languages and problematic incentives that encourage workers to continue to work while ill (e.g., attendance bonuses, medical leave policies). The CDC further noted that workers at meat processing plants may be at greater risk because of additional factors beyond the work environment, including shared transportation to and from work, congregate housing, and high community contact with colleagues^{Footnote 168}.

Exposure at home: Group living (long-term care facilities)

Long-term care (LTC) homes provide 24/7 supervision and support for adults who need help with daily activities. There are other residential settings with fewer staff and supports, intended for adults who have fewer needs, and across the country these are known as retirement homes or assisted living homes. Cases and deaths in these settings have been combined in reporting by most provinces^{Footnote 169}.

In LTC, residents are reliant on others for essential needs and basic care^{Footnote 170} . Even when residents can be isolated in their rooms, staff must still move among residents to meet basic needs, often through care that does not allow for physical distancing (i.e., help with dressing, feeding and bathing). This close proximity facilitates viral transmission if protective measures are not taken^{Footnote 171}. Long-term care facilities can also be risky for residents because of the physical proximity of shared rooms, the challenges in ensuring physical distancing among mobile patients with dementia, chronic understaffing, precarious work conditions and employees that work across multiple LTC sites as well as insufficient testing and availability of personal protective equipment^{Footnote 72}^{Footnote 74}^{Footnote 170}.

Low staffing levels, which pre-dated the COVID-19 pandemic, created additional challenges and two provinces requested the assistance of the Canadian Armed Forces to deal with staffing shortages^{Footnote 172}^{Footnote 165}^{Footnote 173}. The impact of these shortages was exacerbated by visitor restrictions that curtailed the support provided by family members and volunteers^{Footnote 74}. Staff shortages meant fewer people able to attend to residents' needs, making it more difficult to monitor residents for COVID-19 symptoms or follow protocols for physical distancing^{Footnote 74}.

Older adults in LTC homes, as well as the healthcare workers who support them, have been seriously and devastatingly impacted. In an analysis of data in Toronto (up to May 25, 2020), after adjusting for age and sex, long-term care residents were 2.5 times more likely to test positive than the rest of the population, and the case fatality was 1.4 times higher^{Footnote 174}.

As of August 2020, approximately 80% of all COVID related deaths in Canada were linked to LTC^{Footnote 64}.

Ageism

Ageism is an ongoing challenge for older adults, perpetuated by prejudices, stereotypes and/or discriminatory practices on the basis of age. Ageism can also manifest itself as a failure to respond to the needs of older persons and to design systems and services that are inclusive for older persons. Ageism devalues older adults and views them as a burden rather than as a contributing and vital component of society that should be supported^{Footnote 175}^{Footnote 176}. Ageism denies the heterogeneity across older adults and contributes to paternalistic attitudes towards them^{Footnote 175}. Ageist beliefs were evident during and exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, with impacts ranging from the characterization of COVID-19 as the problem of older adults to our failures to better protect populations living in long-term care facilities^{Footnote 175}^{Footnote 176}.

Exposure at home: Group living (group homes)

Similar conditions contribute to risk in group home settings, such as living in close proximity with others and interacting with multiple care providers. People with disabilities are more likely to live in group home settings, in part due to underfunded or defunded community living programs^{Footnote 177}^{Footnote 178} . In addition to the group nature of their housing, people with disabilities may be at greater risk of contracting the virus. This is particularly true for people who need assistance with hand washing, who need support to be independent, who need support to understand or comply with physical distancing requirements, or who need to touch surfaces for support or information (such as in the case of blindness or impaired vision)^{Footnote 177}^{Footnote 178}^{Footnote 179}.

Exposure at home: Group living (shelters)

People experiencing homelessness may live in group settings, such as shelters or encampments^{Footnote 180}, which are often overcrowded and make physical distancing difficult^{Footnote 181} . People living in shelters or encampments may also not have access to the facilities and supplies needed to support public health protocols such as frequent hand washing and disinfecting of surfaces^{Footnote 182}. In addition, people experiencing homelessness have high rates of chronic physical conditions^{Footnote 183}, heightening the risk of suffering complications if they contract COVID-19.

Migrant workers/temporary foreign workers

As indicated in Section 1, there have been a number of outbreaks in Canada related to meat processing and agricultural workplace settings, which are common employment sites for migrant workers and temporary foreign workers. As a result of these outbreaks, provincial and municipal health officials have identified migrant farm workers as populations at risk of contracting the virus through community transmission^{Footnote 184}^{Footnote 185}^{Footnote 186}.

Migrant farm workers may face challenges with physical distancing, due to housing which features close proximity among occupants and shared or inadequate bathroom facilities^{Footnote 187}^{Footnote 188}. Migrant workers may also be reluctant to report symptoms or participate in testing due to fear of reprisals and economic loss^{Footnote 189}. They also face challenges with access to health care, including appointment availability outside of their work hours, transportation to appointments, lack of translation services, limited knowledge of the healthcare system, and lack of accessible public health information^{Footnote 187}^{Footnote 189}^{Footnote 190} . Advocates for migrant workers have pointed to structural issues such as the dependence on employers for housing and sanitation^{Footnote 187}.

Prisons

In a systematic review of infectious disease in prison systems in high-income countries, researchers identified a number of challenges that increase risk of exposure, such as overcrowding, the challenge of balancing security and health concerns, and people who withhold early symptoms to avoid additional restrictions^{Footnote 191} . Early analysis by the US CDC of COVID-19 in prisons suggested that the movement of staff members between correctional facilities and their own communities may pose a risk for virus introduction^{Footnote 192}.

These risks are particularly concerning given the health status of populations who are incarcerated. Research in Canada has identified the poor health of individuals who are incarcerated, compared to the general Canadian population^{Footnote 193}. High rates of chronic disease and immunocompromised health status, as well as the ageing population in federal prisons in particular, increase risks for populations who are incarcerated in Canada^{Footnote 194} . These issues exist alongside social determinants of health; for example, Indigenous and racialized populations are over-represented in the prison system in Canada^{Footnote 193}^{Footnote 194}.

The implementation of public health measures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 being introduced into prisons, or to control outbreaks, such as limiting visitors, managing physical distancing and limiting movement within institutions, have had unintended impacts on the health and well-being of people in prison by further isolating them^{Footnote 195}^{Footnote 196}.

Overcrowded housing

In addition to the specific factors associated with various group housing settings, overcrowded housing has been linked to COVID-19 infection rates in France^{Footnote 197}, England^{Footnote 198} and New York^{Footnote 199}^{Footnote 200}. In Massachusetts, researchers examined the social patterns of excess mortality rates during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and found that the surge in excess death rates was greater in areas with higher poverty, higher household crowding, higher percentage of populations of color, and higher racialized economic segregation^{Footnote 201}.

The City of Toronto has reported that people living in households of 5 or more people comprised 26% of cases, compared to 20% of Toronto's population, though this data does not necessarily reflect crowded conditions^{Footnote 154}. However, we do know that some populations are more likely to experience overcrowding across Canada, related to income, Indigenous status, and newcomer status. Among Indigenous populations, Inuit living in Inuit Nanangat and First Nations people living on reserve were most likely to experience overcrowding^{Footnote 91}. Refugee-led households in Toronto and Vancouver were also more likely to experience overcrowding than other recent immigrants^{Footnote 202} .

Some regional health networks have begun tracking COVID-19 positive test rates against census data to determine whether overcrowding is a possible factor in transmission so that targeted testing and public health responses can take place quickly^{Footnote 203}^{Footnote 204}^{Footnote 205}.

Ableism and COVID-19

COVID-19 has illuminated unfairness based on discriminatory beliefs embedded in our society, including ableism. Although Canada ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2010, over half of the complaints to the Canadian Human Rights Commission in 2018 were on the grounds of disability^{Footnote 206}. Ableism fundamentally devalues and neglects the lives and contributions of many individuals, raising serious concerns during the pandemic as some persons with disabilities may be at increased risk of acquiring COVID-19 or suffering from severe complications^{Footnote 207}. This risk increases when other intersecting vulnerabilities are present, such as older age, underlying medical conditions, and living in congregate settings^{Footnote 207}. Ableism is not new; persons with disabilities have long-experienced stigma and discrimination in their lives, including barriers to and interactions with the health care system; however, COVID-19 has amplified some forms of systemic ableism^{Footnote 207}. For example, blanket prohibitions of visitors at hospitals, group homes, and long-term care facilities may have adverse effects when a person with a disability requires assistance with vital services like communication, caregiving, or supported decision-making^{Footnote 208} . Additionally, the issue of medical rationing has been raised in COVID-19-related care, determining who does and does not receive vital support in the event of shortages, such as intensive care beds and ventilators^{Footnote 209}^{Footnote 210}.

Exposure on transportation

Risk of transmission may vary by transportation type, particularly for those who use public transit compared to those who use their own private vehicle or active transportation. Public transit may pose a risk because of the challenges of physical distancing in a confined space, the inability to easily screen passengers for illness, and the presence of many high-touch surfaces^{Footnote 211}. The role of different forms of public transit and COVID-19 remains to be clarified, with some research suggesting a link between them and other research indicating that any relationship between the two is due to other factors^{Footnote 212}^{Footnote 213}^{Footnote 214}^{Footnote 215}.

Differential susceptibility

Just as Canadians have different risk levels in terms of COVID-19 exposure, they may be at different risks for contracting the illness if exposed or for having serious complications. We have described how some Canadians experienced poorer health prior to COVID-19 and how these health differences are driven by determinants of health. These trends are also related to the specific pre-existing conditions that may increase COVID-19 severity: these may connect to the biological factors included in Figure 5.

Data collected to date have identified Canadians who are aged 60 and over as being at increased risk of more severe outcomes related to COVID-19 along with those who have compromised immune systems, and those with certain underlying medical conditions^{Footnote 54}. As of the end of August, 2020, available research data indicated that 86% of hospitalized cases (for which clinical information was recorded) reported having one or more pre-existing conditions^{Footnote 50}.

Differential treatment

As set out in Figure 5, the severity of illness due to COVID-19 may also be influenced by access to treatment (the healthcare system factor). While universal in principle, access to health care has been identified as a challenge for a number of groups in Canada that may face greater exposure and susceptibility to COVID-19, including populations experiencing homelessness^{Footnote 216Footnote 217Footnote 218}, racialized and Indigenous populations^{Footnote 145}^{Footnote 219}^{Footnote 220}, immigrant populations^{Footnote 221}^{Footnote 222}, migrant workers^{Footnote 190}, temporary foreign workers^{Footnote 223}, people with disabilities^{Footnote 224}^{Footnote 225}^{Footnote 226}, and populations living with low-income^{Footnote 227}^{Footnote 228}. Accessing relevant, meaningful and culturally safe health care is a challenge for many groups who experience stigma and discrimination due to implicit and conscious biases; a lack of respect for and understanding of historic and social determinants that influence health; and stigmatizing organizational cultures^{Footnote 2}.

Impact of public health measures in response to COVID-19

Beyond the direct impact of containing the spread of the virus, the public health measures being implemented to stop the spread of COVID-19 have had an effect on the health and well-being of Canadians. These impacts can be divided into those that affected all Canadians, those that may have disproportionately affected some populations and those that may have longer-term implications.

Overall impact on Canadians

The impact of stigma, discrimination, violence

In the context of an emerging infectious disease outbreak, there are multiple intersecting drivers of stigma and discrimination. Fear of infection can distort our thinking, erroneously linking disease to a certain population or place^{Footnote 229}^{Footnote 230}. When this fear connects with existing racial prejudice in society, the stigma of infection and the stigma of racialization are layered, creating a social stigma that can last far beyond an infection outbreak^{Footnote 230}.

While national data are not available, throughout the COVID-19 pandemic a number of police forces have issued statements about a rise in hate crimes against Canadians of Asian descent in their jurisdictions including the Ottawa Police^{Footnote 231} and the Vancouver Police^{Footnote 232}.

In a crowdsourced study on perceptions of safety during the pandemic, Statistics Canada reported that 30% of participants of Chinese descent felt that race-based incidents had increased since the start of the pandemic, compared to 18% among visible minority participants^{Footnote j} and 6% of non-visible minorities^{Footnote 233}. Researchers have also identified the growth in sinophobic behaviours^{Footnote 234}, anti-Asian hate^{Footnote 235}, and stigmatizing language^{Footnote 236} online during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results from a survey completed in Canada in March and April 2020 suggest that respondents of East Asian backgrounds — including Chinese, Korean and Japanese — reported poorer mental health and more discrimination during the pandemic than white respondents^{Footnote 237}.

Statistics Canada completed a study in early June that focused on stigma and the pandemic, exploring which groups in Canada are concerned about being the target of unwanted behaviours because of perceived exposure risk to COVID-19 after the loosening of public health restrictions. Overall, 20% of Canadians reported fear of being targeted. This figure was almost twice as high among immigrants (29%) than those who were born in Canada (17%). Among those who were concerned about being the target of unwanted behaviours, immigrants were far more likely (42%) to report that they were concerned about stigma based on their racial identity, when compared to the Canadian born population (9%)^{Footnote 238}.

Misinformation (including deliberate disinformation)^{Footnote 239} drives and exacerbates stigma and discrimination in the context of infectious disease. This includes inaccurate and stigmatizing myths about the origin of disease as well as stigmatizing depictions of affected groups. Research on the spread of misinformation, including information related to infectious disease, demonstrates that misinformation is common and often more popular than accurate information^{Footnote 239} . Misinformation, which is often personal and negative in tone, creates fear and mistrust which can increase susceptibility to misinformation. Research has found that lies can spread faster than the truth, and misinformation is very hard to correct once it has spread^{Footnote 239}^{Footnote 240}.

Loss of employment/decreased employment

The extensive slowdown in the Canadian economy as a result of public health emergency measures, including the closure of non-essential services, schools and daycare centres, impacted and continues to impact many Canadians through employment and/or income loss, both of which are key social determinants of health. Despite government wage support programs, in April, 5.5 million Canadian workers were affected by the shutdown, including 3 million Canadians who lost jobs and 2.5 million Canadians who had COVID-19 related absences from work^{Footnote 241} . By August 15, 1.8 million Canadian workers were affected by the shutdown^{Footnote 241}. While gains in employment have been made, recovery may be slow. In August, the unemployment rate was 10.2%, up from 5.6% in February but down from May’s high of 13.7%. In contrast, the 2008-2009 recession saw a rise of unemployment in June 2009 to 8.7%, up from 6.2% in October 2008, and it took approximately 9 years to return to pre-recession levels^{Footnote 241}. In order to understand the COVID-19 shutdown, it is necessary to examine who was most impacted at the beginning, who has most benefited from the gradual reopening, and who is still struggling.

Workers in lower-wage jobs

Of the jobs lost in March and April, employees in lower-wage jobs (meaning lower than two-thirds of the 2019 annual median wage of $24.04/hour) suffered the greatest losses (38%) compared to those in other jobs (13%)^{Footnote 242} . At that time, low-wage workers were more likely to be working less than half of their usual hours for COVID-19-related reasons, compared with all other paid employees^{Footnote 242}.

Analysis of payroll data for March demonstrated that the service sector was hardest hit by the economic slowdown, with the majority of these job losses among women^{Footnote 243}. Workers in the service sector are less likely to be able to work from home. From February to March, 41% of payroll employment declines were in the food services and accommodation, and wholesale and retail trades (two sectors with the lowest average weekly earnings)^{Footnote 243}. Almost 90% of the one million Canadians working in low-wage, non-unionized hourly paid jobs in April worked outside the home: two-thirds worked in food services and accommodation or wholesale and retail trade, industries where jobs frequently require close physical contact^{Footnote 242}^{Footnote 244}. In contrast, payroll employment and total earnings were almost unchanged for workers in higher-paying public administration, finance and insurance sectors^{Footnote 243}.

With gradual reopening across Canada through the summer, low-wage jobs have increased. However, in August, the employment rate for low-wage workers remained far lower than pre-pandemic levels (87.4%), compared with all other employees (99.1%, not seasonally adjusted)^{Footnote 241}.

Women

Emerging evidence suggests that these types of job losses will disproportionately affect women with small children and families since women are largely represented in the service and retail sectors and in the absence of childcare, they will be unable to return to the workforce^{Footnote 245}^{Footnote 246}^{Footnote 247}^{Footnote 248}. One Canadian study reported that women’s participation in the labour force dropped to its lowest level in 3 decades and 1.5 million women lost their jobs in the first 2 months of the pandemic^{Footnote 249}. As public health restrictions were eased in some provinces in May, there was a recovery of low-wage jobs; however, men were more likely than women to benefit (20.5% versus 5.2%)^{Footnote 242}. Gains in jobs were particularly low for women whose youngest child was less than 6 years of age, compared to women whose youngest child was between 6-17 or men with children 0-6 or 6-17 years of age^{Footnote 242}.

Research has demonstrated that there is a gender gap in employment between parents of school-aged children as a result of the pandemic, which is greater for low-income women since they already have fewer economic resources and vulnerable labour market positions^{Footnote 250}. Research on the labour market impact of COVID-19 in Canada demonstrated a substantial drop in the hours worked and employment of parents with pre-school and school-aged children^{Footnote 251}. In a Statistics Canada crowdsourced survey, 80% of participants with school-aged children aged 4-11 reported being very or extremely concerned about balancing childcare, schooling and work^{Footnote 252}. Changes in the labour force participation rate suggest that, as of August 2020, women were still engaging in non-employment-related activities, such as caregiving, at a higher rate than they were prior to the shutdown^{Footnote 241}. In August, 51.1% of teleworking mothers with a child under 6 years old reported concern that returning to their normal work location would create childcare or caregiving challenges^{Footnote 241}.

Workers who are racialized, immigrant and/or Indigenous

In July, Statistics Canada added a question to the Labour Force Survey, asking respondents to which population group(s) they belong. This has allowed for more detailed analysis on which groups are facing higher unemployment levels. While the unemployment rate in August, 2020 was 11.1% (not seasonally adjusted), unemployment was much higher among some groups, including populations who identified as Arab (17.9%), Black (17.6%), Southeast Asian (16.6%), and South Asian (14.9%). Southeast Asian (32.0%), Black (24.9%) or Arab (21.4%) employees were more likely to be in low-wage jobs, compared to those who identify as Chinese (17.4%) or those who did not identify as a visible minority or Indigenous (15.9%) (not seasonally adjusted)^{Footnote 241}.

In August, 2020, the employment rate for those born in Canada was closer to pre-pandemic levels compared to immigrants who have lived in Canada for more than 5 years^{Footnote 241}. Employment among Indigenous populations living off-reserve (91.4% of the pre-pandemic employment level, in February) has not rebounded as quickly as for non-Indigenous Canadians (96.7% of February employment)^{Footnote 241}.

Youth and post-secondary students

Job loss and decreased job opportunities as a result of the pandemic had an effect on post-secondary students who often rely on summer employment or work during the year as a major source of income. The employment rate for students between 20 and 24 years of age fell from 52.5% in February to 28.9% in April 2020^{Footnote 253} . Data from a Statistics Canada crowdsourcing survey indicated that over 70% of continuing post-secondary students were very or extremely concerned about the financial impact of COVID-19, with the most common concern being that they would use up their savings^{Footnote 253}. Other key concerns were increased student debt (47% very or extremely concerned), ability to pay for current costs (44%), pay for the next term’s tuition (46%) or be able to afford next term’s accommodation costs (43%). Among students who rely on research funding, 61% of doctoral candidates were very or extremely concerned about a lack of funding. Financial concerns were higher overall for students living alone or with roommates than those living with family^{Footnote 253}. Disruptions in funding for education could have longer-term impacts, particularly for those students who rely on extra-curricular work or research funding to support their education.

Youth (aged 15 to 24) have experienced significant and lasting impacts of the shutdown. In August 2020, employment for young women and men was at 84.7% of February levels^{Footnote 241}. Unemployment rates for young men (25.6%) and young women (20.2%) were higher in August 2020 than during the 2008/2009 recession (16.4% at its peak). Unemployment was much higher among youth who identified as a member of a group designated as a visible minority (32.3%, not seasonally adjusted), compared to youth who did not identify as Indigenous or with a group designated as a visible minority (18.0%)^{Footnote 241}.

Employment and health

Loss of income and employment is important for public health, as income and job loss both influence health and well-being. The evidence is extensive and clear on the connection between income and health^{Footnote 254}. Income inequality is associated with higher mortality rates^{Footnote 255}, poorer health^{Footnote 256}^{Footnote 257} and mental health outcomes^{Footnote 258}^{Footnote 259}. While income supports are essential, work itself is also important. Statistics Canada found lower life satisfaction among unemployed Canadians and noted that this relationship is about more than just money in that it would take a considerable amount to keep the unemployed at the same level of life satisfaction as the employed^{Footnote 260}. This is echoed by systematic reviews exploring unemployment and mental health^{Footnote 261}^{Footnote 262}, unemployment and health^{Footnote 263}, and unemployment and mortality risk^{Footnote 264}.

Inclusion

While working from home can be desirable to reduce viral exposure, it does not necessarily mean the employee has the proper equipment to perform their job adequately^{Footnote 224}. Some people living with disabilities reported their employer would not supply accessible technology or devices to allow working from home to be possible, forcing these individuals to bear the burden of purchasing equipment themselves^{Footnote 224}.

Impact on social cohesion and social connectedness

The public health measures put in place to reduce the spread of the virus have caused sudden disruptions in the social fabric of Canadians’ lives. In March, over 70% of Canadians who responded to a survey from the Canadian Perspectives Survey Series (CPSS) were concerned about maintaining social ties^{Footnote 265}. Concerns about the social impacts of isolation may be more acute for people who are worried about the financial impact of the pandemic. Of those who said they were experiencing major impacts from the pandemic on their ability to fulfill their financial obligations, 48% were very or extremely concerned about the impacts of COVID-19 on family stress from confinement^{Footnote 266}. By comparison, this was the case for only 1 in 5 people who did not anticipate experiencing significant financial impacts from COVID-19^{Footnote 266}. Of people who anticipated major impacts on their ability to fulfill their financial obligations, 61% reported being very or extremely concerned about the risk of civil disorder, compared to 32% among those who said that the pandemic would have no impact on their personal finances^{Footnote 266}. Concern about the family and social impacts of the pandemic were also higher among individuals with lower education: 60% of those without a high school diploma were very or extremely worried about the impact of COVID-19 on social ties compared to approximately 30% among those with other levels of education^{Footnote 266}. Immigrants were also more likely than those born in Canada to worry about the social impacts of the pandemic^{Footnote 266}.

Isolation associated with physical distancing may be particularly challenging for children, older adults, and individuals with disabilities. In a crowdsourced study by Statistics Canada, 71% of participants reported high levels of concern about their children's opportunities to socialize with friends, and 54% of participants were very or extremely concerned about their children's loneliness or social isolation^{Footnote 252}. While most older adults reported a high level of social support in 2016, some groups were less likely to have a high level of support, such as older adults with lower incomes, older adults living alone (as compared to with a partner), older adults in urban areas, male older adults, and older adults who are immigrants^{Footnote 267}. Physical distancing measures led to the suspension of community groups and day programs for seniors and some seniors chose not to participate in available services out of fear of becoming infected^{Footnote 268}. Isolation may also be a concern for people living with disabilities, particularly for the 21% of Canadians with a disability who live alone (as of 2017) or the approximately 20% of Canadians with a disability who do not use the internet^{Footnote 269}.

COVID-19 has drastically impacted the ways we commemorate important life events such as graduations, religious holidays and wedding ceremonies, resulting in many virtual celebrations. Notably, the pandemic has disrupted individual and collective rituals and ceremonies pertaining to dying, death, and bereavement. Public health measures have forced restrictions on travel, and limited visits in hospitals and long-term care facilities, altering the ways in which friends and family are able to say goodbye to loved ones at the final stages of life. These measures have also required people to modify the ways lives are traditionally honoured by adjusting ceremonies, funerals, memorial services, and faith-based or cultural rituals in accordance with public health measures. Additionally, quarantine and physical distancing measures may mean that physical support of others is limited, or unavailable, for bereaved individuals during the grieving process. While the long-term impacts of these adjustments are not yet known, research from previous pandemics suggest that those who suffer multiple losses related to death and interruptions to social norms, rituals and mourning practices, may be at increased risk for complicated grief^{Footnote 270}.

Cumulative impact of COVID-19 and public health measures on mental health

Mental health and well-being

In a crisis, it is normal to feel stress, fear and worry. The pressures and uncertainty of the pandemic can be overwhelming^{Footnote 123}. Many countries have been reporting higher rates of distress within their population^{Footnote 124}. Canadians face many pressures, from job and/or income loss to social isolation, health anxiety, worry for loved ones and — for many families— the concurrent strain of financial and family responsibilities.

The distress associated with the pandemic can influence mental health, which is a reflection of psychological, emotional and social well-being^{Footnote 271}. Normal reactions to the pandemic, such as stress and worry, are not mental illness. Mental illness —such as mood disorders or anxiety disorders — is the reduced ability to effectively function over a long period of time^{Footnote 272}. However, long-term stress can increase the risk of poor mental health and other medical issues^{Footnote 273}.

Using data from the Canadian Perspectives Survey Series (CPSS), Statistics Canada reports that self-perceived mental health^{Footnote k} has decreased during the pandemic, when compared to the 2018 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS)^{Footnote l}. In 2018, 68% of Canadians aged 15 years and older reported excellent or very good self-perceived mental health, but this figure dropped to 54% in late March/early April of 2020 (CPSS Wave 1) and to 48% in early May, 2020 (CPSS Wave 2)^{Footnote 274} . The difference in self-perceived mental health between women and men also increased during COVID-19. In the 2018 CCHS, 66% of women and 71% of men reported excellent or very good self-perceived mental health, whereas in the CPSS Wave 1, 49% of women and 60% of men reported excellent or very good self-perceived mental health^{Footnote 274}.

Among respondents of a crowdsourced survey, Statistics Canada found that proportion of respondents who indicated that their self-perceived mental health was worse since the onset of physical distancing was higher among Indigenous participants that non-Indigenous participants (60% compared to 52%)^{Footnote 275} . A greater proportion of Indigenous participants (40%) reported most days as “quite a bit stressful” or “extremely stressful” than non-Indigenous participants (27%)^{Footnote 275}.

The emotional impact of the pandemic is not limited to adults. Research has found that children’s physical and mental health are more compromised when they are confined at home, without outdoor activities and interaction with friends^{Footnote 276}. In their crowdsourced survey with parents, Statistics Canada found that 61% of respondents were very or extremely concerned with managing their child or children’s behaviours, stress levels, anxiety and emotions^{Footnote 252}.

