Brazilian recommendations on the safety and effectiveness of the yellow fever vaccination in patients with chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases

Background: In Brazil, we are facing an alarming epidemic scenario of Yellow fever (YF), which is reaching the most populous areas of the country in unvaccinated people. Vaccination is the only effective tool to prevent YF. In special situations, such as patients with chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (CIMID), undergoing immunosuppressive therapy, as a higher risk of severe adverse events may occur, assessment of the risk-benefit ratio of the yellow fever vaccine (YFV) should be performed on an individual level. Main body of the abstract: Faced with the scarcity of specific orientation on YFV for this special group of patients, the Brazilian Rheumatology Society (BRS) endorsed a project aiming the development of individualized YFV recommendations for patients with CIMID, guided by questions addressed by both medical professionals and patients, followed an internationally validated methodology (GIN-McMaster Guideline Development). Firstly, a systematic review was carried out and an expert panel formed to take part of the decision process, comprising BRS clinical practitioners, as well as individuals from the Brazilian Dermatology Society (BDS), Brazilian Inflammatory Bowel Diseases Study Group (GEDIIB), and specialists on infectious diseases and vaccination (from Tropical Medicine, Infectious Diseases and Immunizations National Societies); in addition, two representatives of patient groups were included as members of the panel. When the quality of the evidence was low or there was a lack of evidence to determine the recommendations, the decisions were based on the expert opinion panel and a Delphi approach was performed. A recommendation was accepted upon achieving ≥80% agreement among the panel, including the patient representatives. As a result, eight recommendations were developed regarding the safety of YFV in patients with CIMID, considering the immunosuppression degree conferred by the treatment used. It was not possible to establish recommendations on the effectiveness of YFV in these patients as there is no consistent evidence to support these recommendations. Conclusion: This paper approaches a real need, assessed by clinicians and patient care groups, to address specific questions on the management of YFV in patients with CIMID living or traveling to YF endemic areas, involving specialists from many areas together with patients, and might have global applicability, contributing to and supporting vaccination practices. We recommended a shared decision-making approach on taking or not the YFV

Measuring the burden of infodemics : summary of the methods and results of the fifth WHO infodemic management conference

Background: An infodemic is excess information, including false or misleading information, that spreads in digital and physical environments during a public health emergency. The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by an unprecedented global infodemic that has led to confusion about the benefits of medical and public health interventions, with substantial impact on risk-taking and health-seeking behaviors, eroding trust in health authorities and compromising the effectiveness of public health responses and policies. Standardized measures are needed to quantify the harmful impacts of the infodemic in a systematic and methodologically robust manner, as well as harmonizing highly divergent approaches currently explored for this purpose. This can serve as a foundation for a systematic, evidence-based approach to monitoring, identifying, and mitigating future infodemic harms in emergency preparedness and prevention. Objective: In this paper, we summarize the Fifth World Health Organization (WHO) Infodemic Management Conference structure, proceedings, outcomes, and proposed actions seeking to identify the interdisciplinary approaches and frameworks needed to enable the measurement of the burden of infodemics. Methods: An iterative human-centered design (HCD) approach and concept mapping were used to facilitate focused discussions and allow for the generation of actionable outcomes and recommendations. The discussions included 86 participants representing diverse scientific disciplines and health authorities from 28 countries across all WHO regions, along with observers from civil society and global public health–implementing partners. A thematic map capturing the concepts matching the key contributing factors to the public health burden of infodemics was used throughout the conference to frame and contextualize discussions. Five key areas for immediate action were identified. Results: The 5 key areas for the development of metrics to assess the burden of infodemics and associated interventions included (1) developing standardized definitions and ensuring the adoption thereof; (2) improving the map of concepts influencing the burden of infodemics; (3) conducting a review of evidence, tools, and data sources; (4) setting up a technical working group; and (5) addressing immediate priorities for postpandemic recovery and resilience building. The summary report consolidated group input toward a common vocabulary with standardized terms, concepts, study designs, measures, and tools to estimate the burden of infodemics and the effectiveness of infodemic management interventions. Conclusions: Standardizing measurement is the basis for documenting the burden of infodemics on health systems and population health during emergencies. Investment is needed into the development of practical, affordable, evidence-based, and systematic methods that are legally and ethically balanced for monitoring infodemics; generating diagnostics, infodemic insights, and recommendations; and developing interventions, action-oriented guidance, policies, support options, mechanisms, and tools for infodemic managers and emergency program managers.peer-reviewe

