Health professionals' recommendations on the use of fluoride varnish for caries prevention in preschool children.

BACKGROUND: Fluoride varnish (FV) is widely recommended for caries prevention in preschool children, despite its anticaries benefits being uncertain and modest. Dentists often report using clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) as a source of scientific information. AIM: To identify and analyze recommendations for clinical practice on the use of FV for caries prevention in preschool children and to assess the methodological quality of the CPG on this topic. DESIGN: Two researchers independently used 12 search strategies and searched the first five pages of Google Search™ and three guideline databases for recommendations freely available to health professionals on the use of FV for caries prevention in preschoolers. Then, they retrieved and recorded recommendations that met the eligibility criteria and extracted the data. A third researcher resolved disagreements. Each included CPG was appraised using the AGREE II instrument. RESULTS: Twenty-nine documents were included. Recommendations varied according to age, patients' caries risk, and application frequency. Of the six CPGs, only one scored above 70% in the AGREE II overall assessment. CONCLUSION: Recommendations on the use of FV lacked scientific evidence, and CPGs were of poor quality. Application of FV is widely recommended despite recent evidence showing an uncertain, modest, and possibly not clinically relevant anticaries benefit. Dentists should be aware that it is necessary to critically appraise CPGs since they may be of poor quality.

How different attributes are weighted in professionals' decision-making in Pediatric Dentistry-a protocol for guiding discrete choice experiment focused on shortening the evidence-based practice implementation for dental care.

BACKGROUND: Important evidence has been constantly produced and needs to be converted into practice. Professional consumption of such evidence may be a barrier to its implementation. Then, effective implementation of evidence-based interventions in clinical practice leans on the understanding of how professionals value attributes when choosing between options for dental care, permitting to guide this implementation process by maximizing strengthens and minimizing barriers related to that. METHODS: This is part of a broader project investigating the potential of incorporating scientific evidence into clinical practice and public policy recommendations and guidelines, identifying strengths and barriers in such an implementation process. The present research protocol comprises a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) from the Brazilian oral health professionals' perspective, aiming to assess how different factors are associated with professional decision-making in dental care, including the role of scientific evidence. Different choice sets will be developed, either focusing on understanding the role of scientific evidence in the professional decision-making process or on understanding specific attributes associated with different interventions recently tested in randomized clinical trials and available as newly produced scientific evidence to be used in clinical practice. DISCUSSION: Translating research into practice usually requires time and effort. Shortening this process may be useful for faster incorporation into clinical practice and beneficial to the population. Understanding the context and professionals' decision-making preferences is crucial to designing more effective implementation and/or educational initiatives. Ultimately, we expect to design an efficient implementation strategy that overcomes threats and potential opportunities identified during the DCEs, creating a customized structure for dental professionals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/bhncv .

Economic evaluation of fluoride varnish application in preschoolers: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Fluoride varnish (FV) is a convenient way of professionally applying fluoride in preschoolers. However, its modest anticaries effect highlights the need for economic evaluations. AIM: To assess economic evaluations reporting applications of FV to reduce caries incidence in preschoolers. DESIGN: We included full economic evaluations with preschool participants, in which the intervention was FV and the outcome was related to dentin caries. We searched in CENTRAL; MEDLINE via PubMed; WEB OF SCIENCE; EMBASE; SCOPUS; LILACS; BBO; and BVS Economia em saúde, OpenGrey, and EconoLit. Clinical trial registers, thesis and dissertations, and meeting abstracts were hand searched, as well as 11 dental journals. Risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using the Philips' and Drummond's (full and simplified) tools. RESULTS: Titles and abstracts of 2871 articles were evaluated, and 200 were read in full. Eight cost-effectiveness studies were included: five modeling and three within-trial evaluations. None of the studies gave sufficient information to allow a thorough assessment using the bias tools. We did not combine the results of the studies due to the great heterogeneity among them. Four studies reported that FV in preschool children was a cost-effective measure, but in one of these studies, sealants and fluoride toothpaste were more cost-effective measures than the varnish, and three studies used limited data that compromised the generalizability of their results. The other four studies showed a large increase in costs due to the application of varnish and/or low cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSION: We did not find convincing overall evidence that applying FV in preschoolers is an anticaries cost-effective measure. The protocol of this systematic review is available at Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/xw5va/).