There has also been recognition that Canadian healthcare professionals and frontline workers may be at risk of experiencing poor mental health as a result of the pandemic^{Footnote 277}. This follows reports from Italy, New York City and China indicating that many frontline workers treating patients with COVID-19 experienced negative mental health outcomes^{Footnote 278}^{Footnote 279}^{Footnote 280}. While frontline workers may frequently experience stress in their work, there are calls for increased support related to the unique pressures of working in a pandemic^{Footnote 281}^{Footnote 282}.

Informal caregivers are also being affected by the impact of the pandemic. Statistics Canada noted that in 2018, 25% of Canadians over 15 years of age were providing care to a family member or friend with a long-term health condition, a physical or mental disability, or problems related to aging^{Footnote 283}. While caregivers alleviate pressure on over-stretched health and social systems^{Footnote 284}, in the context of COVID-19, they often had to manage without clear guidance or personal protective equipment^{Footnote 285}. Many find themselves caring for someone at home without their usual support networks or community programs while others may be concerned about the safety of relatives living alone with decreased levels of assistance and support^{Footnote 286}. Physical distancing and other measures to control the spread of COVID-19 can contribute to feelings of isolation and affect the mental health of informal caregivers and those they support^{Footnote 287}.

Mental illness

Canadians living with pre-existing mental illness may be more vulnerable during COVID-19^{Footnote 288}. Isolation may cause the return or increase of symptoms and there may be disruptions in therapeutic care^{Footnote 288}. Issues with access to care may increase, since the mental healthcare system may face additional pressures, resulting in longer wait times for those who have already been underserved^{Footnote 289}.

We do not yet know the impact of the pandemic on suicide. Pandemic-related risk factors for suicide may include unemployment, social isolation and disconnectedness (particularly among older adults), increased alcohol consumption or family violence^{Footnote 290}^{Footnote 291}^{Footnote 292}^{Footnote 293}. In one survey, completed in May 2020, respondents who identified as Indigenous (16%), who were living with a disability (15%), or those with low-income (14%) were more likely to report having suicidal thoughts since the outbreak, compared to the general population (6%)^{Footnote 294}. This was a unique survey administered shortly after the emergence of COVID-19, however, data from the 2015 and 2019 Canadian Community Health Surveys suggest that Indigenous populations and lower-income populations were also more likely to report suicidal thoughts prior to the pandemic^{Footnote 295}^{Footnote 296}. For example, in 2019, Indigenous people living off reserve were more likely to report having had suicidal thoughts in the last 12 months (6%) or during their lifetime (25%), compared with non-Indigenous people (3% over the last 12 months, 12% during their lifetime)^{Footnote 295}.

Food insecurity and reduced access to healthy foods

Food insecurity, which can include being worried about running out of food, as well as missing meals or going without food is a reality for many people in Canada. Preliminary data suggest that income loss triggered by COVID-19 is increasing household food insecurity^{Footnote 297}^{Footnote 298} . Data from the Canadian Perspectives Survey in May 2020 (Wave 2, collected May 4-10, 2020) found that food insecurity was significantly higher among survey respondents during COVID-19 compared to the Canadian Community Health Survey 2017-2018 results (14.6% versus 10.5%)^{Footnote 298}. Canadians who were employed during the survey time period but not working due to closure, layoff or personal circumstances related to COVID-19, were more likely to be food insecure (28.4% compared to 10.7% of those who were working)^{Footnote 298}. Households with children were more likely to experience food insecurity (19.2%) compared to those without children (12.2%)^{Footnote 298}.

In addition to income loss, there are broader community factors that may influence food access. Some isolated communities are already struggling with precarious food supply chains, limited availability of fresh foods, and high food prices^{Footnote 297}^{Footnote 299}, a situation that could be worsened by COVID-19. Currently, food banks, which are an important resource for many food insecure households, are struggling to maintain and expand their capacity to provide emergency food to those in need^{Footnote 297}. With schools closed during shutdown periods, children may have also lost an important opportunity to access healthy foods through school food programs^{Footnote 300}^{Footnote 301}.

Disproportionate impacts on some groups

While all Canadians are affected by the requirements to physically distance, some groups who were already living with other health challenges may have been differentially affected by public health measures.

Substance use

Increased use of alcohol, tobacco, and cannabis

Data from the Canadian Perspectives Survey Series (CPSS) (Wave 1, collected March 29-April 3, 2020), indicates that the majority of Canadians over the age of 15 years did not change their use of substances during the early days of the pandemic. However, some Canadians reported increasing their use of alcohol (14%), cannabis (6.5%) or tobacco (3.3%)^{Footnote 302} . Reported changes did not differ by sex, but people between the ages of 15 to 34 were more likely to report increased use of each^{Footnote 302}. Increase in substance use was also more likely among Canadians who reported having fair or poor mental health^{Footnote 302}. A second CPSS wave (May 4-10, 2020) using the same data tools demonstrated that substance use continued to increase for alcohol (+ 5.2%), cannabis (+ 1.8%) and remained somewhat consistent for tobacco (0.6%)^{Footnote 116}. These results suggest that for some Canadians, the indirect effects of COVID-19 have included increased alcohol consumption.

The pandemic may have also placed additional strain on people with substance use disorders. Public health measures such as calls for physical distancing and limited trips outside the home may have increased social isolation and reduced access to services, such as in-person support groups and other programs^{Footnote 303}^{Footnote 304} . This is a particular consequence for the opioid crisis.

Worsening of the opioid crisis

Prior to the pandemic, there had been a 13% decrease in opioid overdose deaths in Canada between 2018 and 2019, suggesting that efforts to address the opioid crisis were making gains, particularly in British Columbia and Alberta^{Footnote 305}. Emerging evidence indicates that the COVID-19 pandemic has set back that progress, with recent increases in substance-related deaths and harms.

Jurisdictions across the country have reported increases in overdose deaths and non-fatal harms related to opioids and other substances, in part due to increasing toxicity of the illegal drug supply since the start of the pandemic. The situation is most stark in British Columbia, where there have been over 100 illicit drug toxicity deaths for 6 consecutive months from March to August, 2020, with the numbers for May, June and July, 2020 at over 175 deaths each^{Footnote 306}. The highest monthly death toll, in June 2020, was 181, up from 76 in June 2019^{Footnote 306}. First Nations people continue to be disproportionately affected by overdose deaths, with the number almost doubling in British Columbia between January and May 2020 compared to same time period in 2019. Specifically, First Nations people accounted for 16% of all overdose deaths; their overdose mortality rate was 5.6 times greater compared to other BC residents, up from 3.8 for the same period in 2019^{Footnote 307}. In July, British Columbia paramedics responded to a record high number of overdose calls (2706 or 87 a day, compared to a usual monthly average of 2000), and most were for males aged 21 to 40 years old^{Footnote 308}. Authorities in British Columbia have also reported an increase in extreme fentanyl concentrations meaning drugs are toxic at even lower doses^{Footnote 306}. Among overdose deaths where fentanyl was detected, approximately 14% had extreme fentanyl concentrations from April to August 2020, compared to 8% between January 2019 and March 2020^{Footnote 306}.

While British Columbia continues to be the jurisdiction most severely impacted by the overdose crisis, many other provinces, territories, and municipalities have reported recent increases in substance related harms and/or changes to the drug supply. Data on overdose deaths during the pandemic is not yet available for all jurisdictions, however, there are others reporting record high cases of confirmed or suspected overdose deaths, including Ontario^{Footnote 309}, Saskatchewan^{Footnote 310}, and Alberta^{Footnote 311}. Preliminary data from Ontario show that the number of confirmed and probable deaths from opioid-related causes increased by almost 50% from January (148) to May (220), 2020^{Footnote 309}. Alberta experienced a significant increase in opioid related deaths in the three-month period from April to June, 2020 (301 total), up from the previously recorded high of 211 deaths in a three-month period in 2018^{Footnote 311}.

If the contexts that influenced pre-pandemic overdoses continue, some groups will remain at disproportionate risk^{Footnote 312}. Evolving evidence of the determinants of overdose can be seen in qualitative research completed in 2017-18 with coroners, medical examiners, and toxicologists across eight provinces and territories identifying common characteristics among those who died of opioid and other drug-related overdoses^{Footnote 313}. Many of the people who succumbed to overdoses during that time shared “a history of mental health concerns, substance use disorder, trauma, and stigma; decreased drug tolerance; being alone at the time of overdose; lack of social support; and lack of comprehensive and coordinated healthcare and social service follow-up”^{Footnote 313}.

In the context of COVID-19, a conceptual model showing how the pandemic may impact substance use and related harms includes five interrelated domains: 1) substance use as a means of coping; 2) changes in social supports and networks, including changes to drug supply and access; 3) availability and accessibility of services; 4) increased risk of COVID-19 transmission among people who use drugs; and 5) increased risk of severe outcomes for people who use substances^{Footnote 314}.

Front line workers have suggested that fears of contracting COVID-19 may cause people who were previously using opioids with a friend, to use alone, decreasing the chance of intervention if they overdose and contributing to the increase in overdose-related fatalities^{Footnote 304}. Physical distancing measures have also led to longer wait times for supervised consumption sites since these facilities can accommodate fewer numbers of people at one time. At least one supervised consumption site in Ottawa dispensed with physical distancing measures after several clients overdosed while waiting in line to get in^{Footnote 315}. Limited access to some illicit drugs due to social changes related to COVID-19 has led to higher prices and adulteration^{Footnote 316}.

The Public Health Agency of Canada’s Centre for Surveillance and Applied Research has developed a simulation model of opioid use and opioid-related overdose death. Some simulations suggest that if the levels of fentanyl and fentanyl-like drugs in the drug supply increase, with reduced access to public health measures to prevent opioid overdose deaths, opioid overdose deaths may increase in 2020 beyond the levels seen at the peak of the opioid crisis in 2018^{Footnote 317}.

Safety and family violence

The suggestion to shelter in place may have provided additional risks for those who experience family violence including intimate partner violence, child maltreatment and elder abuse^{Footnote 318}^{Footnote 319}^{Footnote 320}. The physical distancing measures put in place and economic insecurity exacerbated during the pandemic can result in chronic stress and increased conflict, which have been demonstrated to be a risk factor for family violence^{Footnote 319}^{Footnote 321}.

Data collected at the start of the pandemic indicated that women were more concerned (10%) than men (6%) about the possibility of violence in the home^{Footnote 322}. In a crowdsourced survey, Statistics Canada reported that – while the majority of Indigenous and non-Indigenous respondents indicated they were not concerned about the impact of the pandemic on violence in their home – the proportion of Indigenous respondents who reported any concern (11%) was twice that of non-Indigenous participants (5%)^{Footnote 323}.

Impacts on children and youth

The home environment changed during COVID-19 due to school and child care closures, increased stress among caregivers and community members, limited access to services, prolonged physical distancing measures, and lost or reduced family income^{Footnote 324}. Many child welfare organizations have highlighted the significant decrease of child abuse or neglect reports, raising concerns that this may be the result of fewer detection opportunities, as children are likely to be isolated at home and without community involvement^{Footnote 325}. Moreover, children are staying home and spending more time online which may put them at an increased risk for online sexual exploitation and abuse^{Footnote 326}. Importantly, LGBTQ2s+ youth may be forced to isolate at home with homophobic/transphobic/biphobic family members and may face emotional and/or physical abuse^{Footnote 319}.

Access to services and shelters

Statistics Canada completed a survey with a sample of victim services programs in late-June and early-July, 2020. In the study context, victim services include services offered by police and court programs, community-based services and sexual assault centres. Among participating programs, 54% reported an increase in the number of domestic violence victims they served from mid-March to the date of the survey, whereas 29% reported no change and 17% reported a decrease^{Footnote 327}. Some regions have more specific data. For example, calls to the Vancouver Battered Women’s Support Services have tripled, while in Alberta, calls to specialized crisis lines for intimate partner violence increased by 30%-50% in the first month following the pandemic^{Footnote 328} .

Potential long-term impacts

Some of the immediately observed indirect impacts of the public health measures could lead to longer-term consequences. Other longer-term impacts may emerge with prolonged implementation of stringent public health measures. Many of these consequences merit increased study and monitoring to mitigate further unintended effects on health.

Long-term economic stability

Employment losses threaten economic stability for many Canadians. Household savings have declined in Canada over the past few decades so that some Canadian families likely have few financial resources to sustain them during the work stoppages implemented since March 2020^{Footnote 329}. Just over one-half of Canadians had enough savings to maintain well-being for at least three months, which suggests that a large number of Canadians do not have enough economic resources to withstand a sudden drop in income for an extended period of time^{Footnote 330}. Groups identified as being most economically vulnerable during a short period of joblessness include single mothers and their children (56%) and individuals living in families where the main income earner is under 35 years of age without a high school diploma (67%)^{Footnote 329}. Forty-five percent of older families where the main income earner is without a high school diploma are also at risk of financial vulnerability^{Footnote 329}. Families headed by an Indigenous person^{Footnote m} are less likely to have enough private sources of income or liquid assets to be sustained for 2 months without employment income (47%) as are 50% of those where the major income earner is a recent immigrant (came to Canada between 2011 and 2016)^{Footnote 329}.

There are also workers in Canada that are not accounted for in labour statistics nor eligible for income supports. For example, sex workers may have difficulty accessing emergency financial relief despite suffering a loss of income due to the pandemic^{Footnote 331}^{Footnote 332}, increasing their vulnerability to adverse economic outcomes.

Interrupted educational opportunities, differential access to distance learning

School closures may increase existing educational disparities between children from low- and high-income families. Many schools moved to online education models in order to continue the education process while closures were in effect. However, access to virtual education varies. This has potential consequences, since — in the United States and Europe — reduced instructional time has been associated with poorer academic performance^{Footnote 301}.

While the majority of households in Canada with children under 18 years of age had access to the internet (only 1.8% did not), 4.2% of households in the lowest income quartile (less than $40,000 per year) were without access compared to 0.2% of households in the highest quartile ($125,000 or higher)^{Footnote 333} . There are also fewer internet-enabled devices per household member in lower income households: 58% of households with internet access had less than one device per household member, but this varied from 63% in the lowest income quarter to 56% in the highest quarter^{Footnote 333}. The type of device is also important since mobile devices, such as tablets, smartphones, and e-readers, are primarily designed for receiving rather than producing information. Almost one-quarter (24.1%) of households in the lowest income quarter reported using only these types of mobile devices to access the internet, compared to only 8% in the highest income quarter^{Footnote 333}. Household access to other types of devices, such as laptops or desktop computers, may allow for greater ease in producing information such as essays or other assignments requiring research and writing, which means that children in households with only mobile devices to access the internet may face additional challenges. There are also differences in internet access between rural and urban areas of Canada: 59% of rural communities do not have adequate access to the broadband internet^{Footnote 334}.

The move to virtual learning may require greater parental involvement which can be challenging for lower-income parents who may have fewer opportunities to be involved in their children’s learning activities, due to multiple jobs and/or long working hours^{Footnote 333}^{Footnote 335}^{Footnote 336}. In a Statistics Canada crowdsourced survey, parental concern about their children’s school year and academic success varied by parental education, with higher concern among participants with a high school diploma or less (56%), a trades certificate or diploma (60%), a college, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma (54%), or a university certificate or diploma below the bachelor’s level (52%), when compared with participants with a bachelor’s degree or higher (42%)^{Footnote 337}.

Virtual learning may also not meet the needs of all students. For example, in a Statistics Canada crowdsourced survey, concern about school year and their children’s academic success was higher among participants whose children had a disability (59%), compared to parents of children without disabilities (42%)^{Footnote 337}.

Health system impacts

Early in the pandemic, governments across Canada prioritized efforts to reduce infection risk and increase available hospital capacity through reductions of in-person and non-urgent medical services. It is important to explore the impacts of these reductions, as well as the role that infection risk may have played in discouraging Canadians from seeking necessary healthcare.

Data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) demonstrate a decline in surgical procedures. When data from the final 2 weeks of March 2020 (the beginning of the “stay at home” period) are compared with the same time period in 2019, preliminary results (excluding QC and NU) show that there were approximately 73,500 fewer surgeries performed nationally, a decrease of 67%. Planned inpatient surgeries (-64%) and day surgeries (-75%) had larger decreases than urgent inpatient surgeries (-29%). Knee and hip procedures also showed larger decreases (-79%) than cardiac and cancer surgeries (-30% and -24%, respectively) suggesting that healthcare providers continued to prioritise urgent surgeries in the face of added pressures created by COVID-19^{Footnote 338}.

There is concern that people did not seek medical care, even when they needed it. Data from CIHI demonstrate a decline in emergency department visits in March 2020 compared to March 2019^{Footnote 339} . Reporting provinces^{Footnote n} recorded a 24% average decrease in visits compared to the same period the previous year, ranging from 13% fewer visits in the Yukon to 27% in Prince Edward Island^{Footnote 339}. The decline in visits corresponds to the time period during which all provinces and territories declared states of emergency and closed or limited non-essential businesses and services. Decreases in emergency room visits occurred through all triage categories, from the most severe (those requiring resuscitation, -14%) to less urgent visits (-29%) and non-urgent (-18%)^{Footnote 339}. This may suggest that people were choosing not to seek medical aid in the same way they had prior to the pandemic. At least one Canadian healthcare facility has reported a decrease in stroke patients since the start of the pandemic, with some patients self-reporting the choice not to seek treatment until their symptoms worsened because of fear of contracting COVID-19^{Footnote 340}.

Preliminary data on excess mortality related to COVID-19 indicate that there were higher than usual numbers of deaths reported in four provinces during April and May 2020^{Footnote 341} . Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec all showed increased numbers of deaths compared to the same time period over the past five years. Some of these additional deaths are directly related to COVID-19, however contributions from other causes not directly linked to COVID-19 cannot be excluded^{Footnote 341}.

There are other suggested impacts to the health system and patients. At least one non-governmental organization has suggested that access to abortion services has been compromised as a result of staff shortages, restricted service areas to abide by travel limits, the shut down of surgical abortion services and patient inability to travel due to risk of exposure or travel restrictions^{Footnote 342}. A national survey of Canadian pain clinics reported that patient access to care was limited as a result of COVID-19, despite telehealth options. Patients waited longer for care and reported increased pain, stress and medication (particularly opioid and cannabis) use^{Footnote 343}. A Canadian assessment of the implications of the pandemic on patients with cardiovascular disease suggests the possibility of future strain on healthcare resources as a result of the postponement of non-urgent medical appointments for these patients^{Footnote 344}.

Impact on physical activity

Physical distancing requirements – including gym closures and cancelled sports leagues – may negatively affect physical activity behaviours and increase sedentary activities and screen-time^{Footnote 345}. For example, more than 60% of Canadians reported spending more time using the internet and watching TV during the pandemic in early April^{Footnote 346}. In one survey, just over 40% of Canadians who reported being inactive prior to the restrictions imposed by physical distancing and the widespread closures reported being even less active after public health measures were imposed while just over 20% of active respondents reported becoming less active^{Footnote 347}. A decrease in physical activity could increase physical health issues such as the risk of weight gain and cardiovascular disease^{Footnote 348}.

For children living in urban areas, who do not have access to safe accessible outdoor spaces where they can maintain physical distance, the impact of physical isolation measures may increase disparities in childhood obesity risk^{Footnote 349}. Some researchers have suggested that in the absence of access to outdoor spaces, people with lower incomes, who may not have access to appropriate indoor spaces to engage in physical activity, may be disadvantaged in their ability to reap the benefits of exercise^{Footnote 350}. Limited physical activity as a result of public health measures to physically isolate may also have an impact on mental health. Research has demonstrated that people who were able to engage in physical activity outdoors were more likely to report excellent or very good mental health^{Footnote 351}.

Section 3: Moving forward from COVID-19

Both the direct impacts of COVID-19 and the indirect effects from public health measures have shown how interconnected our health, our society and our economy are. We have seen a commitment to work together across communities and across sectors to support each other through these past difficult months. We can maintain the momentum driven by this awareness and collaboration to address the challenges facing us today, as well as build a future that supports the health and well-being of all Canadians.

Priorities for action can be identified by drawing on what is known about the importance of key factors in determining health, the emerging research on COVID-19, and what we are learning from our response thus far. Transformation of key high impact systems that influence health can protect us now while creating a sustainable future in the face of other pandemics or health issues.

Crisis can lead to change: A health equity approach

Canadians have come together to respond to the COVID-19 crisis. This is occurring within families, across neighbourhoods, communities and businesses, and between all levels of government. The pandemic has asked much of Canadians, but our collective response demonstrates our capacity to create real and immediate change to protect each other. This level of collaboration and commitment demonstrates what can happen when we work together.

This pandemic has demonstrated that inequities in our society place some populations – and ultimately, all Canadians at risk. No one is protected from the risk of COVID-19 until everyone is protected. While learning from this pandemic is an iterative process, to go forward stronger, there are areas of collaborative and cross-sectoral action that can better prepare Canadians for future public health emergencies and their consequences, while ensuring that everyone has the opportunity to achieve their best health and well-being (see Figure 6).

**Figure 6. A health equity approach to COVID-19**

Adapted loosely from the work of the Boston Consulting Group^{Footnote 352}, this framework explores how a crisis can lead to opportunities for long-term and high-impact change. To integrate a focus on equity and health, the model draws on the values and principles from a human rights-based framework^{Footnote 353}, a Health in All Policies framework^{Footnote 354}, and a public health ethics framework (PHAC)^{Footnote 355}.

The Health Equity Approach to COVID-19 framework proposes work in 4 high impact areas based on the consequences of COVID-19 described in Section 2 of this report: (1) economic security and employment conditions; (2) stable housing and healthy built environment (3) health, education and social service systems; and (4) environmental sustainability (Figure 6). This work will need to be supported by a foundation of tangible actions to eliminate stigma and discrimination, strengthen cross-Canada commitments to robust data and research, clear public health communication, and collaboration across levels of government, sectors and civil society.

High impact areas of action

This section will explore actions that can lead to new ways of living and working. This will include identifying key issues, noting examples of innovations to date, as well as an exploration of next steps we can commit to working on together. These areas provide a framework for cross-sectoral action to centre health equity in pandemic initiatives today, as well as in our collective efforts to build a healthier future.

How we work

Income, employment and working conditions are key social determinants of health. As noted by the Bank of Canada, COVID-19 and the measures necessary to contain the virus, resulted in the “steepest and deepest economic decline since the Great Depression”^{Footnote 356}. Virtually all aspects of the Canadian economy have been impacted. While some economic indicators are improving, recovery from COVID-19 will take time, and the path forward — particularly if further closures are necessary — is uncertain. In addition to the unknowns about the future course of the virus, it is difficult to predict the extent of impacts associated with business closures, job losses, and potential changes in demand due to pandemic-related shifts in consumer priorities and behaviours^{Footnote 356}.

A shift of this magnitude creates an opportunity for reflection and action. Workplace exposure among essential workers, and the disproportionate employment or income loss experienced by some groups, reveal areas for potential action. These actions can reduce pandemic-related economic risks, as well as build a stronger economy for everyone.

As public health measures were implemented, and workplaces shut down, governments across Canada implemented emergency income supports for Canadians who had lost their jobs. Social and economic policy — including income supports, among others — can play an important role in mitigating the impact of income and job loss on health^{Footnote 357}^{Footnote 358}^{Footnote 359}. Federal, provincial, territorial and municipal efforts in these areas are important components of pandemic recovery and — more broadly — addressing societal inequities.

These initiatives have adapted over time to reflect the changes in public health measures and the needs of Canadians.

What we can continue to work on together

The pandemic emphasized a number of issues related to economic security and employment conditions. This includes the importance of stable and safe employment, as well as support for childcare or caregiving responsibilities to facilitate work.

As explored in Section 2, precarious employment (i.e., insecure jobs with few protections or benefits) can increase economic and health risks. Precarious employment is also more common among some populations, particularly women and racialized populations^{Footnote 166}^{Footnote 360}. Improving workplace protections, increasing the number of quality jobs (i.e., secure jobs with benefits), ensuring equitable access to quality jobs, and addressing the impacts of precarious work could support greater health among Canadians and strengthen our collective response to future waves or pandemics.

Protections at work

For Canadians who continue to work but are unable to work from home, workplace safety is essential to protect against COVID-19. Government workplace safety regulations offer important protections, particularly since research suggests that the greatest impact of COVID-19 was on workers with the least bargaining power, such as non-union, low-wage, female or hourly paid workers^{Footnote 251}. New regulations may be needed to address the risks associated with novel infectious disease workplace outbreaks, and regulations need to be planned with a focus on implementation, including enforcement, given the challenges of investigating during outbreaks^{Footnote 361}.

Workplace protections could be extended to support mental health, particularly for essential workers dealing with the stress of increased exposure risk^{Footnote 288}. Existing initiatives could serve as a foundation for this work, including the Mental Health Commission of Canada’s National Standard of Canada for Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace, which is a set of voluntary guidelines, tools and resources to help prevent harms to mental health at work^{Footnote 362}.

In addition to general recommendations regarding workplace safety, there are also specific changes that could better protect temporary foreign workers. This includes ensuring physical distancing can be achieved, providing personal protective equipment, proactive workplace inspections that are based on risk-sensitive selection of inspection sites rather than relying on complaints by workers, and accessible health information and care^{Footnote 363}^{Footnote 364}.

Paid sick leave is also essential to protect worker and community health, but only 42% of working Canadians who are older than 18 years reported having access to paid sick leave^{Footnote 365}. Access to paid sick leave was particularly low among workers in hospitality and construction industries, which generally involve in-person work^{Footnote 365}. Without paid sick leave, employees may lose income if they become ill and are unable to work. Without employment security, they may lose their jobs if they stay home when sick^{Footnote 361}. In either case, and particularly if they are economically insecure, workers may feel unable to comply with public health guidance to stay home when sick^{Footnote 361}. A systematic review identified how common infectious illness presenteeism is, specifically, with studies linking this to organizational factors such lack of paid sick leave, presenteeism culture, concern about disciplinary action (particularly job loss), as well as job and personal factors^{Footnote 366}.

Coming to work while ill carries additional community risk when individuals work at multiple job sites. This was most notably seen in long-term care homes, where many healthcare workers faced the economic necessity of multiple jobs in multiple institutions^{Footnote 165}. Prior to the pandemic, many healthcare workers in long-term care homes were working for low wages and struggled to find full-time or regular part-time jobs with benefits^{Footnote 165}. While the personal impact of precarious employment has been known for some time, COVID-19 in these contexts underlined its impact on the safety of the community.

