32 research outputs found
COVID-19 symptoms at hospital admission vary with age and sex: results from the ISARIC prospective multinational observational study
Background:
The ISARIC prospective multinational observational study is the largest cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We present relationships of age, sex, and nationality to presenting symptoms.
Methods:
International, prospective observational study of 60 109 hospitalized symptomatic patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 recruited from 43 countries between 30 January and 3 August 2020. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate relationships of age and sex to published COVID-19 case definitions and the most commonly reported symptoms.
Results:
‘Typical’ symptoms of fever (69%), cough (68%) and shortness of breath (66%) were the most commonly reported. 92% of patients experienced at least one of these. Prevalence of typical symptoms was greatest in 30- to 60-year-olds (respectively 80, 79, 69%; at least one 95%). They were reported less frequently in children (≤ 18 years: 69, 48, 23; 85%), older adults (≥ 70 years: 61, 62, 65; 90%), and women (66, 66, 64; 90%; vs. men 71, 70, 67; 93%, each P < 0.001). The most common atypical presentations under 60 years of age were nausea and vomiting and abdominal pain, and over 60 years was confusion. Regression models showed significant differences in symptoms with sex, age and country.
Interpretation:
This international collaboration has allowed us to report reliable symptom data from the largest cohort of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Adults over 60 and children admitted to hospital with COVID-19 are less likely to present with typical symptoms. Nausea and vomiting are common atypical presentations under 30 years. Confusion is a frequent atypical presentation of COVID-19 in adults over 60 years. Women are less likely to experience typical symptoms than men
Genomic Detection of the Emerging, Highly Pathogenic HIV-1 Subtype D in Bahia, Northeast Brazil
(1) Background: The HIV subtype D is generally associated with a faster decline in CD4+ T cell counts, a higher viral load, and a faster progression to AIDS. However, it is still poorly characterized in Brazil. In this study, we used genomics and epidemiological data to investigate the transmission dynamics of HIV subtype D in the state of Bahia, Northeast Brazil. (2) Methods: To achieve this goal, we obtained four novel HIV-1 subtype D partial pol genome sequences using the Sanger method. To understand the emergence of this novel subtype in the state of Bahia, we used phylodynamic analysis on a dataset comprising 3704 pol genome sequences downloaded from the Los Alamos database. (3) Results: Our analysis revealed three branching patterns, indicating multiple introductions of the HIV-1 subtype D in Brazil from the late 1980s to the late 2000s and a single introduction event in the state of Bahia. Our data further suggest that these introductions most likely originated from European, Eastern African, Western African, and Southern African countries. (4) Conclusion: Understanding the distribution of HIV-1 viral strains and their temporal dynamics is crucial for monitoring the real-time evolution of circulating subtypes and recombinant forms, as well as for designing novel diagnostic and vaccination strategies. We advocate for a shift to active surveillance, to ensure adequate preparedness for future epidemics mediated by emerging viral strains
Capacitação de bibliotecários com limitação visual pela educação a distância em ambientes virtuais de aprendizagem
Aprendizagem mediada por ferramentas de interação: análise do discurso de professores em um curso de formação continuada a distância Learning mediated by interaction tools: analyzing teachers' discourse in a distance learning course of continued formation