Fluoride Varnish and Dental Caries in Preschoolers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of fluoride varnish (FV) in reducing dentine caries at the patient, tooth, and surface levels as well as caries-related hospitalizations in preschoolers. We performed a systematic review of clinical trials of FV, alone or associated with an oral health program, compared with placebo, usual care, or no intervention. Bibliographical search included electronic searches of seven databases, registers of ongoing trials, and meeting abstracts, as well as hand searching. We performed random-effects meta-analyses and calculated confidence and prediction intervals. The search yielded 2,441 records; 20 trials were included in the review and 17 in at least one meta-analysis. Only one study had low risk of bias in all domains. We found no study reporting on caries-related hospitalizations. At the individual level, the pooled relative risk was 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81, 0.95); this means that in a population of preschool children with 50% caries incidence, we need to apply fluoride varnish in 17 children to avoid new caries in one child. At the tooth level, the pooled weighted mean difference was -0.30 (95% CI -0.69, 0.09) and at the surface level -0.77 (95% CI -1.23, -0.31). Considering the prediction intervals, none of the pooled estimates were statistically significant. We conclude that FV showed a modest and uncertain anticaries effect in preschoolers. Cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to assess whether FV should be adopted or abandoned by dental services.

Prevalence of self-reported gingival bleeding in a representative sample of the Brazilian adolescent population.

AIM: To estimate the prevalence of self-reported gingival bleeding in a representative sample of 12- to 17-year-old Brazilian adolescents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sociodemographic and oral health information were obtained through a self-administered questionnaire of the Study of Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Adolescents. The adolescents answered "yes" or "no" to the question "Do your gums bleed?" RESULTS: 74,589 of the 102,327 eligible adolescents answered the questionnaire and 18.4% (95% CI 17.5-19.3) reported having bleeding gums. The prevalence of self-reported gingival bleeding varied as following: 21.4% (95% CI 20.3-22.6) in girls and 15.3% (95% CI 14.3-16.4) in boys; 20.5% (95% CI 19.2-21.8) in older and 17.5% (95% CI 16.4-18.6) in younger adolescents; 20.6% (95% CI 18.5-22.9) in Black people and 17.1% (95% CI 16.1-18.1) in White people. Regarding mother's level of education, the prevalences were 18.1% (95% CI 16.2-20.3), 17.6% (95% CI 16.4-18.9) and 19.3% (95% CI 17.9-20.9) for high, middle and low levels, respectively. For socioeconomic status, the equivalent figures were 16.4% (95% CI 14.3-18.7), 18.4% (95% CI 17.5-19.4) and 23.0% (95% CI 17.3-29.9). CONCLUSION: Nearly one in five Brazilian adolescents reported having gingival bleeding, which might not be a serious condition, but reflect the disease and the adolescents' perception of oral health status.

A systematic review of the effects of supervised toothbrushing on caries incidence in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: The anticaries effect of supervised toothbrushing, irrespective of the effect of fluoride toothpaste, has not been clearly determined yet. AIM: To assess the effects of supervised toothbrushing on caries incidence in children and adolescents. DESIGN: A systematic review of controlled trials was performed (CRD42014013879). Electronic and hand searches retrieved 2046 records, 112 of which were read in full and independently assessed by two reviewers, who collected data regarding characteristics of participants, interventions, outcomes, length of follow-up and risk of bias. RESULTS: Four trials were included and none of them had low risk of bias. They were all carried out in schools, but there was great variation regarding children's age, fluoride content of the toothpaste, baseline caries levels and the way caries incidence was reported. Among the four trials, two found statistically significant differences favouring supervised toothbrushing, but information about the magnitude and/or the precision of the effect estimate was lacking and in one trial clustering effect was not taken into consideration. No meta-analysis was performed due to the clinical heterogeneity among the included studies and differences in the reporting of data. CONCLUSIONS: There is no conclusive evidence regarding the effectiveness of supervised toothbrushing on caries incidence.