Employment quality

Alongside initiatives to improve employee and workplace safety, broader changes could address other dimensions of precarious employment as a social determinant of health^{Footnote 367}. This could include initiatives targeting low-income workers in precarious jobs such as pathways to better opportunities, as well as income and social supports such as accessible childcare and affordable housing^{Footnote 166}^{Footnote 367}. It could also include addressing systemic discrimination which is limiting the opportunities available to women and racialized men and women^{Footnote 166}^{Footnote 367}. Employer practices can also be examined to better support workers in precarious jobs, particularly if transitioning them to more secure work is not possible. This includes access to employer-provided income benefits, other benefits such as paid leave and flexible hours, greater predictability in scheduling and number of hours, greater professional development, and greater social inclusion^{Footnote 368}.

Safe school and childcare

To be able to work, parents and caregivers need safe school and daycare options for their children^{Footnote 251}. Accessible and high-quality childcare has long been considered a vital prerequisite to work among parents and COVID-19 has emphasized this importance^{Footnote 250}. Attention to which workers are able to return to work, which are constrained by caregiving responsibilities, as well as the policy options necessary to address these caring responsibilities, will be important for the immediate and long-term career paths and earnings of parents^{Footnote 251}. This is particularly true for women^{Footnote 251}.

Where we live

For many Canadians, physical distancing requirements and associated shutdowns meant confinement in inadequate or unsafe housing. Overcrowded housing made it difficult or impossible to physically distance. For others, the pandemic created risks associated with living in residential environments, such as long-term care homes and group homes. People living with homelessness faced additional risks in shelters or encampments^{Footnote 181}. Individuals incarcerated in prison systems faced challenges associated with physical distancing and the impact of restrictions^{Footnote 195}. Physical distancing requirements, alongside the economic repercussions of the pandemic, created conditions that may have increased the risk of family violence^{Footnote 319}^{Footnote 320}.

Across all of these experiences, the place we live clearly emerged as a powerful predictor of our experience with the pandemic. Access to safe, stable, and suitable housing is foundational to mental and physical health^{Footnote 369}^{Footnote 370}^{Footnote 371}, during and beyond a pandemic. Adequate and safe shelter can support compliance with public health measures while better supporting the health and well-being of Canadians.

As COVID-19 spread across Canada, all levels of government were quick to implement measures to address the affordability and adequacy of housing. This included moratoriums on evictions during states of emergency^{Footnote 372}^{Footnote 373}, providing off-peak electricity rates^{Footnote 374}^{Footnote 375}, and leniency on mortgage, rent and bill payment deferrals^{Footnote 376}^{Footnote 377}^{Footnote 378}. Moreover, communities immediately recognized that the unsuitable living situations of some of the most vulnerable Canadians were conducive to the spread of the virus. Many municipalities successfully mobilized emergency housing, repurposing closed city buildings to manage overcrowding in shelters and to provide safe isolation opportunities for individuals who did not have adequate space to do so, such as those experiencing homelessness and temporary foreign workers^{Footnote 379}.

Self-isolation units in the Northwest Territories

As COVID-19 emerged across Canada, the Northwest Territories were quick to reserve 130 housing units in 27 communities across the territory for individuals who needed space to safely self-isolate. At the time of writing, all cases in the Northwest Territories have been resolved. After flattening the curve, the territorial and municipal governments collaboratively arranged to reallocate these self-isolation units as safe, affordable housing to clients of the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation programs. This response will effectively reduce issues of overcrowding, enhancing isolation measure effectiveness in the event of COVID-19 resurgence. Additionally, these housing units will help individuals experiencing homelessness by providing adequate and affordable housing and simultaneously reducing subsidized housing wait list times^{Footnote 380}. These types of adaptive solutions may be applicable to other vulnerable Canadians living in precarious or unsuitable housing.

Several initiatives were implemented to improve the safety of long-term care homes for residents and staff such as single-site work orders and adequate worker compensation^{Footnote 165}^{Footnote 170}.

Actions were also implemented to help identify individuals at risk of violence in their homes. For example, recommendations emerged for healthcare providers, including the use of “Safe Word” and “Signal for Help” campaigns to support more discreet inquiries about violence during telemedicine appointments^{Footnote 328}. Assessment recommendations were also released to support children and youth experiencing family violence, with guidance for pediatricians on how to assess potential violence in the home, including family stressors and coping strategies^{Footnote 381}^{Footnote 382}.

What we can continue to work on together

COVID-19 exposed fractures in housing safety and security, and created opportunities to improve living conditions for Canadians.

Housing for all

By demonstrating the role of housing in health and well-being, the pandemic underlined the importance of initiatives that take a broader lens on housing in the context of other health and social needs^{Footnote 383}. One such approach is Housing First^{Footnote 384}^{Footnote 385}.

Housing First

Housing First is an initiative, integrated in the service delivery of many community-based organizations, that underscores the importance of stable housing and provides a viable alternative to the traditional model of emergency shelters. This program moves people out of emergency shelters and into adequate and affordable long-term housing as quickly as possible, with no predetermined eligibility requirements. Once housed, tenants are supported to maintain their housing and are connected to community and social services based on their needs^{Footnote 384}. Research on Housing First indicates that it can have a positive impact on housing stability, physical and mental health outcomes, and quality of life. The success of Housing First can be amplified when systemic barriers which create homelessness and adequate, affordable housing are simultaneously addressed such as removing barriers to obtaining livable income, accessing health and social services, and increasing subsidized housing supply^{Footnote 385}. Current government initiatives for the prevention and reduction of homelessness build upon the inclusive principles of Housing First to provide support and funding to urban, rural, remote and Indigenous communities across Canada using an outcomes-based approach. This allows community-based organizations to provide assessments, prioritize individuals and families experiencing episodic or chronic homelessness and match them with necessary services based on their unique circumstances. This can also extend to prevention activities to reduce the number of people entering into homelessness by supporting those at imminent risk of homelessness and diverting people from emergency shelters to more suitable arrangements, based on their needs^{Footnote 384}.

Safe and supportive long-term care

The experiences in Canada’s long-term care (LTC) homes have revealed the importance of ongoing changes in this sector. Research into experiences at long-term care homes have identified recommendations to improve safety for residents and employees. These include minimum staffing levels, minimum education standards and continuing education for staff, full-time quality jobs (with workplace protections and benefits such as sick leave) that support workers as well as offer better continuity of care for residents, and improving infection control and prevention training, standards and strategies^{Footnote 7}^{Footnote 165}^{Footnote 386}^{Footnote 387}. Longer-term recommendations to improve LTC for residents and staff have also been identified and include: reviewing and enforcing LTC regulations, integrating healthcare into LTC homes, and supporting leadership and inter-professional teams, and attending to the built environment of LTC homes^{Footnote 386}. Some physical environment recommendations related to pandemic preparedness and response include private rooms, outdoor spaces, smaller units, good sight lines and communication systems, in-house food, laundry and cleaning services, and extra space as well as convertible space for times of crisis^{Footnote 386}. Investment in community health and social services that support older adults to continue living independently at home could also prevent the emotional, social, physical and financial hardships associated with leaving home to live in LTC residences^{Footnote 388}.

A home free of violence

Recommendations to support safe housing for individuals experiencing violence in the home during COVID-19 have broader relevance beyond the pandemic. Recommendations to respond to gender-based violence, including family violence, during COVID-19, include ensuring necessary programs are open and adequately resourced during lockdowns, that programs are accessible to all populations (including newcomers, individuals with disabilities, those with unmet housing needs), building public awareness about available services and correcting misinformation about service closures or restrictions, and educating essential workers to identify signs of violence, abuse or neglect^{Footnote 389}^{Footnote 390}.

Supporting Canadians transitioning from prisons to the community during COVID-19

Researchers from the CIHR Best Brains Exchange held in partnership with the Office of the CPHO identified a number of issues that are important to address to improve the health and well-being of incarcerated populations during a pandemic. Canadian justice and correctional systems reduced the number of people held in correctional institutions in order to reduce public health risk. Among other options, this included temporary or early release for those at low risk to reoffend, and alternatives to custody for those awaiting trial, sentencing or bail hearing. From February to April, 2020, the number of adults in federal, provincial and territorial custody declined by 16%. The decline varied across provincial and territorial correctional service programs, as well as by gender in provincial or territorial institutions. The female custodial population in provincial or territorial institutions declined 40%, from February to April, almost double that for the male custodial population (23%)^{Footnote 89}. Additional recommendations include ensuring safe housing, health services and community-based support systems for individuals released, as well as supports for those who remain in prison, including reintroducing visits and programs suspended during COVID-19 shutdowns (with appropriate physical distancing), reducing lockdowns to facilitate physical activity, and improving access to phone and video calling between prisoners and their support systems^{Footnote 195}.

Homes in healthy communities

A healthy built environment — including physical space, such as parks, transit systems, buildings, and other infrastructure — plays an important role in health and well-being^{Footnote 391}. This includes the accessibility of spaces to connect with community and engage in physical activity^{Footnote 392}, as well as environmental factors that can hinder or facilitate the transmission and spread of contagious diseases like COVID-19^{Footnote 393}. Restrictions in access to parks and green spaces during the pandemic may have particularly impacted families and individuals living in multi-unit residential buildings in urban centres, who do not have access to private green space^{Footnote 394}.

As provinces and territories re-opened, many cities adapted city infrastructure to encourage outdoor social and physical activities, while simultaneously respecting physical distancing protocols. For example, many communities closed select streets to traffic, allowing pedestrians and cyclists to exercise outdoors safely. Additionally, many restaurants, bars, and cafes with outdoor seating were permitted patio expansions to ensure patrons were able to safely dine at least 2 metres apart in a non-closed environment^{Footnote 395}^{Footnote 396}. The Canada Healthy Communities Initiative, launched by Infrastructure Canada was created to encourage adaptive, community-based solutions in response to infrastructure challenges posed by COVID-19, including safe and vibrant community spaces and solutions to support community mobility while physical distancing^{Footnote 397}.

Improving the built environment, particularly in historically underserved and underinvested communities, can help during the pandemic and beyond, supporting all Canadians to meet their basic needs and promote good health. Neighbourhood design, transportation systems, food systems and the natural environment are important elements to support health and well-being^{Footnote 398}.

Our health, social service and education systems

The pandemic limited access to health, education and social systems for all Canadians. However, the impact of this inaccessibility may have been particularly pronounced for Canadians who either generally rely on these services to help them meet their needs, who were less able to adapt to distance-based learning, or for Canadians who were significantly impacted by the pandemic but could not turn to health and social services for support^{Footnote 399}. As we recover from and prepare for resurgences of COVID-19 or other public health emergencies, it is important to reflect on how to build accessible and meaningful support systems for all.

What we can continue to work on together

Equitable access for reintroduced services

As health services are reintroduced, we can consider principles that emphasize – among other key considerations – key ethical considerations related to access^{Footnote 400}. For example, North American cardiovascular societies have identified the importance of fairness, so similar cases are treated the same while considering baseline health inequities, as well as consistency in the reintroduction of services to ensure access is not influenced by factors such as ethnicity or perceived social worth^{Footnote 400}.

Supporting digital access to care

In order to comply with physical distancing requirements, many health and social services quickly adapted to provide care from a distance through virtual care or telemedicine.

Rapid uptake of virtual care provided crucial continuity of care for Canadians. Across all provinces and territories, physicians were advised to provide telemedicine or virtual care, where possible^{Footnote 401}. Specialist services also adapted to virtual care^{Footnote 402}^{Footnote 403}^{Footnote 404}. A ‘Virtual Care Playbook’ for Canadian physicians was released in March, 2020 by The College of Family Physicians of Canada, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, and the Canadian Medical Association in order to provide guidance about safe, effective and efficient virtual care^{Footnote 405}. A shift to virtual services was also evident among community services organizations. A survey with Canadian charities reported that 54% of social service organizations shifted in-person programs online as a result of the pandemic, and 69% of health organizations did as well^{Footnote 406}.

Virtual care can provide opportunities to enhance access, even outside the context of a pandemic. For populations living with lower income who struggle with access, virtual care can address transportation barriers or having to take time off work for appointments, particularly if they can be offered after-hours so that appointments do not impact earnings^{Footnote 407}.

However, there are challenges to ensuring equitable access and – as we anticipate future waves of COVID-19, or future pandemics – it is important to ensure that everyone has access to these supports so that this innovation does not exacerbate health disparities. Older adults, rural populations, racialized populations, populations who require translation supports, people experiencing homelessness and populations with low socioeconomic status may experience lower digital literacy or face digital barriers to internet-enabled devices or high-speed internet required for video interactions^{Footnote 407}^{Footnote 408}^{Footnote 409} . Persons with disabilities may be more likely to face issues with telemedicine, including infrastructure and access barriers, operational and systems challenges, logistic challenges, communication barriers, and unique challenges related to their specific experiences with disability^{Footnote 410}. Racialized and newcomer populations may have additional concerns about trust in the context of virtual care, related to stigma and discrimination within health systems or – particularly for recent or undocumented immigrants – additional concerns related to confidentiality, privacy, and data security^{Footnote 407}. Healthcare providers may not be aware of these disparities, and may not consider how their patients and communities access or interact with technology^{Footnote 408}.

Suggestions to address some of these challenges include offering phone services rather than just online services, widespread advertising emphasizing privacy and security, as well as understanding and addressing digital literacy challenges associated with telemedicine patient apps or portals. Health and social services could also proactively identify potential access disparities, provide digital education and training, offer language interpretation, collect data on who uses virtual services to identify access issues and support low-cost broadband access^{Footnote 407}^{Footnote 409}.

Access to critical health services

While some health and social services were able to move online, this was not possible for a number of critical services. Many important health services were delayed due to the pandemic, including screening and treatment. Routine immunization will need to be reinforced, not only when a vaccine against COVID-19 becomes available, but to ensure that immunization across the life course is available to protect people in Canada against preventable illness^{Footnote 411}. Public health messages on the importance of vaccination will be critical as will flexible vaccine delivery methods that allow for immunization while supporting physical distancing. Other key elements include identifying missed vaccinations and vaccine delivery gaps, better meeting patient needs through a variety of times and sites for clinics and offering immunization at various points of contact with the health system^{Footnote 411}.

Other services, such as those addressing the opioid crisis, had to be reimagined to continue life-saving work during the pandemic. To support physical distancing measures and reduce risk of overdose due to using alone, Health Canada issued temporary exemptions for all provinces and territories in April 2020 that allow them to open new temporary spaces for the safe consumption of drugs without requiring an application to Health Canada^{Footnote 412} .

In March 2020, Health Canada issued an exemption, lasting until at least September 2021, from the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, to allow a number of activities by pharmacists to support ongoing access to opioid agonist therapy^{Footnote 413}. This includes extending, renewing and/ or transferring prescriptions and allowing pharmacy employees to deliver prescriptions of controlled substances to patients^{Footnote 412}. Health Canada also asked provinces, territories and regulatory colleges to consider improving access to opioid medications and allowing accommodations to support public health measures, such as take-home dosing^{Footnote 412}. Continued access to treatment can be life-saving: recent research from British Columbia identified that opioid agonist therapy had a clear protective effect on mortality, an association that grew even stronger after fentanyl was introduced into the illegal drug supply^{Footnote 414}.

The Government of British Columbia also released new safe supply guidelines in March 2020 to facilitate access to a wider range of prescription opioids, for individuals who meet specific criteria^{Footnote 415}. This protects individuals who use substances by supporting physical distancing as well as protecting them from toxic drugs in the illicit drug supply. While other supports – such as mutual aid or group-based treatments – may be limited due to physical distancing requirements, innovations such as safe supply can make a difference^{Footnote 416}. Researchers in British Columbia have also seen early anecdotal evidence that this approach can help individuals who use substances to avoid regular contact with the illegal market and can reduce other potentially high-risk activities such as sex work^{Footnote 417}.

The Canadian Research Initiative in Substance Misuse released 6 national guidance documents to better support people who use substances during the COVID-19 pandemic. These resources focus on supporting people who use substances in shelter settings and in acute care settings, the use of telemedicine for treatment services, harm reduction worker safety, strategies to reduce COVID-19 transmission in residential programs, and how to facilitate physical distancing for people who use substances^{Footnote 418}.

Continued innovations in harm reduction

We can work to better support individuals who use substances through additional harm reduction practices and policies. This includes adapted approaches to addressing substance use during the pandemic, such as practicing safer drug use to decrease transmission, accessing testing if symptoms of COVID-19 occur, avoiding using drugs alone but using physical distancing directives when pairing with another person, finding alternative ways to have safe drugs delivered if in isolation, and continuing to use supervised consumption sites^{Footnote 419}. Broader policy options include the decriminalization of simple possession of small amounts of illicit drugs^{Footnote 420}^{Footnote 421}^{Footnote 422}^{Footnote 423}. Substance use is a public health issue and decriminalization has been suggested as an approach to reduce the public health and public safety harms associated with using drugs by decreasing the stigma associated with illicit drug use and supporting access to services that reduce substance-related harms and support recovery^{Footnote 421}. Four elements of decriminalization were proposed by the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police: supervised consumption sites, decriminalization for simple possession, safe supply of drugs, and diversion programs^{Footnote 421}.

Support mental health

As we recover from the initial impacts of COVID-19, and prepare for future resurgence and other public health crises, it is essential that Canadians are able to access the mental health resources they need. Crises can impact the mental health of anyone and there are particular risks for individuals who faced mental health or substance use challenges prior to the pandemic, essential workers at increased infection risk, and those who have been infected^{Footnote 288}.

Efforts to increase awareness of mental health, mental illness and the pathways to care must continue. It will be important to identify those in need as well as to decrease stigma and discrimination for those seeking help. This includes screening for mental health issues, using a trauma-informed approach that recognizes the pervasive impacts of the pandemic and the resulting new or exacerbated mental health challenges facing patients^{Footnote 424}.

Current mental health systems require adaptations to continue to meet urgent needs, and to better support Canadians long-term^{Footnote 288}. There is expected to be considerable need for mental health resources to cope with the pandemic and its aftermath^{Footnote 425}^{Footnote 426}. Current and ongoing priorities include better meeting the needs of underserved populations, including technological innovation in service delivery, online outreach and psychosocial support, and continuity for essential in-person mental health services^{Footnote 288}. Telemedicine for mental health will require professional training and competency development to ensure quality of care^{Footnote 425}. Access issues also require consideration, related to patient digital literacy as well as the private use of internet-enabled devices^{Footnote 425}.

Virtual mental health care in practice

One example of a pre-existing virtual mental health service is Newfoundland and Labrador’s Stepped Care 2.0. The model involves integrating e-mental health interventions and walk-in single session counselling alongside in-person programming using an evidence-based, client-centred approach^{Footnote 427}. Another approach to telemedicine for virtual mental health support is the Wellness Together online portal (website and app). This new initiative, launched by the Government of Canada in April 2020, is dedicated to mental wellness and substance use issues, with the goal of connecting people to credible peer support workers, social workers, psychologists and other professionals for confidential chat sessions or phone calls^{Footnote 428}.

Strong community services sector

Canadians rely on the support of community service organizations to meet a wide variety of health, mental health and social needs. Since these organizations are already active in and connected to community, they are well-positioned to help strengthen the health and well-being of Canadians during and after the pandemic. However, surveys with Ontario non-profits and charities across Canada emphasize the challenges facing the sector as a result of the pandemic. The sector is dealing with decreasing revenue and donations, office closures and program cancellations because of physical distancing requirements, and human resource challenges related to volunteers as well as paid staff^{Footnote 406}^{Footnote 429} . For organizations who have continued to offer essential services, there are concerns about the lack of PPE^{Footnote 429}.

In a survey with charities across Canada, 42% reported having already developed new programs in response to changing needs^{Footnote 406}. Many organizations across the country have also become innovative in their response to the pandemic^{Footnote 430}. For example, a drop-in centre which supports sex workers in downtown Vancouver has converted a parking lot into a 24-hour respite space for women^{Footnote 431}. Canada’s largest pediatric illness camp held a ‘Virtual Village’ to deliver programs online after the pandemic forced the cancellation of summer camp^{Footnote 432}.

Recommendations to support the sector include emergency, core and flexible funding to enable community organizations to quickly respond to local needs, access to PPE for frontline service providers, and a role for non-profits in post-pandemic recovery planning^{Footnote 390}^{Footnote 429}^{Footnote 433}.

Resilience in education

School closures have illuminated, for many Canadians, the pivotal role of schools in not just learning and education, but also the social, emotional, developmental and physical well-being of children. Decisions to close schools and daycares, as well as if and how to reopen them, demonstrate the tensions between preventing spread of COVID-19 while meeting the social and educational needs of children and supporting parents to work. As we plan for future resurgences and pandemics, it is valuable to explore ways to improve virtual education for everyone and to build on the important role of schools in meeting the social and emotional needs of children.

As this report is released (fall of 2020) more information and evidence will be evolving on the role of children in COVID-19 transmission, as well as opportunities for innovation.

A number of recommendations have emerged to maximize the potential of distance learning. While a discussion of pedagogical approaches is beyond the scope of this report, it is important to address how to maintain the broader roles of the school system, particularly with a focus on equity. This includes ensuring that all students have necessary technological access and supporting the continuity of previously school-based food services and social services^{Footnote 434}. Other suggestions focus building a sense of normalcy and safety in distance learning in order to create an online environment conducive to learning, while teaching adaptive behaviours and ensuring teacher-student check-ins^{Footnote 435}.

As schools re-open, there is an opportunity to consider and support the broader social and emotional needs of children related to the pandemic. This is valuable, because children and adolescents are living through the crisis during critical biopsychosocial development periods^{Footnote 288}. Students may need time and support to rebuild their social and developmental networks at school before they can focus on educational goals^{Footnote 436}^{Footnote 437}. Open and empathic discussions, reconnecting socially, focusing on coping strategies, and communicating openly with students can all help students process their experience and build resilience^{Footnote 438}. A broader focus on trauma-informed practice in schools also offers a way to meet the social and emotional needs of students returning to school^{Footnote 435}. This could include flexible instructional practices, prioritizing relationships over curriculum in classroom management, sensitive approaches to discipline and a broader culture of self-care and support^{Footnote 435}.

Our environment

It is important to remember that COVID-19 is a zoonotic disease in its origin. Actions in the area of environmental sustainability help prevent zoonotic diseases, address food security and have other health and wellbeing benefits.

What we can continue to work on together

Understanding our relationship with zoonotic diseases

The rise of zoonotic diseases, caused by infectious organisms that spread between animals and humans^{Footnote 439}, and the emergence of COVID-19 illustrate the interconnected nature of all life^{Footnote 440}. Once a virus is established in humans, it can quickly spread globally, as we have seen with COVID-19. Conditions have existed and still exist for zoonotic diseases like COVID-19 to develop. Ebola, Marburg, SARS, MERS, HIV/AIDS, Lyme disease, Hantavirus Pulmonary Syndrome, West Nile virus, and Zika virus are all zoonotic diseases that have emerged in the past century^{Footnote 441}^{Footnote 442}. Zoonotic diseases represent 60% of known human infectious disease^{Footnote 443} and 75% of emerging infectious diseases^{Footnote 444}. Emerging zoonotic diseases threaten human and animal health, economic development and the environment. Although zoonotic diseases can impact anyone, people living in poverty or with financial constraints experience disproportionately the direct and indirect consequences of zoonotic disease^{Footnote 440}. This is due to many factors, including living closely to animals or wildlife, poor sanitation conditions and lack of access to clean water. Pandemics are a widely predicted consequence of how people produce food, participate in animal agriculture, and alter and interact with environments^{Footnote 440}. There is a need to examine aspects of industrialized animal production, and urbanization and invasion of wildlife habitats, where humans come in greater contact with wildlife^{Footnote 440}^{Footnote 445}^{Footnote 446} . Increased surveillance of human-animal interactions is needed to monitor emerging zoonotic diseases and pathogens of pandemic potential (e.g., avian and swine influenzas) as well as environmental changes that intensify close proximity^{Footnote 446}.

Addressing the issue of zoonotic diseases and putting solutions in place can be quite complex and require inter-sectoral efforts from the sometimes siloed sectors of environment, agriculture and health. Policies and actions put in place to deal with these diseases can be less effective without an inter-sectoral approach^{Footnote 440}. A One Health approach, the integration of human, animal and environmental health expertise and policy, is a holistic approach helpful for preventing and responding to pandemics as it considers the links between humans, animals, and the environment^{Footnote 440}^{Footnote 447}^{Footnote 448}.

Building sustainable food systems

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed structural inequities in Canada’s social protection programs and food production systems. People experiencing existing inequities, like poverty, will be the most affected by COVID-19 food system disruptions^{Footnote 449}. This pandemic reinforces the need to reassess food systems, including how we produce and process, in order to make them more accessible, sustainable and resilient^{Footnote 450}.

Canada’s agriculture sector is highly dependent on temporary foreign workers, who account for 20% of total employment in this sector, and farmers^{Footnote 451}. We need to ensure good pay and conditions for every worker along the food production chain, while also addressing the specific needs of temporary foreign workers^{Footnote 452}. Food systems can also be enhanced by encouraging community and local food production. Farmers, who are the foundation of our food system, benefit from land security and local demand for their products, which can provide greater market power^{Footnote 453}. Valuing agricultural production will support sustainable agriculture and allow farmers to pass knowledge from generation to generation and to new farmers from non-farm backgrounds, thereby create the conditions for stronger food systems^{Footnote 453}.

Foundational requirements for structural change

To ensure longevity and sustainability of changes to Canadian society, the following areas need to be strengthened.

Reducing stigma and discrimination

Stigma and discrimination prevent people from accessing the resources they need to be healthy and puts them at greater risk of disease, violence and injury. Throughout the report, we have explored how racism, colonization, ageism, among other forms of stigma, contributed to the disproportionate burden of COVID-19 among some groups.

It is necessary to address the stigma associated with COVID-19 as a health condition, as well as broader social stigmas that increase the risk experienced by particular groups, in order to change discriminatory social norms and improve health and well-being. As detailed in the “Action Framework for Building an Inclusive Health System”, developed for the 2019 CPHO Annual Report, there are a number of evidence-based initiatives that can reduce stigma at individual, interpersonal, institutional and population levels. This framework provides a roadmap to implement anti-stigma policies, programs, and actions to address the drivers of stigma, reduce discriminatory practices, and build an inclusive health system. Stigma related to COVID-19 may negatively impact specific communities, ethnic groups or individuals released from quarantine or treatment. This stigma builds upon pre-existing discriminatory social norms.

The Government of Canada has invested additional resources to support community-led responses to COVID-19 in Indigenous communities through the Indigenous Community Support Fund^{Footnote 454}. This funding is in recognition that Indigenous leadership, governments and organizations are best suited to identify and address unique challenges facing their communities. Supporting Indigenous-led services can also help address stigma and discrimination^{Footnote 454}.