Este texto traz resultados de uma pesquisa sobre a Internet como espaço virtual de aprendizagem. A amostra estudada foi de 80 concluintes de um curso de Extensão para professores. Analisamos os discursos dos fóruns, listas de discussão e e-mails, à luz de categorias, retiradas da obra de Jean Piaget: Predominou a informação adaptada - mostrando interação entre os interlocutores, informando e influindo sobre o comportamento mutuamente, colaborando e discutindo idéias. São atributos indispensáveis para a constituição de "comunidades de aprendizagem virtual", assim como o desenvolvimento de competências como a capacidade de pensar categorialmente, utilizar novos recursos lingüísticos, auto-regular o comportamento e aprendizagem, potencializar determinadas áreas cognitivas, criar novas formas de convívio social, afetivo e cultural.<br>This text brings results of a research about the Internet as a virtual learning environment. The studied sample was a group of 80 students from a teacher extension course. We analyzed speeches from the forums, discussion lists and e-mails, in the light of categories from Jean Piaget's studies. Adapted information prevailed - showing interaction among speakers, informing and mutually influencing behavior, collaborating and discussing ideas. These are indispensable attributes for the constitution of "virtual learning communities", as well as the development of competences such as the capacity to think through categories, use new linguistic resources, regulate one's own behavior and learning, potentiate certain cognitive areas, and create new forms of social, emotional and cultural conviviality
Follow-up study of unknowingly pregnant women vaccinated against rubella in Brazil, 2001–2002
Submitted by Priscila Nascimento ([email protected]) on 2016-05-05T14:15:28Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
J Infect Dis.-2011-Soares-S729-36.pdf: 138239 bytes, checksum: d808064bc43f85635c7b079847b0d329 (MD5)Approved for entry into archive by Priscila Nascimento ([email protected]) on 2016-05-05T14:16:10Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1
J Infect Dis.-2011-Soares-S729-36.pdf: 138239 bytes, checksum: d808064bc43f85635c7b079847b0d329 (MD5)Approved for entry into archive by Priscila Nascimento ([email protected]) on 2016-05-05T17:02:23Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1
J Infect Dis.-2011-Soares-S729-36.pdf: 138239 bytes, checksum: d808064bc43f85635c7b079847b0d329 (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2016-05-05T17:02:23Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
J Infect Dis.-2011-Soares-S729-36.pdf: 138239 bytes, checksum: d808064bc43f85635c7b079847b0d329 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2011National Immunization ProgramSecretariat of Public Health SurveillanceFundação Nacional de Saúde (FUNASA)Pan American Health Organization, BrasiliaMeasles and Respiratory Viruses LaboratoryNational School of Public Health, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation/FIOCRUZDepartment of Rio de Janeiro State Health, Rio de JaneiroEpidemiologic Surveillance Unit, Adolfo Lutz Institute, São Paulo State Health Department, São PauloBahia State Health Department and Public Health Laboratory, SalvadorMinas Gerais State Health Department and Central Public Health Laboratory, Belo HorizonteDepartment of Goiás State Health, GoianiaRio Grande do Sul State Health Department and Central Public Health Laboratory, Porto AlegrePernambuco State Health Department and Central Public Health Laboratory, Recife, BrazilPan American Health Organization, Washington, D.C.Instituto Tecnológico em Imunobiológicos, Fundação Oswaldo CruzBrazil conducted mass immunization of women of childbearing age in 2001 and 2002. Surveillance was initiated for vaccination of women during pregnancy to monitor the effects of rubella vaccination on fetal outcomes.
Methods. Women vaccinated while pregnant or prior to conception were reported to the surveillance system.
Susceptibility to rubella infection was determined by anti-rubella immunoglobulin (Ig) M and IgG immunoassays. Susceptible women were observed through delivery. Live-born infants were tested for anti-rubella IgM antibody; IgM-seropositive newborns were tested for viral shedding and observed for 12 months for signs of congenital rubella syndrome. Incidence of congenital rubella infection was calculated using data from 7 states.
Results. A total of 22 708 cases of rubella vaccination during pregnancy or prior to conception were reported
nationwide, 20 536 (90%) of which were from 7 of 27 states in Brazil. Of these, 2332 women were susceptible to
rubella infection at vaccination. Sixty-seven (4.1%) of 1647 newborns had rubella IgM antibody (incidence rate, 4.1
congenital infections per 100 susceptible women vaccinated during pregnancy [95% confidence interval, 3.2–5.1]).
None of the infants infected with rubella vaccine virus was born with congenital rubella syndrome.
