Articles: pandemics.
-
Adjuvants may enhance the efficacy of vaccines. however, the efficacy of adjuvant-associated COVID-19 vaccines (ACVs) remains unclear since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to address this gap by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of ACVs against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 CoV (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOC). ⋯ In this meta-analysis, it should be that full vaccination with ACVs has high efficacy against Alpha or Gamma variants and moderate efficacy against Beta and Delta variants. Notably, with the exception of the aluminum-adjuvanted vaccine, the other ACVs had moderate to high efficacy against the SARS-CoV-2 variant. This raises concerns about the effectiveness of ACVs booster vaccinations against Omicron.
-
This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the links between the level of physical activity and the risk of anxiety or depression among college students in China during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic. ⋯ The physical activity level of college students is negatively correlated with anxiety and depression in China during the pandemic. During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic, it is necessary to strengthen the construction of university physical education courses. As an organized form of physical activity, physical education classes are a necessary and effective way to increase physical activity among college students.
-
Meta Analysis
GDF-15 (a biomarker for metformin) and the risk of COVID-19: A two-sample Mendelian randomization study.
Regarding the impact of metformin on COVID-19, there are currently varying opinions from multiple studies. Growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15) is a biomarker of metformin use and dosage, and we used two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) to assess the causal effect of GDF-15 (metformin) on COVID-19 susceptibility, hospitalization, and severe COVID-19, thereby guiding the selection of glucose-lowering agents for diabetic patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. ⋯ Our study supports the notion that GDF-15 increases the risk of severe COVID-19 in patients. However, there is no causal relationship between GDF-15 and hospitalization or susceptibility to COVID-19.
-
Meta Analysis
Efficacy of supplemental hemoadsorption therapy on severe and critical patients with COVID-19: an evidence-based analysis.
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a disproportionately high threat to the global health system and social stability. COVID-19 damage can lead to hyperinflammation and tissue damage due to a "cytokine storm," which in turn contributes to an increase in the mortality rate. Extracorporeal hemoadsorption therapy (HAT) in patients with severe COVID-19 may improve organ function and stabilize hemodynamic status; however, the effects of supplemental HAT remain controversial. ⋯ Conclusion: Given the better mortality outcomes, HAT confers clinical benefits to patients with severe COVID-19, which correlated with cytokine removal by HAT. Cytokine adsorption may not provide clinical benefits for patients with severe COVID-19 requiring ECMO and should be used with caution. However, because of the very low quality of evidence, multicenter randomized trials with large sample sizes are required to verify these findings.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Aug 2023
Review Meta AnalysisProphylactic anticoagulants for non-hospitalised people with COVID-19.
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted healthcare systems worldwide. Multiple reports on thromboembolic complications related to COVID-19 have been published, and researchers have described that people with COVID-19 are at high risk for developing venous thromboembolism (VTE). Anticoagulants have been used as pharmacological interventions to prevent arterial and venous thrombosis, and their use in the outpatient setting could potentially reduce the prevalence of vascular thrombosis and associated mortality in people with COVID-19. However, even lower doses used for a prophylactic purpose may result in adverse events such as bleeding. It is important to consider the evidence for anticoagulant use in non-hospitalised people with COVID-19. ⋯ We found low- to moderate-certainty evidence from five RCTs that prophylactic anticoagulants result in little or no difference in major bleeding, DVT, need for hospitalisation, or adverse events when compared with placebo or no treatment in non-hospitalised people with COVID-19. Low-certainty evidence indicates that prophylactic anticoagulants may result in little or no difference in all-cause mortality when compared with placebo or no treatment, but moderate-certainty evidence indicates that prophylactic anticoagulants probably reduce the incidence of VTE and PE. Low-certainty evidence suggests that comparing different doses of the same prophylactic anticoagulant may result in little or no difference in need for hospitalisation or adverse events. Prophylactic anticoagulants may result in little or no difference in risk of VTE, hospitalisation, or adverse events when compared with antiplatelet agents (low-certainty evidence). Given that there were only short-term data from one study, these results should be interpreted with caution. Additional trials of sufficient duration are needed to clearly determine any effect on clinical outcomes.