Methods to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness, with an emphasis on quasi-experimental approaches. / Métodos para avaliação da efetividade de vacinas para COVID-19 com ênfase em abordagens quase-experimentais.

The evaluation of vaccine effectiveness is conducted with real-world data. They are essential to monitor the performance of vaccination programmes over time, and in the context of the emergence of new variants. Until now, the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines has been assessed based on classic methods, such as cohort and test-negative case-control studies, which may often not allow for adequate control of inherent biases in the assignment of vaccination campaigns. The aim of this review was to discuss the study designs available to evaluate vaccine effectiveness, highlighting quasi-experimental studies, which seek to mimic randomized trials, by introducing an exogenous component to allocate to treatment, in addition to the advantages, limitations, and applicability in the context of Brazilian data. The use of quasi-experimental approaches, such as interrupted time series, difference-in-differences, propensity scores, instrumental variables, and regression discontinuity design, are relevant due to the possibility of providing more accurate estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. This is especially important in scenarios such as the Brazilian, which characterized by the use of various vaccines, with the respective numbers and intervals between doses, applied to different age groups, and introduced at different times during the pandemic.

A avalição da efetividade de vacinas é feita com dados do mundo real e é essencial para monitorar o desempenho dos programas de vacinação ao longo do tempo bem como frente a novas variantes. Até o momento, a avaliação da efetividade das vacinas para COVID-19 tem sido baseada em métodos clássicos como estudos de coorte e caso controle teste-negativo, que muitas vezes podem não permitir o adequado controle dos vieses intrínsecos da alocação das campanhas de vacinação. O objetivo dessa revisão foi discutir os desenhos de estudo disponíveis para avaliação de efetividade das vacinas, enfatizando os estudos quase-experimentais, que buscam mimetizar os estudos aleatorizados ao introduzir um componente exógeno para atribuição ao tratamento, bem como suas vantagens, limitações e aplicabilidade no contexto dos dados brasileiros. O emprego de métodos quase-experimentais, incluindo as séries temporais interrompidas, o método de diferença em diferenças, escore de propensão, variáveis instrumentais e regressão descontínua, são relevantes pela possibilidade de gerar estimativas mais acuradas da efetividade de vacinas para COVID-19 em cenários como o brasileiro, que se caracteriza pelo uso de várias vacinas, com respectivos número e intervalos entre doses, aplicadas em diferentes faixas etárias e em diferentes momentos da pandemia.

National data linkage assessment of live births and deaths in Mexico: Estimating under-five mortality rate ratios for vulnerable newborns and trends from 2008 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Linked datasets that enable longitudinal assessments are scarce in low and middle-income countries. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the linkage of administrative databases of live births and under-five child deaths to explore mortality and trends for preterm, small (SGA) and large for gestational age (LGA) in Mexico. METHODS: We linked individual-level datasets collected by National statistics from 2008 to 2019. Linkage was performed based on agreement on birthday, sex, residential address. We used the Centre for Data and Knowledge Integration for Health software to identify the best candidate pairs based on similarity. Accuracy was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. We evaluated completeness by comparing the number of linked records with reported deaths. We described the percentage of linked records by baseline characteristics to identify potential bias. Using the linked dataset, we calculated mortality rate ratios (RR) in neonatal, infants, and children under-five according to gestational age, birthweight, and size. RESULTS: For the period 2008-2019, a total of 24,955,172 live births and 321,165 under-five deaths were available for linkage. We excluded 1,539,046 records (6.2%) with missing or implausible values. We succesfully linked 231,765 deaths (72.2%: range 57.1% in 2009 and 84.3% in 2011). The rate of neonatal mortality was higher for preterm compared with term (RR 3.83, 95% confidence interval, [CI] 3.78, 3.88) and for SGA compared with appropriate for gestational age (AGA) (RR 1.22 95% CI, 1.19, 1.24). Births at <28 weeks had the highest mortality (RR 35.92, 95% CI, 34.97, 36.88). LGA had no additional risk vs AGA among children under five (RR 0.92, 95% CI, 0.90, 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the utility of linked data to understand neonatal vulnerability and child mortality. We created a linked dataset that would be a valuable resource for future population-based research.