Harms and benefits of mammographic screening for breast cancer in Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: In the absence of evidence on the effect of mammographic screening on overall mortality, comparing the number of deaths avoided with the number of deaths caused by screening would be ideal, but the only existing models of this type adopt a very narrow definition of harms. The objective of the present study was to estimate the number of deaths prevented and induced by various mammography screening protocols in Brazil. METHODS: A simulation study of cohorts of Brazilian women screened, considering various age groups and screening interval protocols, was performed based on life tables. The number of deaths avoided and caused by screening was estimated, as was the absolute risk reduction, the number needed to invite for screening-NNS, the net benefit of screening, and the ratio of "lives saved" to "lives lost". Nine possible combinations of balances between benefits and harms were performed for each protocol, in addition to other sensitivity analyses. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The most efficient protocol was biennial screening from 60 to 69 years of age, with almost three times more deaths avoided than biennial screening from 50 to 59 years of age, with a similar number of deaths avoided by biennial screening from 50 to 69 years of age and with the greatest net benefit. Compared with the best scenario of annual screening from 40 to 49 years of age, the NNS of the protocol with biennial screening from 60 to 69 years of age was three-fold lower. Even in its best scenario, the addition of annual screening from 40 to 49 years of age to biennial screening from 50 to 69 years of age results in a decreased net benefit. However, even in the 50-69 year age group, the estimated reduction in breast cancer mortality for Brazil was half that estimated for the United Kingdom.

Quality of life of Venezuelan migrants in Brazil during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The economic, social, and health crisis in Venezuela has resulted in the largest forced migration in recent Latin American history. The general scenario in host countries influence migrants' self-perception of quality of life, which can be understood as an indicator of their level of integration. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated socioeconomic and health vulnerabilities, especially for forced migrants. We hypothesized that the adverse circumstances faced by Venezuelan migrants during the pandemic have deepened their vulnerability, which may have influenced their perception of quality of life. This study aims to evaluate the quality of life of Venezuelan migrants in Brazil during the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed the quality of life of 312 adult Venezuelan migrants living in Brazil using the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment, which was self-administered online from October 20, 2020, to May 10, 2021. The associations of quality of life and its domains with participants' characteristics were analyzed via multiple linear regression models. Mean quality of life score was 44.7 (±21.8) on a scale of 0 to 100. The best recorded mean was in the physical domain (66.2±17.8) and the worst in the environmental domain (51.1±14.6). The worst quality of life was associated with being a woman, not living with a partner, lower household income, and discrimination based on nationality. Factors associated with overall quality of life and respective domains, especially income and discrimination, were also observed in other studies as obstacles to Venezuelan migrants. The unsatisfactory quality of life among Venezuelans living in Brazil may have been worsened by the pandemic during the study period.

High certainty evidence is stable and trustworthy, whereas evidence of moderate or lower certainty may be equally prone to being unstable.

OBJECTIVES: To assess to what extent the overall quality of evidence indicates changes to observe intervention effect estimates when new data become available. METHODS: We conducted a meta-epidemiological study. We obtained evidence from meta-analyses of randomized trials of Cochrane reviews addressing the same health-care question that was updated with inclusion of additional data between January 2016 and May 2021. We extracted the reported effect estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from meta-analyses and corresponding GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) assessments of any intervention comparison for the primary outcome in the first and the last updated review version. We considered the reported overall quality (certainty) of evidence (CoE) and specific evidence limitations (no, serious or very serious for risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, and/or indirectness). We assessed the change in pooled effect estimates between the original and updated evidence using the ratio of odds ratio (ROR), absolute ratio of odds ratio (aROR), ratio of standard errors (RoSE), direction of effects, and level of statistical significance. RESULTS: High CoE without limitations characterized 19.3% (n = 29) out of 150 included original Cochrane reviews. The update with additional data did not systematically change the effect estimates (mean ROR 1.00; 95% CI 0.99-1.02), which deviated 1.06-fold from the older estimates (median aROR; interquartile range [IQR]: 1.01-1.15), gained precision (median RoSE 0.87; IQR 0.76-1.00), and maintained the same direction with the same level of statistical significance in 93% (27 of 29) of cases. Lower CoE with limitations characterized 121 original reviews and graded as moderate CoE in 30.0% (45 of 150), low CoE in 32.0% (48 of 150), and very low CoE in 18.7% (28 of 150) reviews. Their update had larger absolute deviations (median aROR 1.12 to 1.33) and larger gains in precision (median RoSE 0.78-0.86) without clear and consistent differences between these categories of CoE. Changes in effect direction or statistical significance were also more common in the lower quality evidence, again with a similar extent across categories (without change in 75.6%, 64.6%, and 75.0% for moderate, low, very low CoE). As limitations increased, effect estimates deviated more (aROR 1.05 with zero, 1.11 with one, 1.25 with two, 1.24 with three limitations) and changes in direction or significance became more frequent (93.2% stable with no limitations, 74.5% with one, 68.2% with two, and 61.5% with three limitations). CONCLUSION: High-quality evidence without methodological deficiencies is trustworthy and stable, providing reliable intervention effect estimates when updated with new data. Evidence of moderate and lower quality may be equally prone to being unstable and cannot indicate if available effect estimates are true, exaggerated, or underestimated.