Addressing misinformation about COVID-19, its origin, and transmission is important to combat stigma. This includes leaders and community members who publicly challenge racism and hatred.

What we can continue to work on together

In addition to the interventions detailed in the 2019 CPHO Annual Report, a number of recommendations and actions have emerged specific to COVID-19. These have relevance to addressing stigma in the context of pandemics and public health crises more broadly. As with other areas of stigma and discrimination, it is important to prioritize the perspectives and leadership of individuals who have experienced stigma related to COVID-19; this can help us improve public health measures^{Footnote 455}.

Health and social service providers can better meet the needs of all individuals when they provide culturally safe services. This could include provider self-reflection, addressing bias and discrimination, relationship building with service-users, understanding diverse perspectives and worldviews, and ongoing and meaningful training for staff and volunteers^{Footnote 2}. Additionally, health and social services are well placed to integrate principles of trauma- and violence-informed care, ensuring a strengths-based and collaborative approach to service delivery^{Footnote 2}.

COVID-19 vaccine development and delivery in Canada

A key objective of Canada’s pandemic response is to provide an effective and safe vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Potential COVID-19 vaccines are subject to a lengthy development process guided by the evolving state of evidence and important ethical considerations, to ensure the most effective vaccine for widespread use^{Footnote 456}^{Footnote 457}.

Vaccine clinical trials follow strict protocols, including the disclosure of potential risks and ensuring participants provide informed and voluntary consent^{Footnote 456}. Early clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccine candidates should start with a range of healthy adults with no underlying health conditions, followed by populations that may need additional safeguards such as children and adolescents, adults who are immunocompromised, and pregnant women^{Footnote 456}^{Footnote 457}. It is critical that trials include populations at high risk of susceptibility and/or exposure to COVID-19 to understand the vaccine’s effectiveness and impacts across these groups^{Footnote 456}^{Footnote 457}. Late stage clinical trials should therefore include individuals from groups who have experienced disproportionate COVID-19 impacts such as those with underlying health conditions, residents of long-term care facilities, as well as healthcare and essential workers. Whenever possible, the results of vaccine trial outcomes should be disaggregated by factors that contribute to health inequities such as sex, age, and health status to better understand comprehensive impacts across demographic variables^{Footnote 456}.

In addition to considering the evidence on the safety and efficacy of vaccines in different populations, the equitable allocation of vaccines where there is limited supply needs to take into account who is most at risk of exposure and severe outcomes, feasibility and acceptability of the vaccine and ethical considerations^{Footnote 456}.

Data for understanding and decision-making

Relevant and accurate data are required to effectively develop, implement, and evaluate public health measures to control the pandemic and recover afterwards. Data are also vital to understand inequities in society, to explore how these inequities influence health and well-being, and to inform and evaluate interventions to build a stronger and more equitable society. Generating necessary evidence requires both new areas of inquiry as well as the capacity to better disaggregate data to understand different experiences. Additionally, there are specific data needs in each of our high impact areas of action, particularly related to precarious employment, housing, and long-term care homes.

Work is underway to strengthen local and national data systems in response to COVID-19. On May 20, 2020, Toronto Public Health began collecting data on Indigenous identity, racial group, income, and household size for individuals who tested positive for COVID-19^{Footnote 154}. These data will be used to reduce COVID-19 inequities, through a variety of activities such as collaborating with relevant community agencies, targeted public health information, identifying areas for testing, and supporting isolation for those unable to do so at home. Another group in Toronto, Health Commons Solutions Lab, worked with partner organizations in North Etobicoke to gather information from key community stakeholders, including residents, to explore the experience of the first 6 months of the pandemic^{Footnote 458}. The goal of this work is to gather information and facilitate conversations between communities and levels of government in order provide suggestions on what communities need to best prepare for possible resurgences of COVID-19.

CIHR funded “Indigenous Health Counts in Urban Homelands: Estimating COVID-19 Incidence and Mortality among Indigenous Populations Living in Ontario Cities” in order to address the data gaps regarding the spread of COVID-19 among Indigenous peoples, particularly in urban areas. This research builds on existing studies that were led and completed by and for the Indigenous community^{Footnote 459}.

Statistics Canada has rapidly collected and shared data that explores the social and economic impacts of COVID-19. This includes crowdsourced data on a number of topics, as well as a new web panel survey called the Canadian Perspectives Survey Series. They maintain a hub for new data and publications, which is helping to provide key information about the impacts of the COVID-19 epidemic on Canadian society^{Footnote 460}.

Data collection initiatives are also underway between federal, provincial and territorial governments to, in the short-term, address critical data gaps with the goal to build the capacity and infrastructure to ensure Canada has the critical data needed to provide the best health and public health systems possible. This work will be carried out with the involvement of key partners such as the First Nations Information Governance Centre, the Canadian Institute for Health Information and the Canada Health Infoway.

Serological research

Knowing who was exposed to COVID-19 at the population level can help to track and identify vulnerable groups in order to implement appropriate preventive or mitigating measures^{Footnote 461}. Antibody (or serological) tests use blood samples to determine whether a person was previously infected by the virus. Higher than average rates for a given sub-population would indicate a disproportional COVID-19 burden and, possibly, point to an inequity. While serological COVID-19 tests started to be implemented in Canada in late spring 2020, one study conducted by Canadian Blood Services suggested that fewer than 1% of provincial residents, excluding Quebec, were exposed to the virus by mid-June^{Footnote 462}. Since not all Canadians who had the virus were tested (particularly those who may have had mild or no symptoms), the number of Canadians exposed to the virus is higher than what has been reported^{Footnote 463}. For instance, comparing serological test results to confirmed case counts in Quebec revealed that the total number of COVID-19 cases among the population was estimated to be more than 3 times higher than the number of reported cases by July^{Footnote 464}. On the one hand, these observations indicate that the implemented public health measures succeeded in keeping infection numbers low. On the other hand, they indicate that population immunity levels are too low to slow a resurgent COVID-19 wave (at the time of writing this report)^{Footnote 465}. Much remains to be learned regarding the relationship between antibodies and providing immunity to SARS-CoV-2. For instance, at the moment we do not know whether people with detectable antibodies are immune to a sub-sequent SARS-CoV-2 infection or still infectious to others^{Footnote 466}. Research is required to answer these key questions.

What we can continue to work on together

Ensure disaggregated data

In order to understand and address inequities, it is essential to collect, link, and disaggregate data related to socio-demographic factors, including geography, income, education, Indigenous status, racial and/or ethnic background, sex and gender, sexual orientation, age, disability status, occupation and migratory status. These efforts rely on the ability to integrate intersectional data from various sources, such as self-reported survey data with administrative data, which requires adequate expertise, technology and infrastructure^{Footnote 467}. The ultimate goal is to supply decision-makers and public health authorities with the information needed to identify the most appropriate interventions for a specific targeted group^{Footnote 468}.

Getting there requires trust and collaboration amongst data owners and providers. Partnerships that were forged or strengthened as part of the initial COVID-19 whole-of-government/society response will have to be sustained and expanded^{Footnote 3}. Standards and systems have to be put in place to ensure that any additional sensitive data, such as race and ethnicity data, is collected, stored, processed and used in ways that are not only uniform and secure, but also culturally safe^{Footnote 469}.

It is important to understand historic and contemporary context when revealing inequities, in order to situate these inequities within a determinants of health framework and to avoid harmful stereotyping and further discrimination^{Footnote 142}. To ensure accurate understanding of why differences occur, it is essential to engage with community to explore the factors that drive health and well-being. Similarly, data collection activities are best designed in collaboration with community, and where feasible, be community-led^{Footnote 142}. Data and research access and ownership is also critical to ensure that communities benefit from their own data.

Expand data collection in key areas

In addition to the capacity to disaggregate data to identify and address health inequities, the pandemic further highlighted the need for data on important health outcomes and determinants of health.

In order to understand and improve working conditions and the availability of good jobs, it will be important to collect more nuanced data on employment. This includes the nature and extent of precarious jobs in the labour market, multiple dimensions of precarious employment, (e.g., availability of paid sick leave), and how these non-standard jobs are impacted by crises like COVID-19^{Footnote 367}^{Footnote 470}^{Footnote 471}.

Housing conditions are always important for health and well-being, and all the more so when public health measures recommend staying at home as much as possible. To best support Canadians during physical distancing requirements and beyond, we need data on housing stability as well as housing adequacy for physical distancing or self-isolation. Data on some home environments are particularly urgent, including the experiences of populations in long-term care homes. This includes robust administrative data, as well as data on resident quality of care, resident quality of life, quality of work life for staff, and resident and family experiences^{Footnote 165}. Data such as these can support evaluation, accreditation, regulation and reform intended to improve long-term care homes^{Footnote 165}.

Data will also be necessary to help us understand and address the larger impacts of the pandemic and associated public health measures, particularly related to mental health. This could include the short- and long-term mental health impacts for individuals living with COVID-19, as well as the broader social and economic impacts of physical distancing requirements^{Footnote 288}.

Communication

The role of effective risk communication—the exchange of real-time information, advice and opinions between experts and the public who face threats to their health, economic, or social well-being^{Footnote 472} —cannot be overstated. Providing Canadians with the information they need, when they need it, where they need it and in the right language and format is critical to public health. Risk communication also helps reduce the uncertainty and anxiety associated with the pandemic, particularly when it is accurate, empathic, well-timed and provided alongside evidence-based containment measures^{Footnote 288}.

Risk communication enables people at risk to make informed decisions to protect themselves and others, and it includes the identification and management of rumours and misinformation^{Footnote 472}. Misinformation can impede the delivery of accurate pandemic-related information, thus hindering efforts by public health officials to fight the pandemic^{Footnote 473}^{Footnote 474}^{Footnote 475}. Moreover, misinformation can be extremely harmful by exacerbating racism and fear, and can result in unconstructive and dangerous behaviour^{Footnote 473}^{Footnote 474}^{Footnote 475}. Promoting effective risk communication and countering misinformation is challenged by a growth in distrust and skepticism towards government and science^{Footnote 476}. Social media has provided a platform for the rapid spread of misinformation, underlining the crucial role and responsibilities of mass media during public health crises^{Footnote 476}. In a study of the most viewed YouTube videos on COVID-19, 27.5% of videos — with over 60 million views at the time of the study — contained non-factual information^{Footnote 473}.

Disinformation surrounding COVID-19 poses a serious risk communications challenge. According to a recent survey conducted by the School of Journalism and Communication at Carleton University, conspiracy theories and non-factual information about COVID-19 are prevalent in Canada^{Footnote 477}. Over half of Canadians surveyed in the study, believed they could distinguish conspiracy theories and misinformation from factual information about COVID-19. However, almost half of those indicated that they believed in one of the conspiracy theories that were described in the survey. The study also found those who held those beliefs spent more time per day on social media than their counterparts^{Footnote 477}.

When COVID-19 first emerged, risk communication messages were straightforward, focused on physical distancing, staying home and hand hygiene. As the pandemic evolved differently across the country and new evidence emerged, the communication environment became much more complex. It becomes more difficult to make clear and definitive statements that are consistent across the country. Some Indigenous communities have developed their own targeted public health messages using social media to get the message across or to dispel misinformation^{Footnote 478}^{Footnote 479}.

What we can continue to work on together

Distrust in scientific expertise and the spread of disinformation is dangerous as we enter new stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. They may contribute to the opposition of a future vaccination and therefore to the potential for increased outbreaks. Anti-vaccination clusters have become highly entangled with undecided clusters online, leading to a growth in anti-vaccination views. It has been predicted that anti-vaccination views will dominate in a decade if efforts are not put in place to shift them^{Footnote 480}.

Maintaining trust is key to vaccine uptake^{Footnote 481}. In a crowdsourced COVID-19 survey, Statistics Canada reported that crowdsourcing participants with high levels of trust in the federal government were more likely to report that they were very likely to get a COVID-19 vaccine when available (77.3%, compared to 53.8% with a low level of trust in the federal government)^{Footnote 482} . A similar difference was found among participants with a high level of trust in federal public health authorities (76.4%) when compared to those with a low level of trust in federal public health authorities (44.4%)^{Footnote 482}. In addition to the impact of misinformation, vaccine hesitancy may be particularly high for a COVID-19 vaccine, since the vaccine will be new and expedited approval may create false beliefs that the vaccine was not properly evaluated^{Footnote 481}. Proper communication with key stakeholders and healthcare providers is essential to ensure as many people as possible will be vaccinated. This will necessarily include working to develop messages which are appropriate for specific contexts and groups and working with community leaders, media literacy experts, community organizations and other key influencers.

Indigenous populations and COVID-19: Examples of leadership, resilience and success^{Footnote 91}^{Footnote 483}^{Footnote 484}^{Footnote 485}

First Nations, Inuit and Métis face social and economic challenges that intersect to increase their risk of contracting COVID-19 and experiencing serious illness. The lasting impacts of intergenerational trauma continue to influence the health of Indigenous peoples in Canada. Social and economic inequities persist, increasing risk related to COVID-19. This includes challenges such as lack of access to medical care, geographic isolation, inadequate and overcrowded housing, as well as low-income and food insecurity. Some communities are unable to comply with public health measures due to overcrowding and lack of a safe water supply, and a number of communities concurrently faced the risk of fire or flood evacuations as well as the pandemic. First Nations, Inuit and Métis populations also experience higher rates of pre-existing health conditions, such as asthma and diabetes. A 2017 study found that rates of disability among First Nations people living off reserve and Métis were higher than for non-Indigenous people^{Footnote 486} . In fact, 32% of First Nations people living off reserve, 30% of Métis and 19% of Inuit had one or more disabilities that limited them in their daily activities. These statistics demonstrate the importance of looking at disability within the context of social and health inequities which are linked to discrimination, historic oppression and trauma^{Footnote 486}.

Despite these challenges, many First Nations, Inuit and Métis communities have shown leadership, resilience and community collaboration in responding to COVID-19. The success of these efforts can be exemplified by First Nations on reserve having lower rates of hospitalizations due to COVID-19 (8.4% compared with 13.4% of the general Canadian population) and lower rates of death (1.4% compared to 7.1%) for reported cases at the end of August 2020^{Footnote 487} Some specific initiatives included:

First Nations:

In British Columbia, the First Nations Health Authority (FNHA) launched the First Nations Virtual Doctor of the Day telehealth program for members of BC First Nations without access or with limited access to their own doctors. They also supported the rollout of a provincial framework to help people living in rural, remote and First Nation communities in BC access critical healthcare. FNHA sourced and distributed personal protective equipment (PPE) to frontline healthcare workers and worked with health stakeholders to provide up to date and culturally safe public health messaging to communities through their website^{Footnote 488}.
Given the risk of older age and COVID-19, the Six Nations of the Grand River in Ontario proactively worked to protect Elders, who are essential resources for knowledge and cultural traditions, by strictly limiting visits at lodges and local long-term care facilities. They also quickly began testing all Elders and other warriors who help take care of them. Community members were in charge of a campaign entitled “Protect our People” which worked to limit travel in and out of Six Nations’ territory. They also implemented a public health campaign through social media with health and safety information for community members^{Footnote 489}.

Inuit:

Some areas, such as Nunatsiavut, NL, imposed strict travel restrictions and cancelled large events early on in the pandemic which helped prevent any outbreaks^{Footnote 490}.
Nunavik, QC, had an outbreak early on, but it was able to control it by imposing a curfew and other measures (requirement of pre-approved travel, closing its airport, etc.)^{Footnote 491}.
In Pond Inlet, NU, when a case of COVID-19 was announced, the community responded immediately. Nunavut responded by restricting all travel to and from the community. Stores in Pond Inlet could only let in 10 people at a time and all non-essential services were closed. The case was then announced to be a false positive and those measures were lifted^{Footnote 492}.

Métis:

Many Métis nations launched support lines^{Footnote 493}, created benefit programs (income, rent, education, children, etc.)^{Footnote 494}^{Footnote 495} and distributed PPE, hand sanitizer and other items to its citizens^{Footnote 494}. Some Métis nations also supplemented regional capacity to ensure food security and supported families to ensure access to essential medication^{Footnote 494}.
In La Loche, Saskatchewan, the Métis Nation of Saskatchewan supported isolation units for doctors and citizens, distributed masks and gloves, coordinated shipments of food to limit the need for travel, and worked with friendship centres to allocate funding in response to the outbreak in the area^{Footnote 496}^{Footnote 497}.

Working together, at every level

During a crisis like COVID-19, it is essential that we all work together to protect and strengthen our communities.

Despite the uncertainty and challenges that COVID-19 has caused, there has been immense collaboration and adaptation among Canadians, across governments, in organizations, and within communities to ensure social and economic protection for those impacted by the virus.

Across Canada, people have volunteered their time, displaying acts of kindness and compassion to support friends, family, neighbours, and others in need with vital tasks such as grocery shopping, medication delivery or providing social support^{Footnote 498}. Others have dedicated their time or resources to ensure essential services, such as food banks, remain operational and accessible.

While widespread public health measures are typically directed by all levels of government, many communities have been quick to develop innovative and collective responses to challenges imposed by COVID-19, guided by the needs of their residents and situated within their geographical, economic and social contexts. These responses can create a collective sense of belonging among people, even while physically remaining apart^{Footnote 499}.

This commitment to each other and the nation was also demonstrated across governments in Canada. COVID-19 represents a complex intergovernmental problem that no one government can address. Success requires high levels of coordination and collaboration across governments and across sectors, and the nature of such a problem challenges the way different levels of government work together by making joint action necessary but without existing processes to draw upon^{Footnote 500}. Despite these challenges, Canadian researchers have noted the successes demonstrated by Canada’s intergovernmental COVID-19 activities^{Footnote 501}^{Footnote 502}. This included coordination and information sharing among public health officers, frequent communication between federal and provincial-territorial leaders, and a united front across governments^{Footnote 501}. This united front was also evident across political parties in Canada. In an analysis of the social media activity of Members of Parliament, Canadian researchers noted that members across political parties consistently emphasized the importance of public health measures^{Footnote 503}.

What we can continue to work on together

To build effective and strong governance systems, all levels need to work together across all high-impact areas described above. This involves partnerships across government, civil society, community and the private sector: a whole-of-society approach. This also requires strengthening the capacity of public health at all levels to respond and help coordinate actions to address crises and other critical public health priorities.

How we continue to work together will influence our success against any resurgence of COVID-19 or other pandemics. As we prepare to move forward stronger through COVID-19’s recovery phase, resilience will play a vital role in how we continue to adapt and adjust to the ongoing impacts of this crisis. We can continue to build upon the social, health and economic responses employed to support Canadians during this unprecedented time and improve these systems through broader systemic change. Simultaneously we can draw upon our individual and collective resilience, in preparation for future crises or disruptions^{Footnote 499}^{Footnote 504}^{Footnote 505}.

Table 3: Summary of evidence-based considerations for a health equity approach
Areas for action	What we can do going forward
How we work: economic security and employment conditions
Employment	Protections at work: enforce safety regulations related to infectious disease; mental health support (particularly for essential workers); greater protections for temporary foreign workers; benefits including paid sick leave; employment security Employment quality: pathways to better jobs for low-income workers in precarious jobs; income and social supports for workers in precarious jobs; ensure equitable access to quality employment; greater predictability in hours and scheduling Safe, accessible, affordable and high-quality childcare and schools for children and youth, to support parent and caregiver employment
Where we live: stable housing and healthy built environment
Housing	Housing for all: prioritize safe, accessible and affordable housing, recognizing connections to health and well-being (e.g., Housing First) Safe and supportive long-term care: minimum staffing levels, minimum education standards and continuing education for staff, full-time quality jobs with benefits such as paid sick leave, improve infection control and prevention strategies, enforce LTC regulations, integrate healthcare in LTC, support leadership and inter-professional teams, improve the built environment of LTC facilities Homes free of violence: build public awareness of available services; ensure necessary support programs are open, accessible and adequately resourced; educate essential workers on signs of violence Support for individuals who are incarcerated or transitioning to the community from incarceration: access to safe housing and health and social services for individuals released from incarceration; increased supports for those who remain in prison, including access to physically distant visits and programs, as well as phone/video connections to outside support systems
Healthy built environment	Homes in healthy communities: building safe and vibrant spaces for community connection and physical activity; supports for physically distant community mobility; develop built environments that help meet basic needs and promote good health including accessible transportation and food systems
Health, social service, and education systems
Digital access to care	Identify populations that may have less access to virtual care and mitigate barriers: offer both phone and online services, emphasize privacy and security of virtual care, address digital literacy challenges particular to virtual care apps or platforms, provide digital training and language interpretation, support low-cost broadband access
Access to critical health services	Share public health messages on the importance of vaccination, ensure flexible vaccine delivery methods Ensure equitable access to health and social services as they are reintroduced in re-opening phases of the pandemic Ensure access to substance use services such as opioid agonist therapy, naloxone, and supervised consumption sites Consider decriminalization of simple possession of illegal drugs
Mental health	Increase awareness of mental health, mental illness and the pathways to care Screen for mental health issues, using a trauma-informed approach Decrease stigma for those seeking help Better meet the needs of underserved populations Provide technological innovations in service delivery, online outreach and psychosocial support, and continuity for essential in-person mental health services Provide professional training and competency development for healthcare workers providing mental health telemedicine Mitigate barriers to access issues (digital literacy, private use of internet devices)
Community services sector	Provide emergency, core and flexible funding allowing community-based organizations to quickly respond to local needs Ensure access to PPE for frontline service providers Engage non-profits in post-pandemic recovery planning
Education	Distance learning: ensure technological access; support continuity of previously school-based food and social services; build a sense of normalcy and safety in distance learning; teach adaptive behaviours; regular teacher-student check-ins In-person learning: support the social and emotional needs of children related to the pandemic through a trauma-informed approach and focus on coping strategies; support flexible instructional practices; use sensitive approaches to discipline; encourage a culture of self-care and support
Environmental sustainability
Zoonotic diseases	Better understand our relationship with the environment: a One Health approach helps prevent and respond to zoonotic disease pandemics by considering the links between humans, animals, and the environment Inter-sectoral collaboration between environment, agriculture and health sectors
Sustainable food systems	Reassess food systems, including how we produce and process, in order to make them more accessible, sustainable and resilient Ensure livable wages and quality working conditions for every worker along the food production chain, while also addressing the specific needs of TFWs Provide land security to farmers and value localised food systems
Foundational requirements for structural change	What we can do going forward
Reducing stigma and discrimination	Prioritize the perspectives and leadership of individuals with lived experience of stigma and discrimination Culturally safe service delivery, including trauma- and violence-informed approaches to health and social services Evidence-based stigma reduction initiatives as identified in the 2019 CPHO annual report
Data understanding and decision making	Collect data disaggregated by socio-demographic factors Collaborate with communities on data collection and analysis, ensuring culturally safe and appropriate methods to collect, process, store and use data Expand data collection in key areas such as: precarious employment; administrative data as well as information on the experiences of staff and residents in long-term care; housing stability and adequacy; mental health impacts of the pandemic
Communication	Counter misinformation and disinformation related to vaccines, including a COVID-19 vaccine when it becomes available Maintain public trust in government and health officials by providing ongoing transparent and timely communication
Working together	Strengthen the capacity of public health at the federal, provincial/territorial, and municipal levels Maintain partnerships across government, civil society, community and the private sector to support a whole-of-society approach Build upon collective and individual resilience to better prepare for future crises or societal disruptions

The way forward

COVID-19 is a powerful example of the serious threat that emerging infectious diseases present to Canadians now and into the future. It also reinforces the interconnectedness between the health of Canadians and the country's social and economic well-being.

The pandemic has revealed deeply entrenched health and social inequities that exist in Canada. This is why our pandemic preparedness, response, and recovery actions need to prioritize health equity as a means to protect the people of Canada from the threat of COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Equity matters—not only to those who are unjustly excluded—but to all of us. This report describes the emerging broader consequences of COVID-19 including the wide reaching impacts of these historical inequities. Ensuring that a health equity agenda is an integral component of pandemic planning and response efforts means that the actions we take to improve economic security and employment conditions, housing and healthy built environment, health, social service and education systems, and environmental sustainability can better protect people in Canada from health crises and create resilience and lasting equitable opportunities.

This report offers evidence-based examples for action across a wide range of sectors. These can become elements of a health equity approach to incorporate into pandemic planning, response and recovery (see Figure 6). These actions can be supported through effective leadership at all levels and powerful social cohesion, supported by a robust public health system. These three catalysing actions, described below, provide the foundation for going forward.

Incorporating health equity into pandemic preparedness and response

1. Leadership and governance at all levels for structural change

When the health of a nation is largely determined by its economic and social protection policies, then pandemic preparedness and response plans need to be inclusive and comprehensive.

Health equity cannot be implicitly assumed in our general pandemic preparedness, response, and recovery efforts. It requires systematic planning, implementation, and measurement of progress. Leadership both within the public health system, and in other sectors, is essential to develop and implement these plans based on the necessary data and research. The participation and engagement of social service and community organizations, business leaders and policy makers, both within and outside of the health sector, are essential to any pandemic response.

Embracing a health equity approach to pandemic preparedness, response and recovery requires health, social, and economic leaders to have robust information to inform goals, objectives, and the required strategic alliances. Practically, this means that data needs to be stratified to understand specific population risks and strengths. Data systems need to converge so that sectors can understand the multiple needs (e.g., housing, safety and employment) of people. The progress of intersectoral actions should be measured and adjusted until demonstrable results are achieved.

By itself, the health system cannot lead us to COVID-19 recovery. Innovative, flexible collaborations and initiatives are needed to support those impacted by health disparities and set the ground work for a more equitable recovery. Cross-sectoral leadership tables have been created at all levels. This type of leadership is critical to maintain and focus on addressing health inequities. Current leadership tables can assess the effectiveness of the work undertaken together during this pandemic to inform plans to address on-going health equity gaps.

Lastly, our pandemic preparedness and response plans must be tested on a regular basis to evaluate their effectiveness, identify and address new and emerging equity considerations, and ensure sectors are equipped to respond to future pandemic threats.