Integrating real-world data from Brazil and Pakistan into the OMOP common data model and standardized health analytics framework to characterize COVID-19 in the Global South.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this work is to demonstrate the use of a standardized health informatics framework to generate reliable and reproducible real-world evidence from Latin America and South Asia towards characterizing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the Global South. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient-level COVID-19 records collected in a patient self-reported notification system, hospital in-patient and out-patient records, and community diagnostic labs were harmonized to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership common data model and analyzed using a federated network analytics framework. Clinical characteristics of individuals tested for, diagnosed with or tested positive for, hospitalized with, admitted to intensive care unit with, or dying with COVID-19 were estimated. RESULTS: Two COVID-19 databases covering 8.3 million people from Pakistan and 2.6 million people from Bahia, Brazil were analyzed. 109 504 (Pakistan) and 921 (Brazil) medical concepts were harmonized to Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership common data model. In total, 341 505 (4.1%) people in the Pakistan dataset and 1 312 832 (49.2%) people in the Brazilian dataset were tested for COVID-19 between January 1, 2020 and April 20, 2022, with a median [IQR] age of 36 [25, 76] and 38 (27, 50); 40.3% and 56.5% were female in Pakistan and Brazil, respectively. 1.2% percent individuals in the Pakistan dataset had Afghan ethnicity. In Brazil, 52.3% had mixed ethnicity. In agreement with international findings, COVID-19 outcomes were more severe in men, elderly, and those with underlying health conditions. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 data from 2 large countries in the Global South were harmonized and analyzed using a standardized health informatics framework developed by an international community of health informaticians. This proof-of-concept study demonstrates a potential open science framework for global knowledge mobilization and clinical translation for timely response to healthcare needs in pandemics and beyond.

Effectiveness of mRNA boosters after homologous primary series with BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 against symptomatic infection and severe COVID-19 in Brazil and Scotland: A test-negative design case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Brazil and Scotland have used mRNA boosters in their respective populations since September 2021, with Omicron's emergence accelerating their booster program. Despite this, both countries have reported substantial recent increases in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. The duration of the protection conferred by the booster dose against symptomatic Omicron cases and severe outcomes is unclear. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using a test-negative design, we analyzed national databases to estimate the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of a primary series (with ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2) plus an mRNA vaccine booster (with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) against symptomatic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes (hospitalization or death) during the period of Omicron dominance in Brazil and Scotland compared to unvaccinated individuals. Additional analyses included stratification by age group (18 to 49, 50 to 64, ≥65). All individuals aged 18 years or older who reported acute respiratory illness symptoms and tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection between January 1, 2022, and April 23, 2022, in Brazil and Scotland were eligible for the study. At 14 to 29 days after the mRNA booster, the VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection of ChAdOx1 plus BNT162b2 booster was 51.6%, (95% confidence interval (CI): [51.0, 52.2], p < 0.001) in Brazil and 67.1% (95% CI [65.5, 68.5], p < 0.001) in Scotland. At ≥4 months, protection against symptomatic infection waned to 4.2% (95% CI [0.7, 7.6], p = 0.02) in Brazil and 37.4% (95% CI [33.8, 40.9], p < 0.001) in Scotland. VE against severe outcomes in Brazil was 93.5% (95% CI [93.0, 94.0], p < 0.001) at 14 to 29 days post-booster, decreasing to 82.3% (95% CI [79.7, 84.7], p < 0.001) and 98.3% (95% CI [87.3, 99.8], p < 0.001) to 77.8% (95% CI [51.4, 89.9], p < 0.001) in Scotland for the same periods. Similar results were obtained with the primary series of BNT162b2 plus homologous booster. Potential limitations of this study were that we assumed that all cases included in the analysis were due to the Omicron variant based on the period of dominance and the limited follow-up time since the booster dose. CONCLUSIONS: We observed that mRNA boosters after a primary vaccination course with either mRNA or viral-vector vaccines provided modest, short-lived protection against symptomatic infection with Omicron but substantial and more sustained protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes for at least 3 months.

Association of urban inequality and income segregation with COVID-19 mortality in Brazil.