Accuracy of two methods to detect the presence of halitosis: the volatile sulfur compounds concentration in the mouth air and the information from a close person.

This study aimed to analyze the accuracy of two methods for detecting halitosis, the organoleptic assessment by a trained professional (OA) with volatile sulfur compounds (VSC) measurement via Halimeter® (Interscan Corporation) and information obtained from a close person (ICP). Participants were patients and companions who visited a university hospital over one year period to perform digestive endoscopy. A total of 138 participants were included in the VSC test, whose 115 were also included in the ICP test. ROC curves were constructed to establish the best VSC cut-off points. The prevalence of halitosis was 12% (95%CI: 7% to 18%) and 9% (95%CI 3% to 14%) for the OA and ICP, respectively. At the cut-off point >80 parts per billion (ppb) VSC, the prevalence of halitosis was 18% (95%CI: 12% to 25%). At the cut-off point >65 ppb VSC, sensitivity and specificity were 94% and 76%, respectively. At the cut-off point >140 ppb, sensitivity was 47% and specificity 96%. For the ICP, sensitivity was 14% and specificity 92%. VSC presents high sensitivity at the cut-off point of >65 ppb and high specificity at the cut-off point of >140 ppb. ICP had high specificity, but low sensitivity. The OA can express either occasional or chronic bad breath, whereas the ICP can be a potential instrument to detect chronic halitosis.

Is bad breath associated with dyspepsia? An association and an equivalence study.

Halitosis affects all populations worldwide. The presence of chronic halitosis may be related to a health problem. Patients with bad breath usually seek a gastroenterologist and, in some cases, invasive and expensive exams, such as digestive endoscopy, are performed to investigate the etiology of halitosis. This study aimed to investigate whether the prevalence of bad breath in patients diagnosed with dyspepsia (any pain or discomfort in the upper abdomen) is higher than or equivalent to that in non-dyspeptic patients. This is a cross-sectional study that included 312 patients from university hospitals in the city of Rio de Janeiro (141 dyspeptic patients and 171 non-dyspeptic ones). The presence of halitosis was defined based on different cutoff points. Association analyses were performed using a log-binomial model and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the coefficients, adjusting for sex and age. The equivalence test (Westlake) was used to test the hypothesis of equivalence between the proportions of patients with bad breath in the two groups (dyspeptic vs. non-dyspeptic), considering an equivalence band of ± 15%. The prevalence of bad breath ranged from 30% to 64% according to the definition of bad breath. Dyspepsia was not associated with bad breath in any of the three definitions of bad breath (two specific ones and a sensitive one). The proportion of patients with marked bad breath was equivalent in patients with and without dyspepsia.

High quality (certainty) evidence changes less often than low-quality evidence, but the magnitude of effect size does not systematically differ between studies with low versus high-quality evidence.