Opinions, Attitudes and Factors Related to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Uptake in Eight South American Countries

This article presents attitudes and practices regarding COVID-19 vaccination in the South American population. The study collected data from a self-administered survey distributed through social media platforms between February and April 2022 (N = 6555). The survey included questions related to participants’ sociodemographic background, flu vaccination practices, sources of information about COVID-19, and opinions regarding pandemic management and vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. The respondents agreed with the statement that COVID-19 vaccines were necessary (86.4%), effective (79.8%), safe (79.1%), and should be mandatory (64%). Overall, 83.4% accepted vaccination and 12.3% refused it completely. Main rejection reasons were safety (65.8%) and efficacy (54.9%) issues, and rushed development and approvals (49.1%). Vaccine uptake was associated with being ≥60 years, being a healthcare worker, previous influenza vaccine uptake, adherence to preventive measures, the death of ≥1 close people from COVID-19, and being informed through mass media or health authorities’ channels. Vaccine uptake inversely correlated with male gender, low educational level, and use of closed social networks for COVID-19 information purposes. This study provides valuable insights into COVID-19 vaccination attitudes and practices in South America that may be used to promote vaccine uptake in the region. Higher COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among people with previously acquired prevention habits reinforces the importance of routine health promotion strategies

Rotavírus e alergia alimentar: uma breve revisão sobre a doença e a importância da vacinação

Artigo produzido a partir da Nota Técnica SBIm sobre o tema, disponível em http://sbim.org.br/images/ files/nota-sbim-asbai-sbp-rotavirus08022017-v2.pdf.Sociedade Brasileira de Imunizações. São Paulo, SP, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Imunizações. São Paulo, SP, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Imunizações. São Paulo, SP, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Imunizações. São Paulo, SP, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Imunizações. São Paulo, SP, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Imunizações. São Paulo, SP, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.Associação Brasileira de Alergia e Imunologia. São Paulo, SP, Brasil.Associação Brasileira de Alergia e Imunologia. São Paulo, SP, Brasil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Os questionamentos sobre a utilização da vacina rotavírus são frequentes, tanto da parte de médicos quanto de pacientes. As principais dúvidas são sobre a eficácia e segurança da vacina. Porém, os casos de crianças com quadros de alergia alimentar também despertam a atenção, em especial quando há diagnóstico ou suspeita de alergia à proteína do leite de vaca (APLV). Com o objetivo de esclarecer e orientar o profissional da Saúde, especialmente o pediatra, para uma adequada prescrição, os departamentos científicos de imunizações e alergia das sociedades brasileiras de Imunizações (SBIm), de Alergia e Imunologia (Asbai) e de Pediatria (SBP), além do Instituto Evandro Chagas, produziram uma breve revisão sobre a doença por rotavírus, as vacinas hoje licenciadas e a importância de sua utilização, além de comentários sobre alergia alimentar

Measuring the Burden of Infodemics: Summary of the Methods and Results of the Fifth WHO Infodemic Management Conference.

