Gender-related differences in prevalence, intensity and associated risk factors of Schistosoma infections in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Schistosomiasis remains a global-health problem with over 90% of its burden concentrated in Africa. Field studies reflect the complex ways in which socio-cultural and socio-economic variables, affect the distribution of Schistosoma infections across different populations. This review set out to systematically investigate and quantify the differences in Schistosoma infection burdens between males and females in Africa for two of the most prevalent Schistosoma species-Schistosoma mansoni and Schistosoma haematobium. METHODOLOGY: We searched (from inception to 11th March 2020) Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, and Web of Science for relevant studies on schistosomiasis. We included studies that report S. mansoni and/or S. haematobium prevalence and/or intensity data distributed between males and females. We conducted meta-analyses on the male to female (M:F) prevalence of infection ratios. Subgroup analyses were performed according to study baseline prevalence, sample size and the lower and upper age limit of study participants. We also present a descriptive analysis of differential risk and intensity of infection across males and females. Evidence for differences in the prevalence of schistosomiasis infection between males and females is presented, stratified by Schistosoma species. RESULT: We identified 128 relevant studies, with over 200,000 participants across 23 countries. Of all the reported differences in the prevalence of infection between males and females, only 41% and 34% were statistically significant for S. mansoni and S. haematobium, respectively. Similar proportions of studies (27% and 34% for for S. haematobium and S. mansoni, respectively) of the reported differences in intensity of infection between males and females were statistically significant. The meta-analyses summarized a higher prevalence of infection in males; pooled random-effects weighted M:F prevalence of infection ratios were 1.20 (95% CI 1.11-1.29) for S. haematobium and 1.15 (95% CI 1.08-1.22) for S. mansoni. However, females are underrespresented in some of the studies. Additionally, there was significant heterogeneity across studies (Higgins I2 statistic (p-values < 0.001, I2values>95%)). Results of the subgroup analysis showed that the baseline prevalence influenced the M:F prevalence ratios for S. haematobium and S. mansoni, with higher M:F prevalence of infection ratios in settings with a lower baseline prevalence of infection. Across the studies, we identified four major risk factors associated with infection rates: occupational and recreational water contact, knowledge, socio-economic factors and demographic factors. The effect of these risk factors on the burden of infection in males and females varied across studies. CONCLUSIONS: We find evidence of differences in prevalence of infection between males and females which may reflect differences in gender norms and water contact activities, suggesting that policy changes at the regional level may help ameliorate gender-related disparities in schistosomiasis infection burden. Collecting, robustly analysing, and reporting, sex-disaggregated epidemiological data, is currently lacking, but would be highly informative for planning effective treatment programmes and establishing those most at risk of schistosomiasis infections.

Children's role in the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of early surveillance data on susceptibility, severity, and transmissibility.

SARS-CoV-2 infections have been reported in all age groups including infants, children, and adolescents. However, the role of children in the COVID-19 pandemic is still uncertain. This systematic review of early studies synthesises evidence on the susceptibility of children to SARS-CoV-2 infection, the severity and clinical outcomes in children with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and the transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 by children in the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed. Reviewers extracted data from relevant, peer-reviewed studies published up to July 4th 2020 during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak using a standardised form and assessed quality using the NIH Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. For studies included in the meta-analysis, we used a random effects model to calculate pooled estimates of the proportion of children considered asymptomatic or in a severe or critical state. We identified 2775 potential studies of which 128 studies met our inclusion criteria; data were extracted from 99, which were then quality assessed. Finally, 29 studies were considered for the meta-analysis that included information of symptoms and/or severity, these were further assessed based on patient recruitment. Our pooled estimate of the proportion of test positive children who were asymptomatic was 21.1% (95% CI: 14.0-28.1%), based on 13 included studies, and the proportion of children with severe or critical symptoms was 3.8% (95% CI: 1.5-6.0%), based on 14 included studies. We did not identify any studies designed to assess transmissibility in children and found that susceptibility to infection in children was highly variable across studies. Children's susceptibility to infection and onward transmissibility relative to adults is still unclear and varied widely between studies. However, it is evident that most children experience clinically mild disease or remain asymptomatically infected. More comprehensive contact-tracing studies combined with serosurveys are needed to quantify children's transmissibility relative to adults. With children back in schools, testing regimes and study protocols that will allow us to better understand the role of children in this pandemic are critical.