2. Harnessing the power of social cohesion

The capacity of our communities to adapt to the COVID-19 crisis has been a remarkable achievement. However, our job is not done yet. Our society's cohesion is the key ingredient to moving through this pandemic successfully.
It takes everyone to follow public health advice and support sustainable change to keep the virus under control and to protect those at high risk. Public health leaders can continue to share information and evidence openly, provide clear and timely guidance for public action and work across sectors on prevention and control. Media organizations have a critical role to share trusted and reliable information in the face of public uncertainty and fear. Civil society organizations can continue to provide essential linkages to their networks to shape decisions and tailor solutions to the needs of their communities. As individuals, we can shape health-promoting attitudes, through actions like finding novel ways to reach out and connect with others and participating in initiatives to promote equity for groups like seniors, racialized populations and people living with disabilities or living in poverty. Lastly, policy makers can work together to create and implement policies and support community actions for sustainable change.

Social cohesion is the foundation of a resilient society—one that is built on the values of transparency, respect, inclusion and accountability. There will be many lessons learned as we examine the actions taken during this pandemic and there will always be room for improvement. Our opportunity to improve only exists in the present and future actions we take.

3. Strengthened public health capacity

Pandemics happen locally and impact people globally. Strong public health systems can provide fast, evidence-based, epidemic responses that are tailored to local contexts while, at the same time, addressing other critical public health priorities. Increased and sustained investments are required at all levels for the public health system to be successful.

Public health is the science and action of promoting health, preventing disease, and prolonging life. Just as it is critical to have a strong health care system, a strong public health system is needed so the two can effectively respond to health threats. Usually public health efforts are invisible to the general population. Now they have taken centre stage in all jurisdictions. Public health workers include epidemiologists, laboratory scientists, social and behavioural scientists, policy makers and practitioners. Priorities not only include the prevention and control of infectious diseases but other complex public health issues such as: preventing opioid overdose deaths, family violence, and deaths by suicide; addressing health adaptations to climate change; as well as supporting babies, their families, youth and seniors to live healthy lives in vibrant and inclusive communities.

The COVID-19 pandemic has shone a light on the critical importance of having a health system that is able to surge and adapt during a crisis while ensuring capacity exists to address on-going critical issues. During the COVID-19 response there have been significant investments in key aspects of public health capacity including laboratory, data and surveillance, contact tracing, stockpiles of personal protective equipment and rapid research to quickly fill gaps laid bare during the response. We must sustain the momentum gained and fill longer-term gaps as we move from response to recovery.

As a priority investment, we must commit to a long-term health data strategy that provides all sectors with the information they need to take action to directly address inequities. At the same time, we must have the needed IT capacity to improve our data analytics and make information accessible, while also facilitating collaboration at all levels. This also means better leveraging the multi-disciplinary knowledge generated across universities and through research funding organizations to inform the policy, program and communications actions we take. Lastly, for these priorities to be effective, Canada's public health system must have a sufficient and well-trained workforce at all levels. Public health cannot do its work alone but needs sufficient capacity to undertake our core mandate and to access surge capacity during emergency situations.

Investments in public health provide the greatest opportunities for preventing disease and ensuring that Canadians can live healthy and happier lives. When the public health system has the capacity and tools it needs, we all benefit.

Going forward

The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the complexities of responding to a global public health crisis. It has shown the power of collaboration and the commitment of Canadians united to control the virus. It has also shown the interconnectedness of our health, social, and economic policies and supports. How these sectors work together, with the engagement of civil society and communities, will influence our success against COVID-19 resurgences and help to mitigate the impacts of future health emergencies.

We are at a watershed moment. By working together, we can move from risk to resilience.

Appendix 1: Timeline of selected milestones and public health interventions (December 2019 to June 2020)

December 31, 2019

The PHAC was notified through its Global Public Health Intelligence Network (GPHIN) and the Program for Monitoring Emerging Diseases (ProMED)^{Footnote 506} of a pneumonia-like illness of unknown cause originating in Wuhan, China^{Footnote 103}.

January 22, 2020

Canada implements novel coronavirus screening requirements for travellers returning from China to airports in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver^{Footnote 42}^{Footnote 507}.

Residents are asked additional screening questions to determine if they have visited the city of Wuhan, China.

January 25, 2020

First presumptive confirmed case of 2019-nCoV related to travel to Wuhan, China (i.e., Ontario)^{Footnote 42}.

February 20, 2020

First COVID-19 case in Canada from travel outside mainland China (i.e., Iran) reported in British Columbia^{Footnote 508}.

February 23, 2020

First recorded COVID-19 case in Canada linked to community transmission^{Footnote 45}.

February 24, 2020

Alberta records first COVID-19 case in Canada linked to travel to the US^{Footnote 103}.

March 7, 2020

First COVID-19 outbreak at a long-term care home in Vancouver, British Columbia involving 79 cases^{Footnote 509}.

March 11, 2020

Canada surpasses 100 reported COVID-19 cases^{Footnote 510}.

March 12-22, 2020

Physical distancing measures are implemented across the country^{Footnote 511}^{Footnote 512}:

All provinces and territories declare a state of emergency and/or public health emergency
Non-essential businesses such as bars, restaurants, and cinemas close or have significantly reduced capacity
Gatherings are restricted (number of people in gatherings vary by province/territory)
All provinces and territories close schools
Advisory for those who can to work from home

March 13, 2020

The Government of Canada recommends avoiding non-essential travel outside of Canada^{Footnote 42}.

March 16, 2020

Government of Canada advises all travellers entering Canada to self-isolate for 14 days^{Footnote 42}.

March 18-19, 2020

Additional international travel advisories and border restrictions are implemented^{Footnote 42}^{Footnote 47}:

Entry to Canada by air is prohibited to all foreign nationals (except those from the United States)
Canada and the United States agree to temporarily restrict non-essential travel across the Canada-US border
International flights are redirected to only 4 airports (Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, and Montreal)

March 28, 2020

First reported outbreak among temporary foreign workers in an agricultural setting, involving 23 people^{Footnote 513}.

April 7, 2020

Council of Chief Medical Officers of Health issue a statement supportive of wearing non-medical masks as an additional layer of protection for other people in close proximity^{Footnote 514}.

April 14, 2020

Largest known COVID-19 outbreak reported at homeless shelter in Toronto, Ontario, involving 164 cases (as of May 8)^{Footnote 515}^{Footnote 516}^{Footnote 517}.

April 15, 2020

Lockdown in response to largest known outbreak at a correctional facility in Laval, Quebec involving 162 cases (as of July 22, 2020)^{Footnote 518}^{Footnote 519}.

April 17, 2020

First reported COVID-19 outbreak in an isolated northern community in Saskatchewan, affecting 117 residents (as of May 8, 2020)^{Footnote 520}^{Footnote 521}.

April 24, 2020

New Brunswick is the first province to ease physical distancing restrictions^{Footnote 522}.

May 6, 2020

Alberta reports a COVID-19 outbreak at a meat processing plant, which becomes the largest outbreak at a single location in Canada (by the end of August) with 1,560 people confirmed^{Footnote 523}^{Footnote 524}.

June 17, 2020

First COVID-19 outbreak in a religious-cultural community declared in Saskatchewan, involving 285 people by the end of August^{Footnote 64}^{Footnote 525}.

Appendix 2: Methodology

Process

As with past years, the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada's (CPHO) report was drafted based on a review of the best available evidence, prioritizing – where possible – Canadian research and representative data. However, the evidence base related to COVID-19 is very different. The pandemic sparked an urgent global research agenda, with a priority on sharing findings through open access to pre-prints, commentaries, rapid reviews, and peer-reviewed publications. The international commitment to generating and sharing research has been invaluable for knowledge generation across the globe, and an example of the meaningful collaboration sparked by the pandemic.

The rapid development of information about COVID-19 and its impacts required a different approach from the Office of the CPHO. Instead of completing a rapid review of publications based on a point-in-time search, the identification and synthesis of new research occurred during the entire writing process. Because the research was continuously developing, sources beyond systemic reviews were required, including primary research through peer-reviewed publications, pre-prints, grey literature, and expert consultation. The vast scope of pandemic impacts prompted high-level review of multiple topics, rather than deep dives into one key issue. Finally, the ever-developing state of knowledge about how to address the impacts of COVID-19 encouraged a focus on broader approaches and principles, rather than on specific interventions.

Knowledge – from research, academic expertise, and traditional ways of knowing – was identified through:

Ongoing and frequent literature searches, completed by sub-topic using online databases such as Medline and Scopus, as well as identifying new research through COVID-19 collections maintained by various academic publishers, such as BMJ, the Lancet, and Elsevier;
A review of municipal and provincial public health publications, particularly epidemiological and public survey reports;
Epidemiological information gathered through COVID-19 case information shared with the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) by provincial/territorial governments and national research networks as well as review of publicly reported data from provincial and territorial websites, press briefings, and media reports;
A review of COVID-19 related research completed by Statistics Canada;
An engagement session held with the Remote and Isolated Communities Working Group, of the Public Health Network's Special Advisory Committee on COVID-19;
Collaboration with internal and external expert stakeholders, including the Centre for Surveillance and Applied Research (PHAC), the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI); and
A Best Brains Exchange meeting held with the Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR).

Limitations

Scope

The 2020 CPHO Annual Report explores the broad impacts of COVID-19 as well as the variety of risk factors. Since the scope of the report is to provide an overview, there are necessary restrictions on the level of detail provided in each section. As a result, discussions of risk and impact are not exhaustive and reflect groups and settings where there was evidence to support a review, either nationally or internationally to serve as an example for discussion. The scope of evidence review for Section 3 was also influenced by these limitations, with a particular focus in this section on research emerging from the pandemic about how to improve the social, economic, and health conditions of Canadians. Each of these fields has a vast and detailed evidence base beyond the pandemic that we were not always able to review or include given the limited amount of time available.

Literature search

The searches conducted were not exhaustive and are unlikely to have captured all relevant literature, given the rapid pace of research and publication and the broad scope of the report. Only literature published in English and French was reviewed. A detailed assessment of study quality and risk of bias was not conducted in this review, and this may be particularly consequential given the pre-print nature of some references.

Language

In drawing on research related to different ethnocultural communities and their experiences of health generally, and to COVID-19 specifically, we have used the terminology included in the source documents (e.g., Black, African-Canadian).

Acknowledgements

Many people and organizations provided invaluable insights and advice in the development of this report.

I would like to express my gratitude to expert advisors who provided strategic advice and guidance in framing the report and reading drafts:

Dr. Karen Grimsrud, Former Chief Medical Officer of Health, Province of Alberta
Dr. David Mowat, Former Medical Officer of Health, Peel Health Region, Ontario
Dr. Cory Neudorf, Professor, Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan and, Medical Director, Health Surveillance and Reporting, Saskatchewan Health Authority

My thanks to the many staff at the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) who provided significant insights and guidance throughout the development of the report, and special thanks to PHAC advisors and epidemiologists for sharing advice and data.

In addition, I would like to thank partners at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Canadian Heritage, the Correctional Service of Canada, Employment and Social Development Canada, Health Canada, Indigenous Services Canada, Statistics Canada, and Women and Gender Equality Canada.

Thank you to our colleagues at the Canadian Institutes for Health Research for collaborating on the Best Brains Exchange and to the participating researchers and thought leaders for their valuable input to inform the report.

Thanks also to members of the Remote and Isolated Communities Working Group of the Public Health Network's Special Advisory Committee on COVID-19, and to Dr. Carrie Bourassa, Dr. Margo Greenwood and Dr. Angela Mashford-Pringle for facilitating Indigenous perspectives.

I want to acknowledge the important work of the PHAC, Canadian Institutes for Health Information, Health Canada and Statistics Canada to contributing to the data cited in this report.

My sincere thanks to the team in the Office of the Chief Public Health Officer for their commitment and dedication in seeing this report from conception to publication: Tammy Bell, Bonnie Hostrawser, Dr. Marie Chia, Tasha Yovetich, Dr. David Grote, Dr. Charlene Cook, Dr. Kimberly Gray, Danielle Noble, Kelsey Seal, Jessica Lepage, Harunya Sivanesan, Rhonda Fraser, Elyse Fortier, and Inès Zombré.

Endnotes

Footnote a

As the true number of infections in the population remained unknown, total number of cases and proportion of deaths are thought to be under or overestimated, respectively.

Return to footnote a referrer

Footnote b

Age and sex/gender available for 121,052 and 120,795 cases, respectively.

Return to footnote b referrer

Footnote c

Of 83,694 case reports for which the hospitalization fields were completed.

Return to footnote c referrer

Footnote d

The Serious Outcomes Surveillance Network of the Canadian Immunization Research Network (CIRN-SOS) collects information on hospitalized adult patients aged 16 years or older. As of 27 August 2020, CIRN-SOS has collected case-level data on 700 adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19 across 8 hospital sites in Ontario, Quebec, and Nova Scotia.

Return to footnote d referrer

Footnote e

In this report the term “long-term care facility” includes long-term care homes and retirement facilities.

Return to footnote e referrer

Footnote f

In this context, the term “healthcare worker” includes self-regulated professions such as doctors and nurses but also other staff providing direct care to residents such as support workers.

Return to footnote f referrer

Footnote g

COVID-19 impacts vary by sex and gender. However, available statistics refer mostly to “sex”, as “gender” specific data were not routinely available.

Return to footnote g referrer

Footnote h

Essential workers are individuals employed in positions considered critical to preserving life, health and basic societal functioning. This category includes, but is not limited to, first responders, healthcare workers, critical infrastructure workers, hydro and natural gas workers, and workers who are essential to supply society with critical goods such as food and medicines.

Return to footnote h referrer

Footnote i

Data may not represent the experience of individual hospitals, some of which may have been operating at close to full ICU capacity prior to the COVID-19 crisis. Overall ICU occupancy figures are based on data from BC, SK, ON, NB, NL, NS and NT only.

Return to footnote i referrer

Footnote j

Visible minority refers to whether a person belongs to a visible minority group as defined by the Employment Equity Act and, if so, the visible minority group to which the person belongs. The Employment Equity Act defines visible minorities as "persons, other than Aboriginal peoples, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour". The visible minority population consists mainly of the following groups: South Asian, Chinese, Black, Filipino, Latin American, Arab, Southeast Asian, West Asian, Korean and Japanese. Statistics Canada. Visible minority of person. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote j referrer

Footnote k

These data reflect Canadians’ self-perceived mental health which is not a measure of mental illness but instead reflects answers collected by Statistics Canada in response to the question “In general, how is your mental health?” The response categories included: Excellent, very good, good, fair, poor.

Return to footnote k referrer

Footnote l

While the CPSS and the CCHS include the same questions about self-perceived health and mental health, it is important to note that they are distinct surveys with different sampling frames.

Return to footnote l referrer

Footnote m

Including First Nations people living off reserve, Métis and Inuit.

Return to footnote m referrer

Footnote n

The reporting provinces are Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia and Yukon.

Return to footnote n referrer

References

Footnote 1

Public Health Agency of Canada & Pan-Canadian Public Health Network. Key Health Inequalities in Canada: A National Portrait – Executive Summary. Government of Canada (2018).

Return to footnote 1

Footnote 2

Tam, T. Addressing Stigma: Towards a More Inclusive Health System. Government of Canada (2019).

Return to footnote 2

Footnote 3

Public Health Agency of Canada. Federal/provincial/territorial public health response plan for ongoing management of COVID-19. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 3

Footnote 4

Adhanom Ghebreyesus, T. WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 27 July 2020. World Health Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 4

Footnote 5

World Health Organization. Strengthening health security by implementing the International Health Regulations (2005) - IHR Procedures concerning public health emergencies of international concern (PHEIC). World Health Organization (2005).

Return to footnote 5

Footnote 6

Ravelo, J. L. & Jerving, S. COVID-19 — a timeline of the coronavirus outbreak. Devex COVID-19 (2020).

Return to footnote 6

Footnote 7

World Health Organization. WHO Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Dashboard. World Health Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 7

Footnote 8

Paget, J. et al. Global mortality associated with seasonal influenza epidemics: New burden estimates and predictors from the GLaMOR Project. Journal of Global Health 9, 020421 (2019).

Return to footnote 8

Footnote 9

Douglas, J., Kaufman, J. & Edlund, S. Epidemiological Parameters. Eclipse Foundation (2015).

Return to footnote 9

Footnote 10

Brachman, P. S. Medical Microbiology 4th edition (ed Baron, S.) (University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston, Texas, 1996).

Return to footnote 10

Footnote 11

World Health Organization. Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). World Health Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 11

Footnote 12

Ogden, N. H. et al. Modelling scenarios of the epidemic of COVID-19 in Canada. Canada Communicable Disease Report (CCDR) 46, 198-204 (2020).

Return to footnote 12

Footnote 13

Sandford, A. Coronavirus: Half of humanity now on lockdown as 90 countries call for confinement. EuroNews (2020).

Return to footnote 13

Footnote 14

Air Transport Bureau. Effects of Novel Coronavirus (COVID‐19) on Civil Aviation: Economic Impact Analysis. International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) (2020).

Return to footnote 14

Footnote 15

International Labour Organization. ILO: As job losses escalate, nearly half of global workforce at risk of losing livelihoods. International Labour Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 15

Footnote 16

Jackson, J. K., Weiss, M. A., Schwarzenberg, A. B. & Nelson, R. M. Global Economic Effects of COVID-19. Congressional Research Service R46270 (2020).

Return to footnote 16

Footnote 17

Azoulay, A. & Jolie, A. Closing Schools Has Derailed the Lives of Kids All Over the World. Here's How We Can Help Them Keep Learning. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (2020).

Return to footnote 17

Footnote 18

Zhou, P. et al. A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin. Nature 579, 270-273 (2020).

Return to footnote 18

Footnote 19

Ye, Z. et al. Zoonotic origins of human coronaviruses. International Journal of Biological Sciences 16, 1686-1697 (2020).

Return to footnote 19

Footnote 20

World Health Organization. Timeline: WHO's COVID-19 response. World Health Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 20

Footnote 21

World Health Organization. Origin of SARS-CoV-2. World Health Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 21

Footnote 22

Deslandes, A. et al. SARS-CoV-2 was already spreading in France in late December 2019. International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 55, 106006 (2020).

Return to footnote 22

Footnote 23

La Rosa, G. et al. SARS-CoV-2 has been circulating in northern Italy since December 2019: evidence from environmental monitoring. medRxiv, 2020.06.25.20140061 (2020). (PRE-PRINT)

Return to footnote 23

Footnote 24

Petersen, E. et al. Comparing SARS-CoV-2 with SARS-CoV and influenza pandemics. The Lancet Infectious Diseases (2020).

Return to footnote 24

Footnote 25

World Health Organization. Q&A: Influenza and COVID-19 - similarities and differences. World Health Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 25

Footnote 26

World Health Organization. Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) - WHO MERS Global Summary and Assessment of Risk. World Health Organization (2018).

Return to footnote 26

Footnote 27

Government of Canada. COVID-19 signs, symptoms and severity of disease: A clinician guide. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 27

Footnote 28

Day, M. Covid-19: Identifying and isolating asymptomatic people helped eliminate virus in Italian village. British Medical Journal 368, m1165 (2020).

Return to footnote 28

Footnote 29

Buitrago-Garcia, D. et al. Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections: A living systematic review and meta-analysis. medRxiv, 2020.04.25.20079103 (2020). (PRE-PRINT)

Return to footnote 29

Footnote 30

Public Health Agency of Canada. Canadian Critical Care Society & Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada: Clinical Management of Patients with COVID-19 – 2nd Interim Guidance. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 30

Footnote 31

Chang, T., Wu, J. & Chang, L. Clinical characteristics and diagnostic challenges of pediatric COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association 119, 982-989 (2020).

Return to footnote 31

Footnote 32

Jacofsky, D., Jacofsky, E. M. & Jacofsky, M. Understanding Antibody Testing for COVID-19. The Journal of Arthroplasty 35, S74-S81 (2020).

Return to footnote 32

Footnote 33

Tenforde, M. W. et al. Symptom Duration and Risk Factors for Delayed Return to Usual Health Among Outpatients with COVID-19 in a Multistate Health Care Systems Network — United States, March–June 2020. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) 69, 993-998 (2020).

Return to footnote 33

Footnote 34

Nextstrain. Genomic epidemiology of novel coronavirus - Global subsampling. Nextstrain (2020).

Return to footnote 34

Footnote 35

Heneghan, C., McCall, M. C. & Jefferson, T. Six Countries: Three-quarters of the COVID Deaths. Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM) (2020).

Return to footnote 35

Footnote 36

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Surveillance of COVID-19 at long-term care facilities in the EU/EEA. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (2020).

Return to footnote 36

Footnote 37

Van Beusekom, M. Italian doctors note high COVID-19 death rate, urge action. Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) (2020).

Return to footnote 37

Footnote 38

Maizland, L. & Felter, C. Comparing Six Health-Care Systems in a Pandemic. Council on Foreign Relations (2020).

Return to footnote 38

Footnote 39

Ritchie, H. et al. Coronavirus (COVID-19) Cases. Our World in Data (2020).

Return to footnote 39

Footnote 40

Allain-Dupré, D., Chatry, I., Michalun, V. & Moisio, A. The territorial impact of COVID-19: Managing the crisis across levels of government. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2020).

Return to footnote 40

Footnote 41

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. COVID-19 situation update worldwide, as of 20 August 2020. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (2020).

Return to footnote 41

Footnote 42

Government of Canada. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Outbreak update. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 42

Footnote 43

Government of Canada. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Epidemiology update. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 43

Footnote 44

Government of Canada. COVID-19 Situational Awareness Dashboard. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 44

Footnote 45

Public Health Agency of Canada COVID-19 Surveillance and Epidemiology Team. A retrospective analysis of the start of the COVID-19 epidemic in Canada, January 15–March 12, 2020. Canada Communicable Disease Report (CCDR) 46, 236-241 (2020).

Return to footnote 45

Footnote 46

Government of Canada. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Weekly Epidemiology Update (24-30 June, 2020). Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 46

Footnote 47

Government of Canada. Aviation measures in response to COVID-19. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 47

Footnote 48

Jones, A. M. More than a million Canadians and permanent residents return from abroad amid COVID-19 warnings. CTVNews Coronavirus (2020).

Return to footnote 48

Footnote 49

Kim, L. et al. Risk Factors for Intensive Care Unit Admission and In-hospital Mortality Among Hospitalized Adults Identified through the US Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET). Clinical Infectious Diseases (2020).

Return to footnote 49

Footnote 50

Canadian Immunization Research Network. Serious Outcomes Surveillance Network, August 27, 2020. Canadian Immunization Research Network (2020).

Return to footnote 50

Footnote 51

Public Health Agency of Canada. Prevalence of Chronic Diseases among Canadian Adults. Government of Canada (2019).

Return to footnote 51

Footnote 52

Government of Canada. Canadian Chronic Disease Indicators (CCDI). Government of Canada (2019).

Return to footnote 52

Footnote 53

Government of Canada. Canadian Chronic Disease Surveillance System (CCDSS). Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 53

Footnote 54

Government of Canada. People who are at high risk for severe illness from COVID-19. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 54

Footnote 55

Statistics Canada. The prevalence of underlying health conditions that increase the risk of severe health outcomes related to COVID-19. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 55

Footnote 56

Huang, I., Lim, M. A. & Pranata, R. Diabetes mellitus is associated with increased mortality and severity of disease in COVID-19 pneumonia – A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews 14, 395-403 (2020).

Return to footnote 56

Footnote 57

Pranata, R., Huang, I., Lim, M. A., Wahjoepramono, E. J. & July, J. Impact of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular diseases on mortality and severity of COVID-19–systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases 29, 104949 (2020).

Return to footnote 57

Footnote 58

Li, J. et al. Epidemiology of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes. Journal of Medical Virology 13 (2020).

Return to footnote 58

Footnote 59

Földi, M. et al. Obesity is a risk factor for developing critical condition in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obesity Reviews 21 (2020).

Return to footnote 59

Footnote 60

Gold, M. S. et al. COVID-19 and comorbidities: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 1-7 (2020).

Return to footnote 60

Footnote 61

Ssentongo, P., Ssentongo, A. E., Heilbrunn, E. S., Ba, D. M. & Chinchilli, V. M. Association of cardiovascular disease and 10 other pre-existing comorbidities with COVID-19 mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLOS ONE 15 (2020).

Return to footnote 61

Footnote 62

Götzinger, F. et al. COVID-19 in children and adolescents in Europe: a multinational, multicentre cohort study. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health 4, 653-661 (2020).

Return to footnote 62

Footnote 63

Galeotti, C. & Bayry, J. Autoimmune and inflammatory diseases following COVID-19. Nature Reviews Rheumatology 16, 413-414 (2020).

Return to footnote 63

Footnote 64

Public Health Agency of Canada. Based on publicly reported data, including media reports, and not validated by province and territories. Public Health Agency of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 64

Footnote 65

Guan, W. J. et al. Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China. The New England Journal of Medicine 382, 1708-1720 (2020).

Return to footnote 65

Footnote 66

Gardner, W., States, D. & Bagley, N. The Coronavirus and the Risks to the Elderly in Long-Term Care. Journal of Aging & Social Policy 32, 310-315 (2020).

Return to footnote 66

Footnote 67

Canadian Institute for Health Information. Dementia in long-term care. Canadian Institute for Health Information (2020).

Return to footnote 67

Footnote 68

World Health Organization. Shortage of personal protective equipment endangering health workers worldwide. World Health Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 68

Footnote 69

CBC News. Ontario confirms 379 new COVID-19 cases as testing declines, protective equipment shortage persists. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (2020).

Return to footnote 69

Footnote 70

Canadian Institute for Health Information. Pandemic Experience in the Long-Term Care Sector: How Does Canada Compare With Other Countries? Canadian Institute for Health Information (2020).

Return to footnote 70

Footnote 71

Dunning, J. & Sinha, S. The NIA’s Recommended ‘Iron Ring’ for Protecting Older Canadians in Long-Term Care and Congregate Living Settings. National Institute on Aging (2020).

Return to footnote 71

Footnote 72

Fisman, D., Lapointe-Shaw, L., Bogoch, I., McCready, J. & Tuite, A. Failing our Most Vulnerable: COVID-19 and Long-Term Care Facilities in Ontario. medRxiv, 2020.04.14.20065557 (2020). (PRE-PRINT)

Return to footnote 72

Footnote 73

Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion (Public Health Ontario). At a Glance: The Use of Portable Fans and Portable Air Conditioning Units during COVID-19 in Longterm Care and Retirement Homes. Queen's Printer for Ontario (2020).

Return to footnote 73

Footnote 74

McGilton, K. et al. Uncovering the Devaluation of Nursing Home Staff During COVID-19: Are We Fuelling the Next Health Care Crisis? Journal of the American Medical Directors Association (2020).

Return to footnote 74

Footnote 75

Office of the Chief Science Advisor of Canada. COVID-19 and Children - Report of a special task force led by the Chief Science Advisor of Canada. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 75

Footnote 76

Davies, N. G. et al. Age-dependent effects in the transmission and control of COVID-19 epidemics. Nature Medicine 26, 1205-1211 (2020).