BACKGROUND: An infodemic is excess information, including false or misleading information, that spreads in digital and physical environments during a public health emergency. The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by an unprecedented global infodemic that has led to confusion about the benefits of medical and public health interventions, with substantial impact on risk-taking and health-seeking behaviors, eroding trust in health authorities and compromising the effectiveness of public health responses and policies. Standardized measures are needed to quantify the harmful impacts of the infodemic in a systematic and methodologically robust manner, as well as harmonizing highly divergent approaches currently explored for this purpose. This can serve as a foundation for a systematic, evidence-based approach to monitoring, identifying, and mitigating future infodemic harms in emergency preparedness and prevention. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we summarize the Fifth World Health Organization (WHO) Infodemic Management Conference structure, proceedings, outcomes, and proposed actions seeking to identify the interdisciplinary approaches and frameworks needed to enable the measurement of the burden of infodemics. METHODS: An iterative human-centered design (HCD) approach and concept mapping were used to facilitate focused discussions and allow for the generation of actionable outcomes and recommendations. The discussions included 86 participants representing diverse scientific disciplines and health authorities from 28 countries across all WHO regions, along with observers from civil society and global public health-implementing partners. A thematic map capturing the concepts matching the key contributing factors to the public health burden of infodemics was used throughout the conference to frame and contextualize discussions. Five key areas for immediate action were identified. RESULTS: The 5 key areas for the development of metrics to assess the burden of infodemics and associated interventions included (1) developing standardized definitions and ensuring the adoption thereof; (2) improving the map of concepts influencing the burden of infodemics; (3) conducting a review of evidence, tools, and data sources; (4) setting up a technical working group; and (5) addressing immediate priorities for postpandemic recovery and resilience building. The summary report consolidated group input toward a common vocabulary with standardized terms, concepts, study designs, measures, and tools to estimate the burden of infodemics and the effectiveness of infodemic management interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Standardizing measurement is the basis for documenting the burden of infodemics on health systems and population health during emergencies. Investment is needed into the development of practical, affordable, evidence-based, and systematic methods that are legally and ethically balanced for monitoring infodemics; generating diagnostics, infodemic insights, and recommendations; and developing interventions, action-oriented guidance, policies, support options, mechanisms, and tools for infodemic managers and emergency program managers

Measuring the Burden of Infodemics: Summary of the Methods and Results of the Fifth WHO Infodemic Management Conference.

BACKGROUND: An infodemic is excess information, including false or misleading information, that spreads in digital and physical environments during a public health emergency. The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by an unprecedented global infodemic that has led to confusion about the benefits of medical and public health interventions, with substantial impact on risk-taking and health-seeking behaviors, eroding trust in health authorities and compromising the effectiveness of public health responses and policies. Standardized measures are needed to quantify the harmful impacts of the infodemic in a systematic and methodologically robust manner, as well as harmonizing highly divergent approaches currently explored for this purpose. This can serve as a foundation for a systematic, evidence-based approach to monitoring, identifying, and mitigating future infodemic harms in emergency preparedness and prevention. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we summarize the Fifth World Health Organization (WHO) Infodemic Management Conference structure, proceedings, outcomes, and proposed actions seeking to identify the interdisciplinary approaches and frameworks needed to enable the measurement of the burden of infodemics. METHODS: An iterative human-centered design (HCD) approach and concept mapping were used to facilitate focused discussions and allow for the generation of actionable outcomes and recommendations. The discussions included 86 participants representing diverse scientific disciplines and health authorities from 28 countries across all WHO regions, along with observers from civil society and global public health-implementing partners. A thematic map capturing the concepts matching the key contributing factors to the public health burden of infodemics was used throughout the conference to frame and contextualize discussions. Five key areas for immediate action were identified. RESULTS: The 5 key areas for the development of metrics to assess the burden of infodemics and associated interventions included (1) developing standardized definitions and ensuring the adoption thereof; (2) improving the map of concepts influencing the burden of infodemics; (3) conducting a review of evidence, tools, and data sources; (4) setting up a technical working group; and (5) addressing immediate priorities for postpandemic recovery and resilience building. The summary report consolidated group input toward a common vocabulary with standardized terms, concepts, study designs, measures, and tools to estimate the burden of infodemics and the effectiveness of infodemic management interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Standardizing measurement is the basis for documenting the burden of infodemics on health systems and population health during emergencies. Investment is needed into the development of practical, affordable, evidence-based, and systematic methods that are legally and ethically balanced for monitoring infodemics; generating diagnostics, infodemic insights, and recommendations; and developing interventions, action-oriented guidance, policies, support options, mechanisms, and tools for infodemic managers and emergency program managers