COVID-19 morbidity in Afghanistan: a nationwide, population-based seroepidemiological study.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objectives were to determine the magnitude of COVID-19 infections in the general population and age-specific cumulative incidence, as determined by seropositivity and clinical symptoms of COVID-19, and to determine the magnitude of asymptomatic or subclinical infections. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We describe a population-based, cross-sectional, age-stratified seroepidemiological study conducted throughout Afghanistan during June/July 2020. Participants were interviewed to complete a questionnaire, and rapid diagnostic tests were used to test for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. This national study was conducted in eight regions of Afghanistan plus Kabul province, considered a separate region. The total sample size was 9514, and the number of participants required in each region was estimated proportionally to the population size of each region. For each region, 31-44 enumeration areas (EAs) were randomly selected, and a total of 360 clusters and 16 households per EA were selected using random sampling. To adjust the seroprevalence for test sensitivity and specificity, and seroreversion, Bernoulli's model methodology was used to infer the population exposure in Afghanistan. OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome was to determine the prevalence of current or past COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: The survey revealed that, to July 2020, around 10 million people in Afghanistan (31.5% of the population) had either current or previous COVID-19 infection. By age group, COVID-19 seroprevalence was reported to be 35.1% and 25.3% among participants aged ≥18 and 5-17 years, respectively. This implies that most of the population remained at risk of infection. However, a large proportion of the population had been infected in some localities, for example, Kabul province, where more than half of the population had been infected with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: As most of the population remained at risk of infection at the time of the study, any lifting of public health and social measures needed to be considered gradually.

WHO's support for COVID-19 research and knowledge management in the Eastern Mediterranean Region.

Health research, innovation and knowledge management remain major priorities of the WHO's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. WHO's Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office (EMRO) supports priority research initiatives that address gaps in current knowledge regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. Through a specific call for proposals, 122 research proposals were received and reviewed in 2020, of which 17 were recommended for funding from eight countries. Ten countries in the region participated in the global solidarity trial to assess potential therapies for COVID-19. In addition, WHO advocated for early serological and epidemiological investigations ('COVID-19 Unity Studies') on the general population, healthcare workers, pregnant women and neonates, and extending technical, financial and material support for them.Starting in early 2020, scholarly articles on COVID-19 have been published in every issue of the Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal More than 6300 publications on COVID-19 were made available on the WHO knowledge management portal in the last year alone. WHO is also supporting countries in conducting studies to assess the field effectiveness of vaccines deployed nationally. To build and strengthen country capacities, regional webinars and intercountry meetings were conducted on research ethics, national health information systems and evidence-based health policy making. With support from WHO EMRO's new research and knowledge management pillar, countries in the region were well equipped to contribute to a global understanding of the novel virus's characteristics, as well as employ a national response based on informed evidence.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in standardised first few X cases and household transmission investigations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

We aimed to estimate the household secondary infection attack rate (hSAR) of SARS-CoV-2 in investigations aligned with the WHO Unity Studies Household Transmission Investigations (HHTI) protocol. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and medRxiv/bioRxiv for "Unity-aligned" First Few X cases (FFX) and HHTIs published 1 December 2019 to 26 July 2021. Standardised early results were shared by WHO Unity Studies collaborators (to 1 October 2021). We used a bespoke tool to assess investigation methodological quality. Values for hSAR and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted or calculated from crude data. Heterogeneity was assessed by visually inspecting overlap of CIs on forest plots and quantified in meta-analyses. Of 9988 records retrieved, 80 articles (64 from databases; 16 provided by Unity Studies collaborators) were retained in the systematic review; 62 were included in the primary meta-analysis. hSAR point estimates ranged from 2% to 90% (95% prediction interval: 3%-71%; I 2 = 99.7%); I 2 values remained >99% in subgroup analyses, indicating high, unexplained heterogeneity and leading to a decision not to report pooled hSAR estimates. FFX and HHTI remain critical epidemiological tools for early and ongoing characterisation of novel infectious pathogens. The large, unexplained variance in hSAR estimates emphasises the need to further support standardisation in planning, conduct and analysis, and for clear and comprehensive reporting of FFX and HHTIs in time and place, to guide evidence-based pandemic preparedness and response efforts for SARS-CoV-2, influenza and future novel respiratory viruses.

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in Aden, Yemen: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: In Yemen, initial surveillance of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) focused primarily on patients with symptoms or severe disease. The full spectrum of the disease remains unclear. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first seroprevalence study performed in Yemen. METHODS: This cross-sectional investigation included 2001 participants from all age groups from four districts in Aden, southern Yemen. A multi-stage sampling method was used. Data were collected using a well-structured questionnaire, and blood samples were taken. Healgen COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) Cassettes were used in all participants. All positive RDTs and 14% of negative RDTs underwent enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) testing (WANTAI SARS-CoV-2 Ab ELISA Kit) for confirmation. RESULTS: In total, 549 of 2001 participants were RDT positive and confirmed by ELISA, giving a prevalence of COVID-19 of 27.4%. The prevalence of immunoglobulin G was 25%. The prevalence of asymptomatic COVID-19 in the entire study group was 7.9%. The highest prevalence was observed in Al-Mansurah district (33.4%). Regarding sociodemographic factors, the prevalence of COVID-19 was significantly higher among females, housewives and subjects with a history of contact with a COVID-19 patient: 32%, 31% and 39%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study found high prevalence of COVID-19 in the study population. Household transmission was common.

Ethical Dimensions of Public Health Actions and Policies With Special Focus on COVID-19.

During pandemics, the ethicists, public health professionals, and human rights advocates raise a red flag about different public health actions that should, at best, be addressed through integrated, global policies. How to rationalize the healthcare resources and prioritize the cases is not a recent challenge but the serious concern about that is how to achieve this while not increasing the vulnerability of the disadvantaged population. Healthcare professionals use different scoring systems as a part of their decision-making so the medical teams and triage committees can allocate resources for predictable health outcomes and prognosis as well as to appropriately triage the patients accordingly. However, the value of the existing scoring systems to manage COVID-19 cases is not well-established yet. Part of this problem includes managing non-COVID patients with chronic medical conditions like non-communicable diseases and addressing their medical needs during the pandemic complex context in a way to avoid worsening their conditions and, on the other hand, avoid hindering the establishment of comprehensive standards for dealing with COVID-19. In this article, we discuss this dilemma as well as how preexisting ethical standards were challenged by COVID-19. We also discuss how monitoring the consistent application of ethical standards during the medical trials of new medications, vaccines, or unproven medical interventions is also a critical issue.