Return to footnote 76

Footnote 77

Public Health Agency of Canada. PHAC Evidence Review: Evidence Brief on Age-Dependent Transmission. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 77

Footnote 78

Government of Canada. COVID-19 guidance for schools Kindergarten to Grade 12. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 78

Footnote 79

Public Health Agency of Canada. Update on COVID-19 in Canada: Epidemiology and Modelling. Public Health Agency of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 79

Footnote 80

Maleki Dana, P. et al. An Insight into the Sex Differences in COVID-19 Patients: What are the Possible Causes? Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 35, 438-441 (2020).

Return to footnote 80

Footnote 81

Griffith, D. M. et al. Men and COVID-19: A Biopsychosocial Approach to Understanding Sex Differences in Mortality and Recommendations for Practice and Policy Interventions. Preventing Chronic Disease 17 (2020).

Return to footnote 81

Footnote 82

Statistics Canada. Selected 2016 Census data: COVID-19 supplement - Population in nursing homes and/or residences for senior citizens by both sexes and age, total, for Canada, Provinces, Territories and Health Regions (December, 2017) – 2016 Census, 100% Data. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 82

Footnote 83

Hou, F. & Schimmele, C. Adults with a health education but not working in health occupations. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 83

Footnote 84

Lien, A. et al. COVID-19 and the increasing need for sex-disaggregated mortality data in Canada and worldwide. Canada Communicable Disease Report (CCDR) 2020 46, 231-235 (2020).

Return to footnote 84

Footnote 85

Public Health Agency of Canada. Preventing COVID-19 in the workplace: Employers, employees and essential service workers. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 85

Footnote 86

Public Health Agency of Canada. Detailed case information received from P/Ts. Public Health Agency of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 86

Footnote 87

O'Brien Institute for Public Health Staff. UCalgary researchers investigate COVID-19 outbreak at Alberta meat processors. UCalgary News (2020).

Return to footnote 87

Footnote 88

CBC News. Alberta COVID-19 case numbers down for 4th day in a row. CBC News COVID-19 (2020).

Return to footnote 88

Footnote 89

Statistics Canada. Changes in federal, provincial and territorial custodial populations during the COVID-19 pandemic, April 2019 to April 2020. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 89

Footnote 90

Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness. Homelessness Sector COVID-19 Information Exchange. Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness (CAEH) (2020).

Return to footnote 90

Footnote 91

Statistics Canada. First Nations people, Métis and Inuit and COVID-19: Health and social characteristics. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 91

Footnote 92

Government of Saskatchewan. Cases and Risk of COVID-19 in Saskatchewan. Government of Saskatchewan (2020).

Return to footnote 92

Footnote 93

Public Health Ontario. Enhanced Epidemiological Summary - COVID-19 in Ontario – A Focus on Diversity. Public Health Ontario (2020).

Return to footnote 93

Footnote 94

Tuite, A. R., Fisman, D. N. & Greer, A. L. Mathematical modelling of COVID-19 transmission and mitigation strategies in the population of Ontario, Canada. Canadian Medical Association Journal (2020).

Return to footnote 94

Footnote 95

Canadian Institute for Health Information. Canadian Institute for Health Information: Unpublished Data. Canadian Institute for Health Information (2020).

Return to footnote 95

Footnote 96

Rosenbaum, L. Facing Covid-19 in Italy — Ethics, Logistics, and Therapeutics on the Epidemic's Front Line. The New England Journal of Medicine 382, 1873-1875 (2020).

Return to footnote 96

Footnote 97

Peters, A. W., Chawla, K. S. & Turnbull, Z. A. Transforming ORs into ICUs. New England Journal of Medicine 382 (2020).

Return to footnote 97

Footnote 98

World Health Organization. WHO Audio Emergencies Coronavirus Press Conference-March 20, 2020. World Health Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 98

Footnote 99

Henry, B. Canadian Pandemic Influenza Preparedness: Health sector planning guidance. Canada Communicable Disease Report (CCDR) 44-1, 6 (2018).

Return to footnote 99

Footnote 100

Public Health Agency of Canada. Canadian Pandemic Influenza Preparedness: Planning Guidance for the Health Sector. Government of Canada (2018).

Return to footnote 100

Footnote 101

Government of Canada. Federal/Provincial/Territorial Public Health Response Plan for Biological Events. Government of Canada (2017).

Return to footnote 101

Footnote 102

World Health Organization. COVID‑19 Strategy Update. World Health Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 102

Footnote 103

Public Health Agency of Canada. Public Health Agency of Canada - Unpublished data. Public Health Agency of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 103

Footnote 104

Pan-Canadian Public Health Network. Special Advisory Committee on COVID-19. Pan-Canadian Public Health Network (2020).

Return to footnote 104

Footnote 105

Government of Canada. Government of Canada takes action on COVID-19. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 105

Footnote 106

Public Health Agency of Canada. Statement from the Chief Public Health Officer Health Professional Forum on New Cannabis Toolkit to Educate Health Professionals. Government of Canada (2018).

Return to footnote 106

Footnote 107

Government of Prince Edward Island. COVID-19 Support for Essential Workers - Earning $3,000/month or less. Government of Prince Edward Island (2020).

Return to footnote 107

Footnote 108

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. COVID-19 Financial support for farmers and food processors. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 108

Footnote 109

Office of the Prime Minister. Statement from the Office of the Prime Minister on COVID-19 - U.S.-Canada joint initiative: Temporary restriction of travellers crossing the U.S.-Canada border for non-essential purposes. Canada Border Service Agency (2020).

Return to footnote 109

Footnote 110

Government of Canada. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Current border measures and requirements. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 110

Footnote 111

Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants. Ontario Drafting Emergency Legislation Changes to Cover COVID-19 Epidemic. Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants (2020).

Return to footnote 111

Footnote 112

Government of Yukon. Legislation changes for COVID-19. Government of Yukon (2020).

Return to footnote 112

Footnote 113

City of Ottawa. Temporary Mandatory Mask By-law. City of Ottawa (2020).

Return to footnote 113

Footnote 114

Feed Ontario. Food Banks Work to Meet Surge in Demand with a New COVID-19 Emergency Food Box Program. Feed Ontario (2020).

Return to footnote 114

Footnote 115

BDO Canada. Pivoting Manufacturing Operations to Support COVID-19 Efforts. BDO Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 115

Footnote 116

Statistics Canada. Canadian Perspectives Survey Series 2: Monitoring the effects of COVID-19, May 2020. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 116

Footnote 117

Yilmazkuday, H. Stay-at-Home Works to Fight against COVID-19: International Evidence from Google Mobility Data. Social Science Research Network (SSRN) (2020).

Return to footnote 117

Footnote 118

Auger, K. A. et al. Association between Statewide School Closure and COVID-19 Incidence and Mortality in the US. Journal of the American Medical Association 324, 859-870 (2020).

Return to footnote 118

Footnote 119

Mahsin, M. et al. The Coronavirus 2019 pandemic in Canada: The impact of public health interventions on the course of the outbreak in Alberta and other provinces. medRxiv-Epidemiology (2020). (PRE-PRINT)

Return to footnote 119

Footnote 120

Zarocostas, J. How to fight an infodemic. The Lancet 395, 676-676 (2020).

Return to footnote 120

Footnote 121

Zyoud, S. H. & Al-Jabi, S. Mapping the situation of research on coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19): a preliminary bibliometric analysis during the early stage of the outbreak. BioMed Central Infectious Diseases 20, 561 (2020).

Return to footnote 121

Footnote 122

Brainard, J. Scientists are drowning in COVID-19 papers. Can new tools keep them afloat? Science Magazine (2020).

Return to footnote 122

Footnote 123

Government of Canada. Taking care of your mental and physical health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 123

Footnote 124

United Nations. Policy Brief: COVID-19 and the Need for Action on Mental Health. United Nations (2020).

Return to footnote 124

Footnote 125

Carleton Researchers. Carleton Researchers Find Canadians Most Trust Public Health Officials on COVID-19. Carleton Newsroom (2020).

Return to footnote 125

Footnote 126

Ruhi, U. A SocioPsychological Perspective on Flattening the COVID-19 Curve: Implications for Public Health Program Delivery in Canada. Canadian Health Policy (2020).

Return to footnote 126

Footnote 127

Government of Canada. Lifting of restrictive public health measures - Recommendations from the F/P/T Special Advisory Committee on COVID-19. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 127

Footnote 128

Government of Canada. Guidance for a strategic approach to lifting restrictive public health measures. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 128

Footnote 129

Harris, K. Even with strict containment measures, COVID-19 could claim 22,000 lives, federal officials project. CBC News Politics (2020).

Return to footnote 129

Footnote 130

Boggild, A. K., Yuan, L., Low, D. E., McGeer, A. J. The impact of influenza on the Canadian First Nations. Canadian Journal of Public Health (2011).

Return to footnote 130

Footnote 131

Patterson, M., Finn, S. & Barker, K. Addressing tuberculosis among Inuit in Canada. Canada Communicable Disease Report (CCDR) 44, 82-85 (2018).

Return to footnote 131

Footnote 132

Government of Yukon. Information for Yukoners on Canada-US border restrictions. Government of Yukon (2020).

Return to footnote 132

Footnote 133

Government of the Northwest Territories. News Release: Chief Public Health Officer Prepares to Order the prohibition of travel to the NWT with limited exceptions and to order self-isolation to occur only in Yellowknife, Inuvik, Hay River and Fort Smith. Government of the Northwest Territories (2020).

Return to footnote 133

Footnote 134

Government of Nunavut. Public Health Act, S. Nu. 2016, c. 13 Travel Restriction Order #7. Government of Nunavut (2020).

Return to footnote 134

Footnote 135

Indigenous Services Canada. Indigenous, Territorial and Federal leaders mobilize funding to support unique northern physical distancing initiative. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 135

Footnote 136

Manitoba Hydro. Manitoba Hydro scales back work and suspends travel in and out of Keeyask. Manitoba Hydro (2020).

Return to footnote 136

Footnote 137

Government of Northwest Territories. Fifth Case of COVID-19 Confirmed in Northwest Territories. Government of Northwest Territories (2020).

Return to footnote 137

Footnote 138

Desmarais, A. Here's how 3 N.W.T. communities are preparing for COVID-19. CBC News North (2020).

Return to footnote 138

Footnote 139

Government of Nunavut. COVID-19 (Novel Coronavirus) - Nunavut COVID-19 Case Update. Government of Nunavut (2020).

Return to footnote 139

Footnote 140

Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Closing the gap in a generation: Health equity through action on the social determinants of health. World Health Organization (2008).

Return to footnote 140

Footnote 141

Blumenshine, P. et al. Pandemic influenza planning in the United States from a health disparities perspective. Emerging Infectious Diseases 14, 709-715 (2008).

Return to footnote 141

Footnote 142

Public Health Agency of Canada & Pan-Canadian Public Health Network. Key Health Inequalities in Canada: A National Portrait. Government of Canada 180210 (2018).

Return to footnote 142

Footnote 143

Senate Subcommittee on Population Health. A Healthy, Productive Canada: A Determinant of Health Approach. Senate of Canada (2009).

Return to footnote 143

Footnote 144

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Honouring the Truth, Reconciling for the Future: Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015).

Return to footnote 144

Footnote 145

Allan, B. & Smylie, J. First Peoples, Second Class Treatment: The role of racism in the health and well-being of Indigenous peoples in Canada. The Wellesley Institute (2015).

Return to footnote 145

Footnote 146

Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent. Report of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent on its mission to Canada. United Nations Human Rights Council (2017).

Return to footnote 146

Footnote 147

Walker, B. The History of Immigration and Racism in Canada - Essential Readings. Canadian Scholars' Press, 305 (2008).

Return to footnote 147

Footnote 148

Mensah, J. Black Canadians - History, Experience, Social Conditions Second Edition 304 (Fernwood Publishing, 2010).

Return to footnote 148

Footnote 149

Adelson, N. The Embodiment of Inequity: Health Disparities in Aboriginal Canada. Canadian Journal of Public Health 96, S45-S61 (2005).

Return to footnote 149

Footnote 150

Veenstra, G. & Patterson, A. C. Black–White Health Inequalities in Canada. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health 18, 51-57 (2016).

Return to footnote 150

Footnote 151

Quinn, S. C. et al. Racial disparities in exposure, susceptibility, and access to health care in the US H1N1 influenza pandemic. American Journal of Public Health 101, 285-293 (2011).

Return to footnote 151

Footnote 152

Block, S. & Dhunna, S. COVID-19: It's time to protect frontline workers. Behind the Numbers (2020).

Return to footnote 152

Footnote 153

Turcotte, M. & Savage, K. The contribution of immigrants and population groups designated as visible minorities to nurse aide, orderly and patient service associate occupations. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 153

Footnote 154

City of Toronto. COVID-19: Status of Cases in Toronto - Ethno-Racial Group, Income and COVID-19 Tab. City of Toronto (2020).

Return to footnote 154

Footnote 155

Rocha, R., Shingler, B. & Montpetit, J. Montreal's poorest and most racially diverse neighbourhoods hit hardest by COVID-19, data analysis shows. CBC News Montreal (2020).

Return to footnote 155

Footnote 156

Santé Montréal. Unequal Toll of the Pandemic. Gouvernement du Québec (2020).

Return to footnote 156

Footnote 157

Office for National Statistics. Coronavirus (COVID-19) related deaths by ethnic group, England and Wales: 2 March 2020 to 10 April 2020. Office for National Statistics (2020).

Return to footnote 157

Footnote 158

Center for Disease Control and Prevention. COVID-19 Hospitalization and Death by Race/Ethnicity. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2020).

Return to footnote 158

Footnote 159

Messacar, D., Morissette, R. & Deng, Z. Inequality in the feasibility of working from home during and after COVID-19. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 159

Footnote 160

Statistics Canada. COVID-19 and the employment of health care workers. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 160

Footnote 161

Deng, Z., Morissette, R. & Messacar, D. Running the economy remotely: Potential for working from home during and after COVID-19. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 161

Footnote 162

St-Denis, X. Sociodemographic Determinants of Occupational Risks of Exposure to COVID-19 in Canada. Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie 57, 399-452 (2020).

Return to footnote 162

Footnote 163

Baker, M. G., Peckham, T. K. & Seixas, N. S. Estimating the burden of United States workers exposed to infection or disease: A key factor in containing risk of COVID-19 infection. PLOS ONE 15, e0232452 (2020).

Return to footnote 163

Footnote 164

Office for National Statistics. Which occupations have the highest potential exposure to the coronavirus (COVID-19)? Office for National Statistics (2020).

Return to footnote 164

Footnote 165

Armstrong, P. et al. Restoring Trust: COVID-19 and the Future of Long-Term Care. Working Group on Long-Term Care (2020).

Return to footnote 165

Footnote 166

Lewchuk, W. et al. The Precarity Penalty: The impact of employment precarity on individuals, households and communities ―and what to do about it. Poverty and Employment Precarity in Southern Ontario (PEPSO) (2015).

Return to footnote 166

Footnote 167

Dyal J. W. et al. COVID-19 Among Workers in Meat and Poultry Processing Facilities ― 19 States, April 2020. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) 69, 557-561 (2020).

Return to footnote 167

Footnote 168

Waltenburg, M. A. et al. Update: COVID-19 Among Workers in Meat and Poultry Processing Facilities ― United States, April–May 2020. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) 69, 887-892 (2020).

Return to footnote 168

Footnote 169

Hsu, A. T. et al. Understanding the impact of COVID-19 on residents of Canada's long-term care homes – ongoing challenges and policy responses. International Long Term Care Policy Network (2020).

Return to footnote 169

Footnote 170

Hsu, A. T. et al. Impact of COVID-19 on residents of Canada's long-term care homes – ongoing challenges and policy response. International Long Term Care Policy Network (2020).

Return to footnote 170

Footnote 171

Strausbaugh, L. J., Sukumar, S. R., Joseph, C. L. & High, K. P. Infectious Disease Outbreaks in Nursing Homes: An Unappreciated Hazard for Frail Elderly Persons. Clinical Infectious Diseases 36, 870-876 (2003).

Return to footnote 171

Footnote 172

Ontario Health Care Workers. Understaffed and Under Pressure: A reality check by Ontario health care workers. Ontario Federation of Labour (2005).

Return to footnote 172

Footnote 173

4th Canadian Division Joint Task Force. OP Laser-JTFC Observations in Long Term Care Facilities in Ontario. (2020).

Return to footnote 173

Footnote 174

Wang, L. et al. Heterogeneity in risk, testing and outcome of COVID-19 across outbreak settings in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada: an observational study. medRxiv (2020). (PRE-PRINT)

Return to footnote 174

Footnote 175

Ehni, H. & Wahl, H. Six Propositions against Ageism in the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Aging & Social Policy 32, 515-525 (2020).

Return to footnote 175

Footnote 176

Fraser, S. et al. Ageism and COVID-19: What does our society's response say about us? Age and Ageing 0, 1-4 (2020).

Return to footnote 176

Footnote 177

Mauldin, L. et al. Disability as an Axis of Inequality: A Pandemic Illustration (Disability in Society). American Sociological Association 48 (2020).

Return to footnote 177

Footnote 178

Public Health Agency of Canada. COVID-19 and people with disabilities in Canada. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 178

Footnote 179

Grier, E., Lunsky, Y., Sullivan, W. F. & Casson, I. Health care of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities in a time of COVID-19. Canadian Family Physician (2020).

Return to footnote 179

Footnote 180

Zlotnick, C. & Zerger, S. Survey findings on characteristics and health status of clients treated by the federally funded (US) Health Care for the Homeless Programs. Health & Social Care in the Community 17, 18-26 (2009).

Return to footnote 180

Footnote 181

Mosites E. et al. Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Prevalence in Homeless Shelters — Four U.S. Cities, March 27–April 15, 2020. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) 69, 521-522 (2020).

Return to footnote 181

Footnote 182

Tsai, J. & Wilson, M. COVID-19: a potential public health problem for homeless populations. The Lancet Public Health 5, e186-e187 (2020).

Return to footnote 182

Footnote 183

Hwang, S. W. & Bugeja, A. L. Barriers to appropriate diabetes management among homeless people in Toronto. Canadian Medical Association Journal 163, 161-165 (2000).

Return to footnote 183

Footnote 184

Office of the Premier. Ontario Takes Immediate Action to Stop COVID-19 Outbreaks in Windsor-Essex. Queen's Printer for Ontario (2020).

Return to footnote 184

Footnote 185

Windsor-Essex County Health Unit. Procedures for Newly Arriving Temporary Foreign Workers. Windsor-Essex County Health Unit (2020).

Return to footnote 185

Footnote 186

Lambton Public Health. Temporary Foreign Workers. Lambton Public Health (2020).

Return to footnote 186

Footnote 187

Migrant Workers Alliance. Unheeded Warnings: COVID-19 & Migrant Workers in Canada. Migrant Workers Alliance (2020).

Return to footnote 187

Footnote 188

Haley, E. et al. Migrant Farmworkers Face Heightened Vulnerabilities during COVID-19. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development 9 (2020).

Return to footnote 188

Footnote 189

Cole, D. C. Heightened COVID-19 Risks to Temporary Foreign (Migrant) Agricultural Workers (TFAWs) and Recommended Actions in the 2020 Agricultural Season Occupational Medicine Perspective Paper. Migrant Worker (2020).

Return to footnote 189

Footnote 190

Hennebry, J., McLaughlin, J. & Preibisch, K. Out of the Loop: (In)access to Health Care for Migrant Workers in Canada. Journal of International Migration and Integration 17, 521-538 (2016).

Return to footnote 190

Footnote 191

Beaudry, G. et al. Managing Outbreaks of Highly Contagious Diseases in Prisons: A Systematic Review. Social Science Research Network (SSRN) (2020).

Return to footnote 191

Footnote 192

Wallace, M. et al. COVID-19 in Correctional and Detention Facilities — United States, February–April 2020. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2020).

Return to footnote 192

Footnote 193

Kouyoumdjian, F., Schuler, A., Matheson, F. I. & Hwang, S. W. Health status of prisoners in Canada. Canadian Family Physician 62, 215 (2016).

Return to footnote 193

Footnote 194

Blair, A., Parnia, A. & Siddiqi, A. Testing lags and emerging COVID-19 outbreaks in federal penitentiaries in Canada. medRxiv (2020). (PRE-PRINT)

Return to footnote 194

Footnote 195

Ricciardelli, R. & Bucerius, S. Canadian prisons in the time of COVID-19: Recommendations for the pandemic and beyond. Royal Society of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 195

Footnote 196

World Health Organization. UNODC, WHO, UNAIDS and OHCHR joint statement on COVID-19 in prisons and other closed settings. World Health Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 196

Footnote 197

Goutte, S., Porcher, T. & Péran, T. Social Inequalities and Vulnerability of Population Facing the COVID-19: The Case of Seine-Saint-Denis in Ile-De-France. Social Science Research Network (SSRN) (2020).

Return to footnote 197

Footnote 198

Kenway, P. & Holden, J. Accounting for the Variation in the Confirmed Covid-19 Caseload across England: An analysis of the role of multi-generation households, London and time. New Policy Institute (2020).

Return to footnote 198

Footnote 199

Stringer, S. M. Protecting NYC's Most Vulnerable Populations during COVID-19. Office of the Comptroller|City of New York (2020).

Return to footnote 199

Footnote 200

The Stoop. COVID-19 Cases in New York City, a Neighborhood-Level Analysis. The Stoop (2020).

Return to footnote 200

Footnote 201

Chen, J. T., Waterman, P. D. & Krieger, N. COVID-19 and the unequal surge in mortality rates in Massachusetts, by city/town and ZIP Code measures of poverty, household crowding, race/ethnicity, and racialized economic segregation. Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies 19 (2020).

Return to footnote 201

Footnote 202

Shan, R. Recent Refugee Housing Conditions in Canada. Socio Economic Analysis: Housing Needs and Conditions (2019).

Return to footnote 202

Footnote 203

Michael Garron Hospital. Michael Garron Hospital partners with community organizations to make COVID-19 testing more accessible to East Toronto neighbourhoods and residents. Michael Garron Hospital (2020).

Return to footnote 203

Footnote 204

Grant, K. & Weeks, C. Examining hot spots for community spread across Ontario. The Globe and Mail Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 204

Footnote 205

Grant, K. Toronto doctors take COVID-19 testing to the people in effort to contain pandemic. The Globe and Mail Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 205

Footnote 206

Council of Canadian with Disabilities. Canadian Human Rights Commission 2018 Annual Report Shows Little Improvement for Disabled Canadians. Council of Canadian with Disabilities (2019).

Return to footnote 206

Footnote 207

United Nations Human Rights Council. COVID-19 and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Guidance. United Nations Human Rights Council (2020).

Return to footnote 207

Footnote 208

Mason, R. The COVID-19 Pandemic and Rights of Persons with Disabilities. HillNotes (2020).

Return to footnote 208

Footnote 209

Andrews, E. E., Ayers, K. B., Brown, K. S., Dunn, D. S. & and Pilarski, C. R. No Body Is Expendable: Medical Rationing and Disability Justice during the COVID-19 Pandemic. American Psychologist (2020).

Return to footnote 209

Footnote 210

Goggin, G. & and Ellis, K. Disability, communication, and life itself in the COVID-19 pandemic. Health Sociology Review 29(2), 168-176 (2020).

Return to footnote 210

Footnote 211

International Association of Public Transport (UITP). Management of COVID-19 Guidelines for Public Transport Operators. International Association of Public Transport (UITP) (2020).

Return to footnote 211

Footnote 212

Cordes, J. & Castro, M. C. Spatial analysis of COVID-19 clusters and contextual factors in New York City. Spatial and Spatio-temporal Epidemiology 34, 100355 (2020).

Return to footnote 212

Footnote 213

McLaren, J. Racial Disparity in COVID-19 Deaths: Seeking Economic Roots with Census Data. National Bureau of Economic Research (2020).

Return to footnote 213

Footnote 214

Sy, K. T. L., Martinez, M. E., Rader, B. & White, L. F. Socioeconomic disparities in subway use and COVID-19 outcomes in New York City. medRxiv, 2020.05.28.20115949 (2020). (PRE-PRINT)

Return to footnote 214

Footnote 215

Almagro, M. & Orane-Hutchinson, A. The Determinants of the Differential Exposure to COVID-19 in New York City and their Evolution over Time. Social Science Research Network (SSRN) (2020). (PRE-PRINT)

Return to footnote 215

Footnote 216

Campbell, D. J. T., O'Neill, B. G., Gibson, K. & Thurston, W. E. Primary healthcare needs and barriers to care among Calgary's homeless populations. BioMed Central Family Practice 16, 139 (2015).

Return to footnote 216

Footnote 217

Hwang, S. W. et al. Universal Health Insurance and Health Care Access for Homeless Persons. American Journal of Public Health 100, 1454-1461 (2010).

Return to footnote 217

Footnote 218

Argintaru, N. et al. A cross-sectional observational study of unmet health needs among homeless and vulnerably housed adults in three Canadian cities. BioMed Central Public Health 13, 577 (2013).

Return to footnote 218

Footnote 219

Kitching, G. T. et al. Unmet health needs and discrimination by healthcare providers among an Indigenous population in Toronto, Canada. Canadian Journal of Public Health 111, 40-49 (2020).

Return to footnote 219

Footnote 220

Sinai Health System. Black Experiences in Health Care: Symposium Report. Sinai Health System (2017).

Return to footnote 220

Footnote 221

Ahmed, S. et al. Barriers to Access of Primary Healthcare by Immigrant Populations in Canada: A Literature Review. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health 18, 1522-1540 (2016).

Return to footnote 221

Footnote 222

Kalich, A., Heinemann, L. & Ghahari, S. A Scoping Review of Immigrant Experience of Health Care Access Barriers in Canada. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health (2016).

Return to footnote 222

Footnote 223

Salami, B., Meharali, S. & Salami, A. The health of temporary foreign workers in Canada; A scoping review. Canadian Journal of Public Health/Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique 106, e546-e554 (2015).

Return to footnote 223

Footnote 224

Gordon, K. D. COVID-19 Survey Report: The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Canadians Who are Blind, Deaf-Blind, and Partially-Sighted. Canadian Council of the Blind (2020).

Return to footnote 224

Footnote 225

Lunsky, Y. et al. International Review of Research in Developmental Disabilities (ed Hodapp, R. M.) 1-37 (Academic Press, 2014).