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES: It is generally believed that evidence from low quality of evidence generate inaccurate estimates about treatment effects more often than evidence from high (certainty) quality evidence (CoE). As a result, we would expect that (a) estimates of effects of health interventions initially based on high CoE change less frequently than the effects estimated by lower CoE (b) the estimates of magnitude of effect size differ between high and low CoE. Empirical assessment of these foundational principles of evidence-based medicine has been lacking. METHODS: We reviewed the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from January 2016 through May 2021 for pairs of original and updated reviews for change in CoE assessments based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method. We assessed the difference in effect sizes between the original versus updated reviews as a function of change in CoE, which we report as a ratio of odds ratio (ROR). We compared ROR generated in the studies in which CoE changed from very low/low (VL/L) to moderate/high (M/H) versus M/H to VL/L. Heterogeneity and inconsistency were assessed using the tau and I2 statistic. We also assessed the change in precision of effect estimates (by calculating the ratio of standard errors) (seR), and the absolute deviation in estimates of treatment effects (aROR). RESULTS: Four hundred and nineteen pairs of reviews were included of which 414 (207 × 2) informed the CoE appraisal and 384 (192 × 2) the assessment of effect size. We found that CoE originally appraised as VL/L had 2.1 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.19-4.12; p = 0.0091] times higher odds to be changed in the future studies than M/H CoE. However, the effect size was not different (p = 1) when CoE changed from VL/L → M/H [ROR = 1.02 (95% CI: 0.74-1.39)] compared with M/H → VL/L (ROR = 1.02 [95% CI: 0.44-2.37]). Similar overlap in aROR between the VL/L → M/H versus M/H → VL/L subgroups was observed [median (IQR): 1.12 (1.07-1.57) vs. 1.21 (1.12-2.43)]. We observed large inconsistency across ROR estimates (I2 = 99%). There was larger imprecision in treatment effects when CoE changed from VL/L → M/H (seR = 1.46) than when it changed from M/H → VL/L (seR = 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: We found that low-quality evidence changes more often than high CoE. However, the effect size did not systematically differ between the studies with low versus high CoE. The finding that the effect size did not differ between low and high CoE indicate urgent need to refine current EBM critical appraisal methods.

Trends in socioeconomic disparities in the utilization of dental care in Brazil and Sweden.

AIMS: To describe trends in socioeconomic disparities in utilization of dental care. METHODS: We obtained cross-sectional data from Sweden in the period 1968-2000 and from Brazil in 1986 and 2002 for 16 state capitals. The outcome was the percentage of people who reported that they had visited the dentist in the last 12 months, calculated for a higher and a lower income group and stratified by sex, age (two groups: young and adults) and dental status. Adjusted prevalence differences and prevalence ratios were produced using Poisson regression. RESULTS: In Brazil, there was a decline in use of dental care among the 15-19 year olds in the period 1986-2002, but not among the 35-44 year olds. In Sweden, there was a decline among the young and adults between 1991 and 2000. Overall, socioeconomic disparities in use of dental services between the higher and the lower economic groups showed a decline in both countries. The reduction in disparities among young Brazilians was 1.1 percentage points per year (p < 0.01), but among the other age groups the decline was not significant (p>0.01). In the last surveys, the gap remained in both countries and age groups (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The recent decline in utilization of dental care and in the socioeconomic gap may mirror improvements in oral health. However, there are still relevant and persistent disparities in utilization of dental care in both countries, with a higher proportion of people of higher socioeconomic status visiting the dentist.

Inconsistencies in recommendations on oral hygiene practices for children by professional dental and paediatric organisations in ten countries.

BACKGROUND: Some of the basic dental health practices that are recommended to the public by professionals are not evidence based. Incorrect oral health messages may adversely affect children's oral health behaviours. AIM: To identify and list the recommendations concerning children's oral hygiene practices provided by dental and paediatric organisations, and to assess how these recommendations relate to the scientific evidence currently available. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. The authors contacted professional organisations in ten countries requesting items (brochures, leaflets or folders) containing messages on children's oral hygiene practices. They then listed these recommendations and assessed how they related to scientific evidence obtained from systematic reviews available at PubMed and the Cochrane Library. RESULTS: Fifty-two of 59 (88%) organisations responded to our request and 24 dental health education materials were submitted to the authors. They mentioned recommendations on oral hygiene practices for children, such as toothbrushing frequency, supervision and technique; when to start and how long toothbrushing should last; toothbrush design and replacement; flossing; gums/teeth wiping; tongue cleaning; type and amount of toothpaste and advice on toothpaste ingestion. The search at PubMed and the Cochrane Library resulted in 11 systematic reviews addressing these topics. CONCLUSIONS: Several oral hygiene messages delivered by professional organisations showed inconsistencies and lacked scientific support.