Conclusions. As rubella elimination goals are adopted worldwide, evidence of rubella vaccine safety aids in planning and implementation of mass adult immunization
Follow-up Study of Unknowingly Pregnant Women Vaccinated Against Rubella in Brazil,\ud 2001–2002
Background. Brazil conducted mass immunization of women of childbearing age in 2001 and 2002. Surveillance\ud
was initiated for vaccination of women during pregnancy to monitor the effects of rubella vaccination on fetal outcomes.\ud
Methods. Women vaccinated while pregnant or prior to conception were reported to the surveillance system.\ud
Susceptibility to rubella infection was determined by anti-rubella immunoglobulin (Ig) M and IgG immunoassays.\ud
Susceptible women were observed through delivery. Live-born infants were tested for anti-rubella IgM antibody;\ud
IgM-seropositive newborns were tested for viral shedding and observed for 12 months for signs of congenital rubella\ud
syndrome. Incidence of congenital rubella infection was calculated using data from 7 states.\ud
Results. A total of 22 708 cases of rubella vaccination during pregnancy or prior to conception were reported\ud
nationwide, 20 536 (90%) of which were from 7 of 27 states in Brazil. Of these, 2332 women were susceptible to\ud
rubella infection at vaccination. Sixty-seven (4.1%) of 1647 newborns had rubella IgM antibody (incidence rate, 4.1\ud
congenital infections per 100 susceptible women vaccinated during pregnancy [95% confidence interval, 3.2–5.1]).\ud
None of the infants infected with rubella vaccine virus was born with congenital rubella syndrome.\ud
Conclusions. As rubella elimination goals are adopted worldwide, evidence of rubella vaccine safety aids in\ud
planning and implementation of mass adult immunization.Funding: Brazilian Ministry of Health, State Health Departments, and the Pan- American Health Organization
Field and classroom initiatives for portable sequence-based monitoring of dengue virus in Brazil
This work was supported by Decit, SCTIE, Brazilian
Ministry of Health, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico - CNPq (440685/
2016-8, 440856/2016-7 and 421598/2018-2), Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - CAPES - (88887.130716/2016-00), European Union’s Horizon
2020 Research and Innovation Programme under ZIKAlliance Grant Agreement
(734548), STARBIOS (709517), Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de
Janeiro – FAPERJ (E-26/2002.930/2016), International Development Research Centre
(IDRC) Canada (108411-001), European Union’s Horizon 2020 under grant agreements
ZIKACTION (734857) and ZIKAPLAN (734548).Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Minas Gerais. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil / Latin American Genomic Surveillance Arboviral Network.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil / Latin American Genomic Surveillance Arboviral Network.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil Latin American Genomic Surveillance Arboviral Network.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Leônidas e Maria Deane. Laboratório de Ecologia de Doenças Transmissíveis na Amazônia. Manaus, AM, Brazil.Secretaria de Saúde do Estado de Mato Grosso do Sul. Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública. Campo Grande, MS, Brazil.Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Minas Gerais. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Dr. Giovanni Cysneiros. Goiânia, GO, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Professor Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Secretaria de Saúde do Estado da Bahia. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Dr. Milton Bezerra Sobral. Recife, PE, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Mato Grosso. Cuiabá, MT, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Distrito Federal. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Minas Gerais. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Coordenação Geral dos Laboratórios de Saúde Pública. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Coordenação Geral dos Laboratórios de Saúde Pública. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde / Organização Mundial da Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde / Organização Mundial da Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde / Organização Mundial da Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde Coordenação Geral das Arboviroses. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde Coordenação Geral das Arboviroses. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde Coordenação Geral das Arboviroses. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde Coordenação Geral das Arboviroses. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Fundação Hemocentro de Ribeirão Preto. Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.Gorgas Memorial Institute for Health Studies. Panama, Panama.Universidade Federal da Bahia. Vitória da Conquista, BA, Brazil.Laboratorio Central de Salud Pública. Asunción, Paraguay.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Bio-Manguinhos. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Coordenação Geral dos Laboratórios de Saúde Pública. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, BrazilFundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, BrazilMinistério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Mato Grosso do Sul. Campo Grande, MS, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Mato Grosso do Sul. Campo Grande, MS, Brazil.Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencias de la Salud. San Lorenzo, Paraguay.Secretaria de Estado de Saúde de Mato Grosso do Sul. Campo Grande, MS, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Campo Grande, MS, Brazil.Fundação Hemocentro de Ribeirão Preto. Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Dr. Giovanni Cysneiros. Goiânia, GO, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Dr. Giovanni Cysneiros. Goiânia, GO, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Professor Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Dr. Milton Bezerra Sobral. Recife, PE, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Distrito Federal. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Secretaria de Saúde de Feira de Santana. Feira de Santana, Ba, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Secretaria de Saúde do Estado de Minas Gerais. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Hospital das Forças Armadas. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Universidade Nova de Lisboa. Instituto de Higiene e Medicina Tropical. Lisboa, Portugal.University of Sydney. School of Life and Environmental Sciences and School of Medical Sciences. Marie Bashir Institute for Infectious Diseases and Biosecurity. Sydney, NSW, Australia.University of KwaZulu-Natal. College of Health Sciences. KwaZulu-Natal Research Innovation and Sequencing Platform. Durban, South Africa.University of Oxford. Peter Medawar Building. Department of Zoology. Oxford, UK.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Universidade de Brasília. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Universidade Salvador. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Fundação Ezequiel Dias. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Flavivírus. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Hantaviroses e Rickettsioses. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Leônidas e Maria Deane. Laboratório de Ecologia de Doenças Transmissíveis na Amazônia. Manaus, AM, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado do Paraná. Curitiba, PR, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Rondônia. Porto Velho, RO, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado do Amazonas. Manaus, AM, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado do Rio Grande do Norte. Natal, RN, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública do Estado de Mato Grosso. Cuiabá, MT, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Professor Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Professor Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Laboratório Central de Saúde Pública Noel Nutels. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Instituto Adolfo Lutz. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.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.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.Universidade de São Paulo. Instituto de Medicina Tropical. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Universidade de São Paulo. Instituto de Medicina Tropical. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Universidade de São Paulo. Instituto de Medicina Tropical. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.University of Oxford. Peter Medawar Building. Department of Zoology. Oxford, UK.Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Virales Humanas Dr. Julio Maiztegui. Pergamino, Argentina.Gorgas Memorial Institute for Health Studies. Panama, Panama.Gorgas Memorial Institute for Health Studies. Panama, Panama.Gorgas Memorial Institute for Health Studies. Panama, Panama.Instituto de Salud Pública de Chile. Santiago, Chile.Instituto de Diagnóstico y Referencia Epidemiológicos Dr. Manuel Martínez Báez. Ciudad de México, México.Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Infecciosas Dr Carlos G Malbrán. Buenos Aires, Argentina.Ministerio de Salud Pública de Uruguay. Montevideo, Uruguay.Instituto Costarricense de Investigación y Enseñanza em Nutrición y Salud. Tres Ríos, Costa Rica.Instituto Nacional de Investigacion en Salud Publica Dr Leopoldo Izquieta Pérez. Guayaquil, Ecuador.Instituto Nacional de Investigacion en Salud Publica Dr Leopoldo Izquieta Pérez. Guayaquil, Ecuador.Universidade Federal de Pernambuco. Recife, PE, Brazil.Secretaria de Saúde do Estado de Minas Gerais. Belo Horizonte. MG, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Brasília, DF, Brazil.Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto. Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto. Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto. Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto. Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.Fundação Hemocentro de Ribeirão Preto. Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.Secretaria de Saúde de Feira de Santana. Feira de Santana, BA, Brazil.Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Brazil experienced a large dengue virus (DENV) epidemic in 2019, highlighting a continuous struggle with effective control and public health preparedness. Using Oxford Nanopore sequencing, we led field and classroom initiatives for the monitoring of DENV in Brazil, generating 227 novel genome sequences of DENV1-2 from 85 municipalities (2015–2019). This equated to an over 50% increase in the number of DENV genomes from Brazil available in public databases. Using both phylogenetic and epidemiological models we retrospectively reconstructed the recent transmission history of DENV1-2. Phylogenetic analysis revealed complex patterns of transmission, with both lineage co-circulation and replacement. We identified two lineages within the DENV2 BR-4 clade, for which we estimated the effective reproduction number and pattern of seasonality. Overall, the surveillance outputs and training initiative described here serve as a proof-of-concept for the utility of real-time portable sequencing for research and local capacity building in the genomic surveillance of emerging viruses
Follow-up Study of Unknowingly Pregnant Women Vaccinated Against Rubella in Brazil, 2001–2002
Neotropical freshwater fisheries : A dataset of occurrence and abundance of freshwater fishes in the Neotropics
The Neotropical region hosts 4225 freshwater fish species, ranking first among the world's most diverse regions for freshwater fishes. Our NEOTROPICAL FRESHWATER FISHES data set is the first to produce a large-scale Neotropical freshwater fish inventory, covering the entire Neotropical region from Mexico and the Caribbean in the north to the southern limits in Argentina, Paraguay, Chile, and Uruguay. We compiled 185,787 distribution records, with unique georeferenced coordinates, for the 4225 species, represented by occurrence and abundance data. The number of species for the most numerous orders are as follows: Characiformes (1289), Siluriformes (1384), Cichliformes (354), Cyprinodontiformes (245), and Gymnotiformes (135). The most recorded species was the characid Astyanax fasciatus (4696 records). We registered 116,802 distribution records for native species, compared to 1802 distribution records for nonnative species. The main aim of the NEOTROPICAL FRESHWATER FISHES data set was to make these occurrence and abundance data accessible for international researchers to develop ecological and macroecological studies, from local to regional scales, with focal fish species, families, or orders. We anticipate that the NEOTROPICAL FRESHWATER FISHES data set will be valuable for studies on a wide range of ecological processes, such as trophic cascades, fishery pressure, the effects of habitat loss and fragmentation, and the impacts of species invasion and climate change. There are no copyright restrictions on the data, and please cite this data paper when using the data in publications