Return to footnote 225

Footnote 226

Selick, A., Durbin, J., Casson, I., Lee, J. & Lunsky, Y. Original qualitative research – Barriers and facilitators to improving health care for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities: what do staff tell us? Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in Canada 48, 349-357 (2018).

Return to footnote 226

Footnote 227

Loignon, C. et al. Perceived barriers to healthcare for persons living in poverty in Quebec, Canada: The EQUIhealThY project. International Journal for Equity in Health 14, 4 (2015).

Return to footnote 227

Footnote 228

Health Quality Ontario. Income and Health: Opportunities to achieve health equity in Ontario. Health Quality Ontario (2016).

Return to footnote 228

Footnote 229

Pappas, G., Kiriaze, I. J., Giannakis, P. & Falagas, M. E. Psychosocial consequences of infectious diseases. Clinical Microbiology and Infection 15, 743-747 (2009).

Return to footnote 229

Footnote 230

Hoppe, T. “Spanish Flu”: When Infectious Disease Names Blur Origins and Stigmatize Those Infected. American Journal of Public Health 108, 1462-1464 (2018).

Return to footnote 230

Footnote 231

Ottawa Police Service. Awareness, Reporting, We are here – Hate Incidents. Ottawa Police Service (2020).

Return to footnote 231

Footnote 232

Vancouver Police Department. Vancouver Police Raise Concern over Increase in Hate Crime. Vancouver Police Department (2020).

Return to footnote 232

Footnote 233

Statistics Canada. Canadians' perceptions of personal safety since COVID-19. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 233

Footnote 234

Schild, L. et al. "Go eat a bat, Chang!": An Early Look on the Emergence of Sinophobic Behavior on Web Communities in the Face of COVID-19. Cornell University (2020). (PRE-PRINT)

Return to footnote 234

Footnote 235

Ziems, C., He, B., Soni, S. & Kumar, S. Racism is a Virus: Anti-Asian Hate and Counterhate in Social Media during the COVID-19 Crisis. Cornell University (2020). (PRE-PRINT)

Return to footnote 235

Footnote 236

Budhwani, H. & Sun, R. Creating COVID-19 Stigma by Referencing the Novel Coronavirus as the “Chinese virus” on Twitter: Quantitative Analysis of Social Media Data. Journal of Medical Internet Research 22, e19301 (2020).

Return to footnote 236

Footnote 237

Wu, C., Wilkes, R., Qian, Y. & Kennedy, E. B. Acute Discrimination and East Asian-White Mental Health Gap during COVID-19 in Canada. Social Science Research Network (SSRN) (2020).

Return to footnote 237

Footnote 238

Hango, D. Fear of COVID-19 related stigmatization. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 238

Footnote 239

Wang, Y., McKee, M., Torbica, A. & Stuckler, D. Systematic Literature Review on the Spread of Health-Related Misinformation on Social Media. Social Science & Medicine 240, 112552 (2019).

Return to footnote 239

Footnote 240

Vosoughi, S., Roy, D. & Aral, S. The spread of true and false news online. Science 359, 1146 (2018).

Return to footnote 240

Footnote 241

Statistics Canada. Labour Force Survey, August 2020. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 241

Footnote 242

Statistics Canada. Labour Force Survey, May 2020. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 242

Footnote 243

Statistics Canada. Payroll employment, earnings and hours, March 2020. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 243

Footnote 244

Statistics Canada. COVID-19 and the labour market in April 2020. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 244

Footnote 245

Power, K. The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the care burden of women and families. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy 16, 67-73 (2020).

Return to footnote 245

Footnote 246

Scott, K. Women bearing the brunt of economic losses: One in five has been laid off or had hours cut. Behind the Numbers (2020).

Return to footnote 246

Footnote 247

Wenham, C., Smith, J. & Morgan, R. COVID-19: the gendered impacts of the outbreak. The Lancet 395, 846-848 (2020).

Return to footnote 247

Footnote 248

Winsa, P. Which workers are being hit hardest by the COVID-19 lockdown? These 6 graphics paint a stark picture of Canadian inequality. The Star Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 248

Footnote 249

RBC Economics. Pandemic threatens decades of women's labour force gains. Royal Bank of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 249

Footnote 250

Qian, Y. & Fuller, S. COVID-19 and the Gender Employment Gap among Parents of Young Children. Canadian Public Policy (2020).

Return to footnote 250

Footnote 251

Lemieux, T., Milligan, K., Schirle, T. & Skuterud, M. Initial Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Canadian Labour Market. Canadian Labour Economics Forum (2020).

Return to footnote 251

Footnote 252

Statistics Canada. Impacts of COVID-19 on Canadian families and children. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 252

Footnote 253

Statistics Canada. COVID-19 Pandemic: Financial impacts on postsecondary students in Canada. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 253

Footnote 254

Bushnik, T., Tjepkema, M. & Martel, L. Socioeconomic disparities in life and health expectancy among the household population in Canada. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 254

Footnote 255

Wilkinson, R. G. & Pickett, K. E. Income Inequality and Socioeconomic Gradients in Mortality. American Journal of Public Health 98, 699-704 (2008).

Return to footnote 255

Footnote 256

Pickett, K. E. & Wilkinson, R. G. Income inequality and health: A causal review. Social Science & Medicine 128, 316-326 (2015).

Return to footnote 256

Footnote 257

Wilkinson, R. G. & Pickett, K. E. Income inequality and population health: A review and explanation of the evidence. Social Science & Medicine 62, 1768-1784 (2006).

Return to footnote 257

Footnote 258

Ribeiro, W. S. et al. Income inequality and mental illness-related morbidity and resilience: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Psychiatry 4, 554-562 (2017).

Return to footnote 258

Footnote 259

Patel, V. et al. Income inequality and depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the association and a scoping review of mechanisms. World Psychiatry 17, 76-89 (2018).

Return to footnote 259

Footnote 260

Chen, W. & Hou, F. The Effect of Unemployment on Life Satisfaction: A Cross-national Comparison between Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. Statistics Canada (2018).

Return to footnote 260

Footnote 261

van der Noordt, M., IJzelenberg, H., Droomers, M. & Proper, K. I. Health effects of employment: A systematic review of prospective studies. Occupational and Environmental Medicine (2014).

Return to footnote 261

Footnote 262

Bartelink, V. H. M., Zay Ya, K., Guldbrandsson, K. & Bremberg, S. Unemployment among young people and mental health: A systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 1403494819852847 (2019).

Return to footnote 262

Footnote 263

Norström, F., Virtanen, P., Hammarström, A., Gustafsson, P. E. & Janlert, U. How does unemployment affect self-assessed health? A systematic review focusing on subgroup effects. BioMed Central Public Health 14, 1310 (2014).

Return to footnote 263

Footnote 264

Roelfs, D. J., Shor, E., Davidson, K. W. & Schwartz, J. E. Losing life and livelihood: A systematic review and meta-analysis of unemployment and all-cause mortality. Social Science & Medicine 72, 840-854 (2011).

Return to footnote 264

Footnote 265

Statistics Canada. Table 1 - Concerns expressed by Canadians about COVID-19 impacts, March and April 2020. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 265

Footnote 266

Turcotte, M. & Hango, D. Impact of economic consequences of COVID-19 on Canadians' social concerns. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 266

Footnote 267

Frank, K. COVID-19 and social support for seniors: Do seniors have people they can depend on during difficult times? Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 267

Footnote 268

Flint, A. J., Bingham, K. S. & Iaboni, A. Effect of COVID-19 on the mental health care of older people in Canada. International Psychogeriatrics, 1-4 (2020).

Return to footnote 268

Footnote 269

Statistics Canada. The vulnerability of Canadians with disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 269

Footnote 270

Mayland, C. R. et al. Supporting Adults Bereaved Through COVID-19: A Rapid Review of the Impact of Previous Pandemics on Grief and Bereavement. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 60(2), e33-e39 (2020).

Return to footnote 270

Footnote 271

Government of Canada. About Mental Health. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 271

Footnote 272

Government of Canada. About Mental Illness. Government of Canada (2017).

Return to footnote 272

Footnote 273

The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. Stress. The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (2020).

Return to footnote 273

Footnote 274

Statistics Canada. Mental health of Canadians during the COVID-19 pandemic. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 274

Footnote 275

Arriagada, P., Hahmann, T. & O'Donnell, V. Indigenous people and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 275

Footnote 276

Wang, G., Zhang, Y., Zhao, J., Zhang, J. & Jiang, F. Mitigate the effects of home confinement on children during the COVID-19 outbreak. The Lancet 395, 945-947 (2020).

Return to footnote 276

Footnote 277

McKinnon, M. & Lanius, R. Hard choices put health workers at risk of mental anguish, PTSD during coronavirus. The Canadian Press (2020).

Return to footnote 277

Footnote 278

Rossi, R. et al. Mental Health Outcomes among Frontline and Second-Line Health Care Workers during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic in Italy. The Journal of the American Medical Association Network Open 3, e2010185 (2020).

Return to footnote 278

Footnote 279

Besheer, M. After COVID-19 Losses, NYC to Offer Trauma Counseling for Front-Line Workers. Voice of America News COVID-19 Pandemics (2020).

Return to footnote 279

Footnote 280

Lai, J. et al. Factors Associated with Mental Health Outcomes Among Health Care Workers Exposed to Coronavirus Disease 2019. The Journal of the American Medical Association Network Open 3, e203976 (2020).

Return to footnote 280

Footnote 281

Reger, M. A., Stanley, I. H. & Joiner, T. E. Suicide Mortality and Coronavirus Disease 2019 - A Perfect Storm? The Journal of the American Medical Association Psychiatry (2020).

Return to footnote 281

Footnote 282

Phoenix Australia – Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health and the Canadian Centre of Excellence – PTSD. Moral Stress amongst Healthcare Workers during COVID-19: A Guide to Moral Injury. Phoenix Australia – Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health and the Canadian Centre of Excellence – PTSD (2020).

Return to footnote 282

Footnote 283

Statistics Canada. Caregivers in Canada, 2018. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 283

Footnote 284

Drury, J. Family Caregivers as Essential Partners in Care: More than Just a Visitor. Canadian Foundation for Healthcare Improvement (2020).

Return to footnote 284

Footnote 285

Phillips, D. et al. The invisible workforce during the COVID-19 pandemic: Family carers at the frontline. Health Research Board Open Research 3, 24 (2020).

Return to footnote 285

Footnote 286

Alzheimer Society British Columbia. Self-care and caregiver resilience during COVID-19. Alzheimer Society British Columbia (2020).

Return to footnote 286

Footnote 287

The Ontario Caregiver Organization. Caregiver Mental Health during COVID-19 Outbreak. The Ontario Caregiver Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 287

Footnote 288

Vigo, D. et al. Mental Health of Communities during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 65, 681-687 (2020).

Return to footnote 288

Footnote 289

Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. Mental health and addictions organizations call on province for $100 million COVID-19 emergency response package. Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (2020).

Return to footnote 289

Footnote 290

Cheung, Y. T., Chau, P. H. & Yip, P. S. F. A revisit on older adults' suicides and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) epidemic in Hong Kong. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 23, 1231-1238 (2008).

Return to footnote 290

Footnote 291

Gunnell, D. et al. Suicide risk and prevention during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet Psychiatry 7, 468-471 (2020).

Return to footnote 291

Footnote 292

Yip, P. S., Cheung Y. T., Chau, P.H. & Law, Y. W. The impact of epidemic outbreak: the case of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and suicide among older adults in Hong Kong. Crisis (2010).

Return to footnote 292

Footnote 293

McIntyre, R. S. & Lee, Y. Projected increases in suicide in Canada as a consequence of COVID-19. Psychiatry Research 290, 113104 (2020).

Return to footnote 293

Footnote 294

Canadian Mental Health Association. COVID-19 effects on the mental health of vulnerable populations. Canadian Mental Health Association (2020).

Return to footnote 294

Footnote 295

Statistics Canada. Canadian Community Health Survey, 2019. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 295

Footnote 296

Statistics Canada. Canadian Community Health Survey, 2015. The Daily (2017).

Return to footnote 296

Footnote 297

Deaton, B. J. & Deaton, B. J. Food security and Canada's agricultural system challenged by COVID-19. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie 68, 143-149 (2020).

Return to footnote 297

Footnote 298

Statistics Canada. Food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic, May 2020. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 298

Footnote 299

Hobbs, J. E. Food supply chains during the COVID-19 pandemic. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie 68, 171-176 (2020).

Return to footnote 299

Footnote 300

McKenna, M. L. Policy options to support healthy eating in schools. Canadian Journal of Public Health 101, s14-s18(2010).

Return to footnote 300

Footnote 301

Van Lancker, W. & Parolin, Z. COVID-19, school closures, and child poverty: a social crisis in the making. The Lancet Public Health 5, e243-e244 (2020).

Return to footnote 301

Footnote 302

Rotermann, M. Canadians who report lower self-perceived mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic more likely to report increased use of cannabis, alcohol and tobacco. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 302

Footnote 303

Marsden, J. et al. Mitigating and learning from the impact of COVID-19 infection on addictive disorders. Addiction 115, 1007-1010 (2020).

Return to footnote 303

Footnote 304

Grinspoon, P. A tale of two epidemics: When COVID-19 and opioid addiction collide. Harvard Health Publishing (2020).

Return to footnote 304

Footnote 305

Government of Canada. Opioid-related harms in Canada Published:(June 2020). Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 305

Footnote 306

Ministry of Public Safety & Solicitor General. Illicit Drug Toxicity Deaths in BC January 1, 2010 – August 31, 2020. Government of British Columbia (2020).

Return to footnote 306

Footnote 307

First Nations Health Authority. First Nations Illicit Drug Deaths Rise during COVID-19 Pandemic. First Nations Health Authority (2020).

Return to footnote 307

Footnote 308

Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General. Toxic supply continues to contribute to loss of lives in B.C. Government of British Columbia (2020).

Return to footnote 308

Footnote 309

Public Health Ontario. Interactive Opioid Tool: Opioid-related morbidity and mortality in Ontario. Public Health Ontario (2020).

Return to footnote 309

Footnote 310

Saskatchewan Coroners Service. Confirmed and Suspected Drug Toxicity Deaths. Saskatchewan Coroners Service (2020).

Return to footnote 310

Footnote 311

Government of Alberta. Alberta COVID-19 Opioid Response Surveillance Report: Q2 2020. Government of Alberta (2020).

Return to footnote 311

Footnote 312

Becker, W. C. & Fiellin, D. A. When Epidemics Collide: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the Opioid Crisis. Annals of Internal Medicine 173, 59-60 (2020).

Return to footnote 312

Footnote 313

Government of Canada. Highlights from phase one of the national study on opioid and other drug-related overdose deaths: insights from coroners and medical examiners. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 313

Footnote 314

Ens, A. et al. Evidence-informed policy brief – Substance use and related harms in the context of COVID-19: a conceptual model. Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention Journal 40 (2020).

Return to footnote 314

Footnote 315

Jones, R. P. Injection site scales back physical distancing rules to prevent ODs. CBC News Ottawa (2020).

Return to footnote 315

Footnote 316

Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction. CCENDU Alert Changes Related to COVID-19 in the Illegal Drug Supply and Access to Services, and Resulting Health Harms. Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction (2020).

Return to footnote 316

Footnote 317

Public Health Agency of Canada. Simulating opioid overdose deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic - Internal report. Public Health Agency of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 317

Footnote 318

Boserup, B., McKenney, M. & Elkbuli, A. Alarming trends in US domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. American Journal of Emergency Medicine (2020).

Return to footnote 318

Footnote 319

Human Rights Watch. COVID-19 and Children's Rights. Human Rights Watch (2020).

Return to footnote 319

Footnote 320

United Nations Women. COVID-19 and Ending Violence against Women and Girls. United Nations Women (2020).

Return to footnote 320

Footnote 321

Bradbury-Jones, C. & Isham, L. The pandemic paradox: The consequences of COVID-19 on domestic violence. Journal of Clinical Nursing 29, 2047-2049 (2020).

Return to footnote 321

Footnote 322

Statistics Canada. Canadian Perspectives Survey Series 1: Impacts of COVID-19. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 322

Footnote 323

Arriagada, P., Hahmann, T. & O'Donnell, V. Perceptions of safety of Indigenous people during the COVID-19 pandemic. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 323

Footnote 324

Sistovaris, M. et al. Fact Sheet: Child Welfare and Pandemics. University of Toronto (2020).

Return to footnote 324

Footnote 325

Campbell, A. M. An increasing risk of family violence during the Covid-19 pandemic: Strengthening community collaborations to save lives. Forensic Science International: Reports 2, 100089 (2020).

Return to footnote 325

Footnote 326

Western's Center for Research & Education on Violence against Women and Children. Keep Children Safe from Online Sexual Exploitation and Abuse During the Pandemic. Western's Center for Research & Education on Violence against Women and Children (2020).

Return to footnote 326

Footnote 327

Allen, M. & Jaffray, B. The COVID-19 pandemic and its impacts on Canadian victim services. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 327

Footnote 328

Bradley, N. L., DiPasquale, A. M., Dillabough, K. & Schneider, P. S. Health care practitioners' responsibility to address intimate partner violence related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Canadian Medical Association Journal 192, E609 (2020).

Return to footnote 328

Footnote 329

Messacar, D. & Morissette, R. Work interruptions and financial vulnerability. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 329

Footnote 330

Statistics Canada. Health and social challenges associated with the COVID-19 situation in Canada. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 330

Footnote 331

Jozaghi, E. & Bird, L. COVID-19 and sex workers: human rights, the struggle for safety and minimum income. Canadian Journal of Public Health (2020).

Return to footnote 331

Footnote 332

Platt, L. et al. Sex workers must not be forgotten in the COVID-19 response. The Lancet 396, 9-11 (2020).

Return to footnote 332

Footnote 333

Frenette, M., Frank, K. & Zechuan, D. School Closures and the Online Preparedness of Children during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 333

Footnote 334

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission. BROADBAND FUND: Closing the digital divide in Canada. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 334

Footnote 335

O'Sullivan, R. H., Chen, Y. & Fish, M. C. Parental Mathematics Homework Involvement of Low-Income Families with Middle School Students. School Community Journal 24, 165-187 (2014).

Return to footnote 335

Footnote 336

Smith, J. G., Parental Involvement in Education among Low Income Families: A Case Study. School Community Journal 16 (2005).

Return to footnote 336

Footnote 337

Greenlee, E. & Reid, A. Parents supporting learning at home during the COVID-19 pandemic. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 337

Footnote 338

Canadian Institute for Health Information. Discharge Abstract Database. Canadian Institute for Health Information (2020).

Return to footnote 338

Footnote 339

Canadian Institute for Health Information. NACRS Emergency Department Visits: Comparison of January to March 2019 and January to March 2020. Canadian Institute for Health Information (2020).

Return to footnote 339

Footnote 340

Pasarikovski, C. R. & da Costa, L. The impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Stroke Volume. Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences/Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques, 1-6 (2020).

Return to footnote 340

Footnote 341

Statistics Canada. Provisional death counts and excess mortality, January 2019 to May 2020. The Daily (2020).

Return to footnote 341

Footnote 342

Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada. Abortion rights and healthcare during COVID-19. Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 342

Footnote 343

Lynch, M. E., Williamson, O. D. & Banfield, J. C. COVID-19 Impact and Response by Canadian Pain Clinics: A National Survey of Adult Pain Clinics. Canadian Journal of Pain (2020).

Return to footnote 343

Footnote 344

Botly, L. C. P. et al. COVID-19 Pandemic: Global Impact and Potential Implications for Cardiovascular Disease in Canada. Canadian Journal of Cardiology Open (2020).

Return to footnote 344

Footnote 345

Hammami, A., Harrabi, B., Mohr, M. & Krustrup, P. Physical activity and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Specific recommendations for home-based physical training. Managing Sport and Leisure, 1-6 (2020).

Return to footnote 345

Footnote 346

Statistics Canada. How are Canadians coping with the COVID-19 situation? Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 346

Footnote 347

Lesser, I. A. & Nienhuis, C. P. The Impact of COVID-19 on Physical Activity Behavior and Well-Being of Canadians. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, 3899 (2020).

Return to footnote 347

Footnote 348

Lippi, G., Henry, B. M. & Sanchis-Gomar, F. Physical inactivity and cardiovascular disease at the time of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). European Journal of Preventive Cardiology 27, 906-908 (2020).

Return to footnote 348

Footnote 349

Rundle, A. G., Park, Y., Herbstman, J. B., Kinsey, E. W. & Wang, Y. C. COVID-19–Related School Closings and Risk of Weight Gain Among Children. Obesity 28, 1008-1009 (2020).

Return to footnote 349

Footnote 350

Sallis, J. F., Adlakha, D., Oyeyemi, A. & Salvo, D. An international physical activity and public health research agenda to inform coronavirus disease-2019 policies and practices. Journal of Sport and Health Science 9, 328-334 (2020).

Return to footnote 350

Footnote 351

Gilmour, H. Self-perceived mental health and health-related behaviours of Canadians during the COVID-19 pandemic. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 351

Footnote 352

Reeves, M., Carlsson-Szlezak, P., Whitaker, K. & Abraham, M. Sensing and Shaping the Post-Covid Era. Boston Consulting Group (2020).

Return to footnote 352

Footnote 353

Unicef. Human Rights-based Approach to Programming - What is HRBAP? Unicef (2016).

Return to footnote 353

Footnote 354

World Health Organization. Helsinki Statement on Health in All Policies. World Health Organization (2014).

Return to footnote 354

Footnote 355

Government of Canada. Public health ethics framework: A guide for use in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 355

Footnote 356

Macklem, T. et al. Monetary Policy Report. Bank of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 356

Footnote 357

Renahy, E. et al. Connections between unemployment insurance, poverty and health: A systematic review. European Journal of Public Health 28, 269-275 (2018).

Return to footnote 357

Footnote 358

O'Campo, P. et al. Social welfare matters: A realist review of when, how, and why unemployment insurance impacts poverty and health. Social Science & Medicine 132, 88-94 (2015).

Return to footnote 358

Footnote 359

Naik, Y. et al. Going upstream – an umbrella review of the macroeconomic determinants of health and health inequalities. BioMed Central Public Health 19, 1678 (2019).

Return to footnote 359

Footnote 360

Hira-Friesen, P. Immigrants and Precarious Work in Canada: Trends, 2006–2012. Journal of International Migration and Integration 19, 35-57 (2018).

Return to footnote 360

Footnote 361

Stanford, J. 10 Ways the COVID-19 Pandemic Must Change Work for Good. Centre for Future Work (2020).

Return to footnote 361

Footnote 362

Mental Health Commission of Canada. National Standard of Canada for Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace. Mental Health Commission of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 362

Footnote 363

Vosko, L. F., Tucker, E. & Casey, R. Enforcing Employment Standards for Temporary Migrant Agricultural Workers in Ontario, Canada: Exposing Underexplored Layers of Vulnerability. Memorial University (2020).

Return to footnote 363

Footnote 364

Tucker, E. M., Marsden, S. & Vosko, L. F. Federal Enforcement of Migrant Workers' Labour Rights in Canada: A Research Report. York University (2020).

Return to footnote 364

Footnote 365

Chen, W. & Mehdi, T. Assessing Job Quality in Canada: A Multidimensional Approach. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 365

Footnote 366

Webster, R. K. et al. A systematic review of infectious illness presenteeism: Prevalence, reasons and risk factors. BioMed Central Public Health 19, 799 (2019).

Return to footnote 366

Footnote 367

Benach, J., Vives, A., Tarafa, G., Delclos, C. & Muntaner, C. What should we know about precarious employment and health in 2025? Framing the agenda for the next decade of research. International Journal of Epidemiology 45, 232-238 (2016).

Return to footnote 367

Footnote 368

KPMG & United Way. Better Business Outcomes through Workforce Security: A Business Case Framework. KPMG International Cooperative (2017).

Return to footnote 368

Footnote 369

World Health Organization. WHO Housing and health guidelines - Recommendations to promote healthy housing for a sustainable and equitable future. World Health Organization (2018).

Return to footnote 369

Footnote 370

Taylor, L. Housing and Health: An Overview of the Literature. Health Affairs Health Policy Brief (2018).

Return to footnote 370

Footnote 371

MacKay, K., Wellner, J. & OMA Health Promotion. Housing and health: OMA calls for urgent government action, housing-supportive policies to improve health outcomes of vulnerable populations. Ontario Medical Review (2013).

Return to footnote 371

Footnote 372

Tribunals Ontario. COVID-19 Updates on Landlord and Tenant Board Operations. Tribunals Ontario (2020).

Return to footnote 372

Footnote 373

Government of British Columbia. COVID-19 Provincial and Federal Benefits. Government of British Columbia (2020).

Return to footnote 373

Footnote 374

Ontario Energy Board. COVID-19 - Off-peak electricity pricing extended to May 31, 2020. Ontario Energy Board (2020).

Return to footnote 374

Footnote 375

Hydro One. Rate Relief: Ontario Government Extends Off-Peak Pricing During COVID-19. Hydro One (2020).

Return to footnote 375

Footnote 376

City of Ottawa. COVID-19 water bill relief. City of Ottawa (2020).

Return to footnote 376

Footnote 377

Government of Alberta. Utility payment deferral. Government of Alberta (2020).

Return to footnote 377

Footnote 378

Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation. COVID-19: Understanding Mortgage Payment Deferral. Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (2020).

Return to footnote 378

Footnote 379

Perri, M., Dosani, N. & Hwang, S. W. COVID-19 and people experiencing homelessness: Challenges and mitigation strategies. Canadian Medical Association Journal 192, E716 (2020).

Return to footnote 379

Footnote 380

Government of Northwest Territories. Northwest Territories Housing Corporation announces units previously reserved for self-isolation purposes to be allocated. Government of Northwest Territories (2020).

Return to footnote 380

Footnote 381

Humphreys, K. L., Myint, M. T. & Zeanah, C. H. Increased Risk for Family Violence during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Pediatrics 146, e20200982 (2020).

Return to footnote 381

Footnote 382

Suleman, S. et al. What paediatricians can do to support children and youth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Canadian Paediatric Society (2020).

Return to footnote 382

Footnote 383

Conway, B., Truong, D. & Wuerth, K. COVID-19 in homeless populations: Unique challenges and opportunities. Future Virology (2020).

Return to footnote 383

Footnote 384

Government of Canada. Housing First. Government of Canada (2019).

Return to footnote 384

Footnote 385

Gaetz, S., Scott, F. & Gulliver, T. Housing First in Canada: Supporting Communities to End Homelessness. Canadian Homelessness Research Network Press (2013).

Return to footnote 385

Footnote 386

Armstrong, P., Armstrong, H., Choiniere, J., Lowndes, R. & Struthers, J. Re-imagining Long-term Residential Care in the COVID-19 Crisis. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (2020).