One year of unsolicited e-mails: The modus operandi of predatory journals and publishers.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify, characterize and analyze e-mail from predatory journals (PJ) received by an academic in dentistry. METHODS: E-mails received in 2019 and suspected of being potentially predatory were pre-selected. The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI) checklist was applied to identify the suspected biomedical PJ, including the following criteria: article processing charge (APC), fake impact factor, the journal being listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We also extracted information on the lack of an impact factor on Journal Citations Reports, non-journal affiliated contact e-mail address, flattering language, article and/or personal citation, unsubscribe link, being listed in the National Library of Medicine (NLM) current catalog and indexed on Medline. RESULTS: A total of 2812 unsolicited suspected e-mails were received, and 1837 requested some sort of manuscript; among these, 1751 met some of the OHRI criteria. Less than half (780/1837, 42 %) referred to some area of dentistry. The median APC was US$399. A false impact factor was mentioned in 11 % (201/1837) of the e-mails, and 27 % (504/1837) corresponded to journals currently listed in the NLM catalog. Journals listed in DOAJ and COPE sent 89 e-mails. CONCLUSIONS: The email campaign from PJ was high and recurrent. Researchers should be well informed about PJ' modus operandi to protect their own reputation as authors and that of science. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Peer review and established academic practices and etiquette contribute to ensuring scientific progress, which is essential to protect the health of patients in particular and of people in general. Predatory journals constitute a threat to peer review and scientific etiquette and, as such, may hinder scientific progress and public health.

Homicide impunity in Brazil between 2006 and 2016.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the level and temporal trends of homicide impunity in Brazil. METHODS: This is an ecological study that calculated two impunity indexes by dividing the total number of homicides committed in a 5-year period by the number of individuals arrested for murder (homicide impunity) or any other cause (general impunity) two years after this period. The Prais-Winsten linear regression model with serial autocorrelation correction was used to estimate the temporal trend of the impunity indexes. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2014, 328,714 homicides were recorded in Brazil, but only 84,539 prisoners were serving sentences for this kind of crime in 2016. This shows that the number of homicides in Brazil exceeded in 244,175 the number of individuals in prisons for this crime. The impunity index ranged from 3.9 in 2006 to 3.3 in 2014. All states reached values above 1. Rio de Janeiro stood out negatively, with values above 20. São Paulo, Santa Catarina, and Distrito Federal showed the lowest impunity indexes for homicide, with values below 2. Eight states showed a downward trend in the overall impunity index. CONCLUSIONS: Most Brazilian states presented extremely high impunity indexes values. However, from 2010 to 2012, Brazilian society started to effectively combat impunity for serious violent crimes, including homicide. In São Paulo, this positive trend arose in the mid-1990s and that state currently shows impunity indexes values similar to those of developed countries.

How heuristics and cognitive biases affect vaccination decisions.

Immunization, the most successful public health intervention to date, can only be effective if eligible individuals or their legal representatives have access to vaccines and subsequently comply with their use. Under-vaccination stems from multiple causes: access, affordability, awareness, acceptance and activation. In this paper, we focus on acceptance and, specifically, on factors pertaining to individual or parental compliance, specifically the psychology of judgment and decision making. We describe how heuristics and cognitive biases - a facet of thoughts and feelings - affect vaccination decision making. Additionally, we address when and how social processes play a role and how attitudes towards vaccines might reflect a more general underlying attitude or ideology. The understanding of how decision making, with regards to vaccines occurs, and the role played by heuristics and cognitive biases can help inform more appropriate public health interventions.

Strategies to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic.

The World Health Organization declared a COVID-19 pandemic on March 11, 2020, when there were 4,293 confirmed cumulative deaths. By May 17, 2020 this number increased to 315,005. The risk of death is higher above the age of 60, but there are many deaths below 60 (for example, in Sao Paulo, 25%). Due to the lack of a vaccine or specific treatment, there are at least three types of interventions used in the first wave of this pandemic: increased alertness and hygiene (e.g. Sweden); identification and isolation of infected people and their contacts (e.g. South Korea); lockdown (e.g. Italy). These interventions are complementary. Choices of the right mix of interventions will vary from society to society and in the same society at different times. The search for a miracle drug is dangerous because it is based on the mistaken belief that any treatment option is better than "nothing". Brazilian society will not be able to maintain lockdown for a long period. Naturally, in the near future, regardless of the advice from scientists, doctors and authorities, commerce, services and schools will reopen. In order to implement any strategy aimed to control the pandemic and preserve the economy, the country needs leadership that centralizes and coordinates actions. Unfortunately, the Brazilian government is not fulfilling this role; on the contrary, it is a hindrance. This negative leadership and lack of coordination are causing many deaths and are severely damaging the lives of survivors by delaying the resuming of economic and social activities.