METHODOLOGY: Data was collected for this cross-sectional study between August 2020 and January 2021 from 11-to-23 years old participants in 43-countries using an electronic validated questionnaire developed in five languages. Data collected included information on the dependent variables (the presence of oral conditions- gingival inflammation, dry mouth, change in taste and oral ulcers), independent variable (COVID-19 infection) and confounders (age, sex, history of medical problems and parents' educational level). Multilevel binary logistic regression was used for analysis.
RESULTS: Complete data were available for 7164 AYA, with 7.5% reporting a history of COVID-19 infection. A significantly higher percentage of participants with a history of COVID-19 infection than those without COVID-19 infection reported having dry mouth (10.6% vs 7.3%, AOR = 1.31) and taste changes (11.1% vs 2.7%, AOR = 4.11). There was a significant effect modification in the association between COVID-19 infection and the presence of dry mouth and change in taste by age and sex (P = 0.02 and
AREAS COVERED: This systematic review identified and evaluated the potential of current drug treatments for long-COVID, examining both completed and ongoing RCTs.
EXPERT OPINION: We identified four completed and 22 ongoing RCTs, investigating 22 unique drugs. However, most drugs were deemed to not have high potential for treating long-COVID, according to three pre-specified domains, a testament to the ordeal of treating long-COVID. Given that long-COVID is highly multifaceted with several proposed subtypes, treatments likely need to be tailored accordingly. Currently, rintatolimod appears to have modest to high potential for treating the myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) subtype, LTY-100 and Treamid for pulmonary fibrosis subtype, and metformin for general long-COVID prevention.
METHODS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus as of 1st June 2023. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of pooled POTS rate in SARS-CoV-2-infected and COVID-19-vaccinated groups from epidemiological studies, followed by subgroup analyses by characteristic. Meta-analysis of risk ratio was conducted to compare POTS rate in infected versus uninfected groups. Meta-analysis of demographics was also performed to compare cases of post-infection and post-vaccination POTS from case reports and series.
RESULTS: We estimated the pooled POTS rate of 107.75 (95 % CI: 9.73 to 273.52) and 3.94 (95 % CI: 0 to 16.39) cases per 10,000 (i.e., 1.08 % and 0.039 %) in infected and vaccinated individuals based on 5 and 2 studies, respectively. Meta-regression revealed age as a significant variable influencing 86.2 % variance of the pooled POTS rate in infected population (P
OBJECTIVE: This umbrella review synthesizes findings from systematic reviews and meta-analyses to provide insights into global perceptions on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy across diverse populations and regions.
METHODS: We conducted a literature search across major databases to identify systematic reviews and meta-analysis that reported COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy. The AMSTAR-2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) criteria were used to assess the methodological quality of included systematic reviews. Meta-analysis was performed using STATA 17 with a random effect model. The data synthesis is presented in a table format and via a narrative.
RESULTS: Our inclusion criteria were met by 78 meta-analyses published between 2021 and 2023. Our analysis revealed a moderate vaccine acceptance rate of 63% (95% CI 0.60%-0.67%) in the general population, with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 97.59%). Higher acceptance rates were observed among health care workers and individuals with chronic diseases, at 64% (95% CI 0.57%-0.71%) and 69% (95% CI 0.61%-0.76%), respectively. However, lower acceptance was noted among pregnant women, at 48% (95% CI 0.42%-0.53%), and parents consenting for their children, at 61.29% (95% CI 0.56%-0.67%). The pooled vaccine hesitancy rate was 32% (95% CI 0.25%-0.39%) in the general population. The quality assessment revealed 19 high-quality, 38 moderate-quality, 15 low-quality, and 6 critically low-quality meta-analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: This review revealed the presence of vaccine hesitancy globally, emphasizing the necessity for population-specific, culturally sensitive interventions and clear, credible information dissemination to foster vaccine acceptance. The observed disparities accentuate the need for continuous research to understand evolving vaccine perceptions and to address the unique concerns and needs of diverse populations, thereby aiding in the formulation of effective and inclusive vaccination strategies.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023468363; https://tinyurl.com/2p9kv9cr.