Return to footnote 386

Footnote 387

Canadian Foundation for Healthcare Improvement & Canadian Patient Safety Institute. Reimagining Care for Older Adults: Next Steps in COVID-19 Response in Long-Term Care and Retirement Homes - What We Heard. Canadian Foundation for Healthcare Improvement (2020).

Return to footnote 387

Footnote 388

Employment and Social Development Canada. Core community supports to age in community. Government of Canada (2019).

Return to footnote 388

Footnote 389

World Health Organization. Addressing Violence against Children, Women and Older People during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Key Actions. World Health Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 389

Footnote 390

VAW Learning Network. COVID-19 & Gender-Based Violence in Canada: Key Issues and Recommendations. VAW Learning Network (2020).

Return to footnote 390

Footnote 391

Tam, T. The Chief Public Health Officer's Report on the State of Public Health in Canada, 2017: Designing Healthy Living. Public Health Agency of Canada (2017).

Return to footnote 391

Footnote 392

Summers, J. K. & Vivian, D. N. Ecotherapy - A Forgotten Ecosystem Service: A Review. Frontiers in Psychology 9, 1389-1389 (2018).

Return to footnote 392

Footnote 393

Megahed, N. A. & Ghoneim, E. M. Antivirus-built environment: Lessons learned from Covid-19 pandemic. Sustain Cities & Society 61 (2020).

Return to footnote 393

Footnote 394

Freeman, S. & Eykelbosh, A. COVID-19 and outdoor safety: Considerations for use of outdoor recreational spaces. National Collaborating Centre for Environmental Health (2020).

Return to footnote 394

Footnote 395

City of Vancouver. City issues more than 360 temporary patio permits and expands public space on Robson Street. City of Vancouver (2020).

Return to footnote 395

Footnote 396

City of Toronto. CaféTO - Expanded Outdoor Dining and Café Placement Guidelines. City of Toronto (2020).

Return to footnote 396

Footnote 397

Infrastructure Canada. Canada Healthy Communities Initiative. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 397

Footnote 398

BC Centre for Disease Control. Healthy Built Environment Linkages Toolkit: Making the links between design, planning and health. Provincial Health Services Authority (2018).

Return to footnote 398

Footnote 399

Canadian Human Rights Commission. Statement - Inequality amplified by COVID-19 crisis. Canadian Human Rights Commission (2020).

Return to footnote 399

Footnote 400

Wood, D. A. et al. Safe Reintroduction of Cardiovascular Services during the COVID-19 Pandemic: From the North American Society Leadership. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 75, 3177-3183 (2020).

Return to footnote 400

Footnote 401

Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Telemedicine and virtual care guidelines (and other clinical resources for COVID-19). Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 401

Footnote 402

Dickinson, J. A., Thériault, G., Singh, H., Szafran, O. & Grad, R. Rethinking screening during and after COVID-19: Should things ever be the same again? Canadian Family Physician 66, 571-575 (2020).

Return to footnote 402

Footnote 403

Moulson, N. et al. Cardiac Rehabilitation during the COVID-19 Era: Guidance on Implementing Virtual Care. Canadian Journal of Cardiology 36, 1317-1321 (2020).

Return to footnote 403

Footnote 404

Virani, S. A. et al. Optimizing Access to Heart Failure Care in Canada During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Canadian Journal of Cardiology 36, 1148-1151 (2020).

Return to footnote 404

Footnote 405

Dremer, M. Virtual Care Playbook. Canadian Medical Association (2020).

Return to footnote 405

Footnote 406

Lasby, D. Imagine Canada's Sector Monitor Charities & the COVID-19 Pandemic. Imagine Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 406

Footnote 407

Das, L. T. & Gonzalez, C. J. Preparing Telemedicine for the Frontlines of Healthcare Equity. Journal of General Internal Medicine 35, 2443-2444 (2020).

Return to footnote 407

Footnote 408

Crawford, A. & Serhal, E. Digital Health Equity and COVID-19: The Innovation Curve Cannot Reinforce the Social Gradient of Health. Journal of Medical Internet Research 22, e19361 (2020).

Return to footnote 408

Footnote 409

Nouri, S., Khoong, E. C., Lyles, C. R. & Karliner, L. Addressing Equity in Telemedicine for Chronic Disease Management During the Covid-19 Pandemic. New England Journal of Medicine Catalyst (2020).

Return to footnote 409

Footnote 410

Annaswamy, T. M., Verduzco-Gutierrez, M. & Frieden, L. Telemedicine barriers and challenges for persons with disabilities: Covid-19 and beyond. Disability and Health Journal (2020).

Return to footnote 410

Footnote 411

MacDonald, N. E., Comeau, J. L., Dubé, È. & Bucci, L. M. COVID-19 and missed routine immunizations: designing for effective catch-up in Canada. Canadian Journal of Public Health 111, 469-472 (2020).

Return to footnote 411

Footnote 412

Government of Canada. Helping people who use substances during the COVID-19 pandemic. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 412

Footnote 413

Health Canada. Subsection 56(1) class exemption for patients, practitioners and pharmacists prescribing and providing controlled substances in Canada during the coronavirus pandemic. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 413

Footnote 414

Pearce, L. A. et al. Opioid agonist treatment and risk of mortality during opioid overdose public health emergency: population based retrospective cohort study. The British Medical Journal 368, m772 (2020).

Return to footnote 414

Footnote 415

Ahamad, K. et al. Risk Mitigation in the Context of Dual Public Health Emergencies. British Columbia Centre on Substance Use (2020).

Return to footnote 415

Footnote 416

Crockford, D. The COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on addiction treatment. The Canadian Journal of Addiction 11, 7-8 (2020).

Return to footnote 416

Footnote 417

Bach, P., Robinson, S., Sutherland, C. & Brar, R. Innovative strategies to support physical distancing among individuals with active addiction. The Lancet Psychiatry, S2215-0366(20)30231-5 (2020).

Return to footnote 417

Footnote 418

Canadian Research Initiative in Substance Misuse. COVID-19 Pandemic – National Rapid Guidance. Canadian Research Initiative in Substance Misuse (2020).

Return to footnote 418

Footnote 419

BC Centre for Disease Control. BC Centre for Disease Control Information Sheet: COVID-19: Harm Reduction and Overdose Response. British Columbia Centre for Disease Control (2020).

Return to footnote 419

Footnote 420

Wright, T. Discussion on decriminalizing drugs should be considered in wake of opioid deaths: Tam. Global News Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 420

Footnote 421

Special Purpose Committee on the Decriminalization of Illicit Drugs. Findings and recommendations report Decriminalization for Simple Possession of Illicit Drugs: Exploring Impacts on Public Safety & Policing. Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (2020).

Return to footnote 421

Footnote 422

The Canadian Press. B.C. premier asks Trudeau to decriminalize drug possession as overdose deaths spike. CBC News British Columbia (2020).

Return to footnote 422

Footnote 423

Perrin, B. I was Stephen Harper's criminal justice adviser. But I now think Canada should decriminalize drugs. The Globe and Mail Opinion (2020).

Return to footnote 423

Footnote 424

Browne, D., Roy, S., Phillips, M., Stephenson, M. & Shamon, S. Supporting Patient and Clinician Mental Health during COVID-19 via Trauma-Informed Interdisciplinary Systems. Canadian Family Physician 66, e190-e192 (2020).

Return to footnote 424

Footnote 425

Torous, J., Jän Myrick, K., Rauseo-Ricupero, N. & Firth, J. Digital Mental Health and COVID-19: Using Technology Today to Accelerate the Curve on Access and Quality Tomorrow. Journal of Medical Internet Research Mental Health 7, e18848 (2020).

Return to footnote 425

Footnote 426

Hansel, T. C., Saltzman, L. Y. & Bordnick, P. S. Behavioral Health and Response for COVID-19. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, 1-7 (2020).

Return to footnote 426

Footnote 427

Mental Health Commission of Canada. Newfoundland and Labrador Stepped Care 2.0© E-Mental Health Demonstration Project. Mental Health Commission of Canada (2019).

Return to footnote 427

Footnote 428

Health Canada. Government of Canada connects Canadians with mental wellness supports during COVID-19. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 428

Footnote 429

Ontario Nonprofit Network. Ontario Nonprofits and the Impact of COVID-19: A flash survey report. Ontario Nonprofit Network (2020).

Return to footnote 429

Footnote 430

Jensen, E. Sector Stories: How 7 Nonprofits are changing their Programs Due to COVID-19. Imagine Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 430

Footnote 431

WISH Vancouver. WISH Vancouver Charity. WISH Vancouver (2020).

Return to footnote 431

Footnote 432

Brigadoon Village. Virtual Village 2020 program details for campers. Brigadoon Village (2020).

Return to footnote 432

Footnote 433

Imagine Canada. Policy Proposal: Partners in Well-Being - A Government-Charitable Sector Response to COVID-19. Imagine Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 433

Footnote 434

Reimers, F. M. & Schleicher, A. A framework to guide an education response to the COVID-19 Pandemic of 2020. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2020).

Return to footnote 434

Footnote 435

Crosby, S. D., Howell, P. B. & Thomas, S. Teaching through Collective Trauma in the Era of COVID-19: Trauma-informed Practices for Middle Level Learners. Middle Grades Review 6 (2020).

Return to footnote 435

Footnote 436

Sandoval, J. Crisis Counseling, Intervention and Prevention in the Schools 405 (Routledge, New York, 2013).

Return to footnote 436

Footnote 437

Theodore, L. A. Handbook of Evidence-Based Interventions for Children and Adolescents (Springer Publishing Company, New York, 2016).

Return to footnote 437

Footnote 438

Capurso, M., Dennis, J. L., Salmi, L. P., Parrino, C. & Mazzeschi, C. Empowering Children Through School Re-Entry Activities After the COVID-19 Pandemic. Continuity in Education 1, 64-82 (2020).

Return to footnote 438

Footnote 439

Government of Canada. Centre for Food-borne, Environmental and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases. Government of Canada (2013).

Return to footnote 439

Footnote 440

United Nations Environment Programme. Preventing the next pandemic: Zoonotic diseases and how to break the chain of transmission. A Scientific Assessment with Key Messages for Policy-Makers a Special Volume of UNEP's Frontiers Report Series. United Nations Environment Programme (2020).

Return to footnote 440

Footnote 441

Cunningham, A. A., Daszak, P. & Wood, J. L. N. One Health, emerging infectious diseases and wildlife: two decades of progress? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Society B, Biological Sciences 372 (2017).

Return to footnote 441

Footnote 442

The Center for One Health Research. Zoonotic & infectious disease. University of Washington (2020).

Return to footnote 442

Footnote 443

Jones, K. E. et al. Global trends in emerging infectious diseases. Nature 451, 990-993 (2008).

Return to footnote 443

Footnote 444

Woolhouse, M. E. J. & Gowtage-Sequeria, S. Host range and emerging and re-emerging pathogens. Emerging Infectious Diseases 11, 1842-1847 (2005).

Return to footnote 444

Footnote 445

United Nations. First Person: COVID-19 is not a silver lining for the climate, says UN Environment chief. United Nations News (2020).

Return to footnote 445

Footnote 446

Johnson, C. K. et al. Global shifts in mammalian population trends reveal key predictors of virus spillover risk. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 287, 20192736 (2020).

Return to footnote 446

Footnote 447

World Health Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations & World Organisation for Animal Health. Tripartite Zoonoses Guide (TZG). World Health Organization (WHO), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) (2019).

Return to footnote 447

Footnote 448

Arctic Council. One Health. Arctic Council (2020).

Return to footnote 448

Footnote 449

High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition. Impact of COVID-19 on Food Security and Nutrition. Committee on World Food Security (2020).

Return to footnote 449

Footnote 450

United Nations. Policy Brief: The Impact of COVID-19 on Food Security and Nutrition. United Nations (2020).

Return to footnote 450

Footnote 451

Statistics Canada. COVID-19 Disruptions and Agriculture: Temporary Foreign Workers. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 451

Footnote 452

Food Secure Canada. Growing Resilience and Equity. Food Secure Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 452

Footnote 453

National Farmers Union. Envisioning a Post-Pandemic Agriculture and Food System. National Farmers Union (2020).

Return to footnote 453

Footnote 454

Indigenous Services Canada. Government of Canada announces funding for Indigenous communities and organizations to support community-based responses to COVID-19. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 454

Footnote 455

Logie, C. H. Lessons learned from HIV can inform our approach to COVID-19 stigma. Journal of the International AIDS Society 23, e25504 (2020).

Return to footnote 455

Footnote 456

Government of Canada. Research priorities for COVID-19 vaccines to support public health decisions. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 456

Footnote 457

Shah, A., Marks, P. W. & Hahn, S. M. Unwavering Regulatory Safeguards for COVID-19 Vaccines. The Journal of the American Medical Association 324, 931-932 (2020).

Return to footnote 457

Footnote 458

Health Commons Solutions Lab. "Lessons from Toronto's Hardest Hit Communities: Experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic in North Etobicoke". Health Commons Solutions Lab (2020).

Return to footnote 458

Footnote 459

Government of Canada. Funding Decisions Database - CIHR: "Indigenous Health Counts in Urban Homelands: Estimating COVID-19 Incidence and Mortality among Indigenous Populations Living in Ontario Cities". Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 459

Footnote 460

Statistics Canada. Surveys on the impacts of COVID-19. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 460

Footnote 461

Health Canada. Statement from Health Canada on COVID-19 Serological Tests. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 461

Footnote 462

COVID-19 Immunity Task Force. Final results of initial Canadian SARS-COV-2 seroprevalence study announced. COVID-19 Immunity Task Force (2020).

Return to footnote 462

Footnote 463

National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. Rapid Review: What serological tests are available, and what are their sensitivities and specificities? National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (2020).

Return to footnote 463

Footnote 464

Héma-Québec. Blood Donor Seroprevalence Study: 2.23% of Quebec Adults Contracted COVID-19. Héma-Québec (2020).

Return to footnote 464

Footnote 465

COVID-19 Immunity Task Force. The COVID-19 Immunity Task Force Welcomes the Results of the Blood Donor Seroprevalence Study Led by Héma-Québec. COVID-19 Immunity Task Force (2020).

Return to footnote 465

Footnote 466

Government of Canada. Testing devices for COVID-19: Serological testing devices. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 466

Footnote 467

Statistics Canada. Infonex: Big Data and Analytics for the Public Sector. Statistics Canada (2019).

Return to footnote 467

Footnote 468

Public Health Agency of Canada. Population Health Approach: The Organizing Framework - Key Element 3: Base Decisions On Evidence. Government of Canada (2014).

Return to footnote 468

Footnote 469

Canadian Public Health Association. CPHA calls for culturally safe collection and use of socio-demographic and race-based data. Canadian Public Health Association (2020).

Return to footnote 469

Footnote 470

Zhang, S. & Zuberi, D. Evening the keel: Measuring and responding to precarity in the Canadian labour economy. Canadian Public Administration 60, 28-47 (2017).

Return to footnote 470

Footnote 471

Jeon, S. & Ostrovsky, Y. The impact of COVID-19 on the gig economy: Short- and long-term concerns. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 471

Footnote 472

World Health Organization. General information on risk communication. World Health Organization (2020).

Return to footnote 472

Footnote 473

Li, H. O., Bailey, A., Huynh, D. & Chan, J. YouTube as a source of information on COVID-19: a pandemic of misinformation? British Medical Journal Global Health 5, e002604 (2020).

Return to footnote 473

Footnote 474

Ippolito, G., Hui, D. S., Ntoumi, F., Maeurer, M. & Zumla, A. Toning down the 2019-nCoV media hype—and restoring hope. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine 8, 230-231 (2020).

Return to footnote 474

Footnote 475

Smith, G. D., Ng, F. & Ho Cheung Li, W. COVID-19: Emerging compassion, courage and resilience in the face of misinformation and adversity. Journal of Clinical Nursing 29, 1425-1428 (2020).

Return to footnote 475

Footnote 476

Dornan, C. Science Disinformation in a Time of Pandemic. Public Policy Forum (2020).

Return to footnote 476

Footnote 477

Carleton Newsroom. New Carleton Study Finds COVID—19 Conspiracies and Misinformation Spreading Online. Carleton Newsroom (2020).

Return to footnote 477

Footnote 478

The National Association of Friendship Centres. COVID-19. The National Association of Friendship Centres (2020).

Return to footnote 478

Footnote 479

Alexis Nakota Sioux Nation. #ProtectOurElders Campaign. Alexis Nakota Sioux Nation (2020).

Return to footnote 479

Footnote 480

Johnson, N. F. et al. The online competition between pro- and anti-vaccination views. Nature 582, 230-233 (2020).

Return to footnote 480

Footnote 481

Fadda, M., Albanese, E. & Suggs, L. S. When a COVID-19 vaccine is ready, will we all be ready for it? International Journal of Public Health 65, 711-712 (2020).

Return to footnote 481

Footnote 482

Frank, K. & Arim, R. Canadians' willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine when one becomes available: What role does trust play? Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 482

Footnote 483

Wien, F. First Nations people, Métis and Inuit and COVID-19: Health and social characteristics. National Collaborating Centre for Aboriginal Health (2017).

Return to footnote 483

Footnote 484

Chan, L. et al. FNFNES Final Report for Eight Assembly of First Nations Regions: Draft Comprehensive Technical Report. First Nations Food, Nutrition & Environment Study (2019).

Return to footnote 484

Footnote 485

Arriagada, P., Hahmann, T. & O'Donnell, V. Indigenous people in urban areas: Vulnerabilities to the socioeconomic impacts of COVID-19. Statistics Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 485

Footnote 486

Hahmann, T., Badets, N. & Hughes, J. Indigenous people with disabilities in Canada: First Nations people living off reserve, Métis and Inuit aged 15 years and older. Statistics Canada (2019).

Return to footnote 486

Footnote 487

Population Health and Primary Care Directorate. COVID-19 Daily Epidemiological Update. Indigenous Services Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 487

Footnote 488

First Nations Health Authority. FNHA Reports 86 First Nations Cases of COVID-19 to June 14, 2020. First Nations Health Authority (2020).

Return to footnote 488

Footnote 489

Hill, M. Protecting a People: The Six Nations Success in COVID-19 Prevention. Public Policy Forum (2020).

Return to footnote 489

Footnote 490

Mercer, G. "We are not prepared': Inuit brace for coronavirus to reach remote communities. The Globe and Mail (2020).

Return to footnote 490

Footnote 491

CBC News. First case of COVID-19 in Nunavik confirmed. CBC News North (2020).

Return to footnote 491

Footnote 492

Tranter, E. Pond Inlet and Nunavut breathe sigh of relief after false COVID-19 case. Nunatsiaq News News (2020).

Return to footnote 492

Footnote 493

Métis Nation of Ontario. COVID-19 Update (May 14). Métis Nation of Ontario (2020).

Return to footnote 493

Footnote 494

Métis Nation of Ontario. COVID-19 Support Programs. Métis Nation of Ontario (2020).

Return to footnote 494

Footnote 495

Métis Nation of Alberta. Interim COVID-10 Support Plan Supports to help all Metis in Alberta. Métis Nation of Alberta (2020).

Return to footnote 495

Footnote 496

Métis Nation-Saskatchewan. MN-S supports Saskatchewan Public Health Order issued April 30, 2020. Métis Nation-Saskatchewan (2020).

Return to footnote 496

Footnote 497

Métis Nation-Saskatchewan. Métis Nation – Saskatchewan calls for an immediate, coordinated emergency response to COVID-19 outbreak in north. Métis Nation-Saskatchewan (2020).

Return to footnote 497

Footnote 498

Wolf, L. J., Haddock, G., Manstead, A. S. R. & Maio, G. R. The importance of (shared) human values for containing the COVID-19 pandemic. British Journal of Social Psychology 59, 618-627 (2020).

Return to footnote 498

Footnote 499

Habersaat, K. B. et al. Ten considerations for effectively managing the COVID-19 transition. Nature Human Behaviour 4, 677-687 (2020).

Return to footnote 499

Footnote 500

Paquet, M. & Schertzer, R. COVID-19 as a Complex Intergovernmental Problem. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue Canadienne De Science Politique, 1-5 (2020).

Return to footnote 500

Footnote 501

Schertzer, R. & Paquet, M. The lessons from recent crises are helping federal and provincial governments work together to respond to COVID-19, but also signal hurdles ahead. Policy Options (2020).

Return to footnote 501

Footnote 502

Migone, A. R. Trust, but customize: federalism's impact on the Canadian COVID-19 response. Policy and Society 39, 382-402 (2020).

Return to footnote 502

Footnote 503

Merkley, E. et al. A Rare Moment of Cross-Partisan Consensus: Elite and Public Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic in Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 1-8 (2020).

Return to footnote 503

Footnote 504

Vinkers, C. H. et al. Stress resilience during the coronavirus pandemic. Journal of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology 35, 12-16 (2020).

Return to footnote 504

Footnote 505

Lewis, L. & Ehrenberg, N. Realising the true value of integrated care: Beyond COVID-19. International Foundation for Integrated Care (2020).

Return to footnote 505

Footnote 506

ProMED International Society for Infectious Diseases. ProMED - Mail. ProMED International Society for Infectious Diseases (2020).

Return to footnote 506

Footnote 507

Abedi, M. Coronavirus: 3 Canadian airports ramp up screening process for travellers. Global News Health (2020).

Return to footnote 507

Footnote 508

The Canadian Press. Timeline of COVID-19 cases across Canada. CBC News Health (2020).

Return to footnote 508

Footnote 509

Culbert, L. COVID-19's early days 'really scary' at Lynn Valley home, which is now virus-free. Vancouver Sun Health (2020).

Return to footnote 509

Footnote 510

Young, L. Canada has reported more than 100 cases of novel coronavirus disease. Global News Health (2020).

Return to footnote 510

Footnote 511

Bronca, T. COVID-19: A Canadian timeline. Canadian Healthcare Network (2020).

Return to footnote 511

Footnote 512

Cotnam, H. Federal public servants should work from home if possible: TBS. CBC News Ottawa (2020).

Return to footnote 512

Footnote 513

Thom, S. COVID-19 outbreak among foreign workers declared over at Bylands Nurseries. Global News Health (2020).

Return to footnote 513

Footnote 514

Public Health Agency of Canada. Council of Chief Medical Officers of Health Communication: Use of Non-Medical Masks (or Facial Coverings) by the Public. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 514

Footnote 515

Casey, L. COVID-19 spreading among Toronto's homeless, with 30 cases reported. CBC News Toronto (2020).

Return to footnote 515

Footnote 516

Casey, L. COVID-19 outbreak surges among homeless in Toronto with 135 cases. CTV News Toronto (2020).

Return to footnote 516

Footnote 517

City of Toronto. Active COVID-19 Outbreaks in Toronto Shelters, May 8 2020. City of Toronto (2020).

Return to footnote 517

Footnote 518

Correctional Service Canada. Lockdown at the Federal Training Centre – multi-level security unit. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 518

Footnote 519

Correctional Service Canada. Inmate COVID-19 testing in federal correctional institutions July 22, 2020. Government of Canada (2020).

Return to footnote 519

Footnote 520

Kirkup, K. & Mcleod, M. Alarming coronavirus outbreak hits northern Saskatchewan. The Globe and Mail Ontario (2020).

Return to footnote 520

Footnote 521

Quenneville, G. 'We have an outbreak situation in La Loche,' top doc says. CBC News Saskatoon (2020).

Return to footnote 521

Footnote 522

Brown, S. & Quon, A. N.B. to allow outdoor activities, family ‘bubbles’ in relaxing COVID-19 restrictions. Global News Health (2020).

Return to footnote 522

Footnote 523

Anderson, D. Father of Cargill worker becomes 2nd person to die in massive outbreak linked to slaughterhouse. CBC News Calgary (2020).

Return to footnote 523

Footnote 524

Rieger, S. 3rd death linked to Canada's largest COVID-19 outbreak at Alberta slaughterhouse. CBC News Calgary (2020).

Return to footnote 524

Footnote 525

Saskatchewan Health Authority. Public Health Advisory – R.M. of Maple Creek No. 111. Saskatchewan Health Authority (2020).

Return to footnote 525

Page details

Date modified:: 2021-10-27

From risk to resilience: An equity approach to COVID-19

Chief Public Health Officer of Canada's Report on the State of Public Health in Canada 2020

Table of contents

Message from the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada

About this report

Section 1: COVID-19 in Canada

Introduction

Beginning of COVID-19

Epidemiological snapshot of COVID-19

Globally

Nationally

Variations of the epidemic in Canada

International travel and community transmission have played a significant role

The COVID-19 situation has unfolded differently across the country

COVID-19 impacts have varied depending on individual health status

COVID-19 impacts vary across age

COVID-19 burden not equal across populations in Canada

Long-term care home residents and workers

Age-related trends

COVID-19 affects the sexes differently

Risks for essential workers

Confined working conditions fuel transmission

Group living conditions may promote viral spread

Marginalization increased risk

Canada's public health response

Whole-of-society approach

Responses to facilitate transitioning towards living with COVID-19

Section 2: COVID-19 is not impacting Canadians equally

The health of people in Canada was inequitable before COVID-19

Differences in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality

Factors that shape the differential direct impacts of COVID-19

Differential exposure to COVID-19

Differential susceptibility

Differential treatment

Impact of public health measures in response to COVID-19

Overall impact on Canadians

Loss of employment/decreased employment

Impact on social cohesion and social connectedness

Cumulative impact of COVID-19 and public health measures on mental health

Food insecurity and reduced access to healthy foods

Disproportionate impacts on some groups

Substance use

Safety and family violence

Potential long-term impacts

Long-term economic stability

Interrupted educational opportunities, differential access to distance learning

Health system impacts

Impact on physical activity

Section 3: Moving forward from COVID-19

Crisis can lead to change: A health equity approach

High impact areas of action

How we work

What we can continue to work on together

Where we live

What we can continue to work on together

Our health, social service and education systems

What we can continue to work on together

Our environment

What we can continue to work on together

Foundational requirements for structural change

Reducing stigma and discrimination

What we can continue to work on together

Data for understanding and decision-making

What we can continue to work on together

Communication

What we can continue to work on together

Working together, at every level

What we can continue to work on together

The way forward

Incorporating health equity into pandemic preparedness and response

1. Leadership and governance at all levels for structural change

2. Harnessing the power of social cohesion

3. Strengthened public health capacity

Going forward

Appendix 1: Timeline of selected milestones and public health interventions (December 2019 to June 2020)

Appendix 2: Methodology

Process

Limitations

Scope

Literature search