How has research on the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccination been evaluated: a scope review with emphasis on CoronaVac.

Introduction: The control of the COVID-19 epidemic has been focused on the development of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2. All developed vaccines have reported safety and efficacy results in preventing infection and its consequences, although the quality of evidence varies depending on the vaccine considered. Different methodological designs have been used for their evaluation, which can influence our understanding of the effects of these interventions. CoronaVac is an inactivated vaccine, and it has been assessed in various studies, including clinical trials and observational studies. Given these differences, our objective was to explore the published information to answer the question: how has the efficacy/effectiveness and safety of CoronaVac been evaluated in different studies? This is to identify potential gaps and challenges to be addressed in understanding its effect. Methods: A scoping review was carried out following the methodology proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute, which included studies carried out in humans as of 2020, corresponding to systematic reviews, clinical trials, analytical or descriptive observational studies, in which the effectiveness and/or safety of vaccines for COVID19 were evaluated or described. There were no age restrictions for the study participants. Results: The efficacy/effectiveness and safety of this vaccine was assessed through 113 studies. Nineteen corresponded to experimental studies, 7 of Phase II, 5 of Phase IV, and 4 were clinical trials with random assignment. Although some clinical trials with random assignment have been carried out, these have limitations in terms of feasibility, follow-up times, and with this, the possibility of evaluating safety outcomes that occur with low frequencies. Not all studies have used homogeneous methods of analysis. Both the prevention of infection, and the prevention of outcomes such as hospitalization or death, have been valued through similar outcomes, but some through multivariate analysis of dependencies, and others through analysis that try to infer causally through different control methods of confounding. Conclusion: Published information on the evaluation of the efficacy/effectiveness and safety of the CoronaVac is abundant. However, there are differences in terms of vaccine application schedules, population definition, outcomes evaluated, follow-up times, and safety assessment, as well as non-standardization in the reporting of results, which may hinder the generalizability of the findings. It is important to generate meetings and consensus strategies for the methods and reporting of this type of studies, which will allow to reduce the heterogeneity in their presentation and a better understanding of the effect of these vaccines.

Clinical and epidemiological characteristics of mpox: A descriptive cases series in Colombia.

INTRODUCTION: Colombia is the fifth most affected country by the global monkeypox outbreak and the second in LAC after Brazil. We describe the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of 521 patients with mpox in the country. METHODS: We conducted an observational analysis of laboratory-confirmed Mpox cases between June 29 and November 16, 2022. RESULTS: Most cases were young men living with HIV. The clinical evolution was primarily benign, with two deaths reported. We found some differences between women and men regarding their BMI, presence of lymphadenopathies, localization of lesions, and the antecedent of HIV infection. CONCLUSION: Although it seems that the epidemic curve for this outbreak of Mpox is decreasing not only in Colombia but globally, it could remain endemic. Therefore, it is necessary to maintain very close surveillance.

Systemic Factors and Barriers That Hamper Adequate Data Collection on the HIV Epidemic and Its Associated Inequalities in Countries With Long-Term Armed Conflicts: Lessons From Colombia.

Although advances in treatment and diagnosis have transformed HIV into a chronic disease in high-income countries, a spectrum of structural, political, sociocultural, and health system barriers hamper early diagnosis and timely treatment of HIV in many middle- and low-income countries. In most Latin American countries, in spite of the great improvement in access to antiretroviral therapy, a large proportion of individuals infected with HIV do not know their status. In Colombia, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS currently estimates a much larger number of HIV cases than the number reported by Colombian authorities. Potential reasons for underdiagnosis and underreporting include sociocultural factors such as social stigma, restrictions in access to health care, a lack of public health research and robust surveillance systems, and the particular recent history and social situation related to the armed conflict the country has suffered through for several decades. Lessons from Colombia may be helpful in monitoring, understanding, and tackling the HIV epidemic in countries with long-term armed conflicts.