Socioeconomic factors have exacerbated the impact of COVID-19 worldwide. Brazil, already marked by significant economic inequalities, is one of the most affected countries, with one of the highest mortality rates. Understanding how inequality and income segregation contribute to excess mortality by COVID-19 in Brazilian cities is essential for designing public health policies to mitigate the impact of the disease. This paper aims to fill in this gap by analyzing the effect of income inequality and income segregation on COVID-19 mortality in large urban centers in Brazil. We compiled weekly COVID-19 mortality rates from March 2020 to February 2021 in a longitudinal ecological design, aggregating data at the city level for 152 Brazilian cities. Mortality rates from COVID-19 were compared across weeks, cities and states using mixed linear models. We estimated the associations between COVID-19 mortality rates with income inequality and income segregation using mixed negative binomial models including city and week-level random intercepts. We measured income inequality using the Gini index and income segregation using the dissimilarity index using data from the 2010 Brazilian demographic census. We found that 88.2% of COVID-19 mortality rates variability was between weeks, 8.5% between cities, and 3.3% between states. Higher-income inequality and higher-income segregation values were associated with higher COVID-19 mortality rates before and after accounting for all adjustment factors. In our main adjusted model, rate ratios (RR) per 1 SD increases in income inequality and income segregation were associated with 17% (95% CI 9% to 26%) and 11% (95% CI 4% to 19%) higher mortality. Income inequality and income segregation are long-standing hallmarks of large Brazilian cities. Risk factors related to the socioeconomic context affected the course of the pandemic in the country and contributed to high mortality rates. Pre-existing social vulnerabilities were critical factors in the aggravation of COVID-19, as supported by the observed associations in this study.

A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat.

Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic^1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches¹, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach² that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities³ in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.

Patterns of multimorbidity and some psychiatric disorders: A systematic review of the literature.

Objective: The presence of two or more chronic diseases results in worse clinical outcomes than expected by a simple combination of diseases. This synergistic effect is expected to be higher when combined with some conditions, depending on the number and severity of diseases. Multimorbidity is a relatively new term, with the first fundamental definitions appearing in 2015. Studies usually define it as the presence of at least two chronic medical illnesses. However, little is known regarding the relationship between mental disorders and other non-psychiatric chronic diseases. This review aims at investigating the association between some mental disorders and non-psychiatric diseases, and their pattern of association. Methods: We performed a systematic approach to selecting papers that studied relationships between chronic conditions that included one mental disorder from 2015 to 2021. These were processed using Covidence, including quality assessment. Results: This resulted in the inclusion of 26 papers in this study. It was found that there are strong associations between depression, psychosis, and multimorbidity, but recent studies that evaluated patterns of association of diseases (usually using clustering methods) had heterogeneous results. Quality assessment of the papers generally revealed low quality among the included studies. Conclusions: There is evidence of an association between depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, and psychosis with multimorbidity. Studies that tried to examine the patterns of association between diseases did not find stable results. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021216101, identifier: CRD42021216101.

Vaccine effectiveness of heterologous CoronaVac plus BNT162b2 in Brazil.

There is considerable interest in the waning of effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and vaccine effectiveness (VE) of booster doses. Using linked national Brazilian databases, we undertook a test-negative design study involving almost 14 million people (~16 million tests) to estimate VE of CoronaVac over time and VE of BNT162b2 booster vaccination against RT-PCR-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes (hospitalization or death). Compared with unvaccinated individuals, CoronaVac VE at 14-30 d after the second dose was 55.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 54.3-55.7) against confirmed infection and 82.1% (95% CI: 81.4-82.8) against severe outcomes. VE decreased to 34.7% (95% CI: 33.1-36.2) against infection and 72.5% (95% CI: 70.9-74.0) against severe outcomes over 180 d after the second dose. A BNT162b2 booster, 6 months after the second dose of CoronaVac, improved VE against infection to 92.7% (95% CI: 91.0-94.0) and VE against severe outcomes to 97.3% (95% CI: 96.1-98.1) 14-30 d after the booster. Compared with younger age groups, individuals 80 years of age or older had lower protection after the second dose but similar protection after the booster. Our findings support a BNT162b2 booster vaccine dose after two doses of CoronaVac, particularly for the elderly.

Vaccine effectiveness of CoronaVac against COVID-19 among children in Brazil during the Omicron period.

Although severe COVID-19 in children is rare, they may develop multisystem inflammatory syndrome, long-COVID and downstream effects of COVID-19, including social isolation and disruption of education. Data on the effectiveness of the CoronaVac vaccine is scarce during the Omicron period. In Brazil, children between 6 to 11 years are eligible to receive the CoronaVac vaccine. We conducted a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness using 197,958 tests from January 21, 2022, to April 15, 2022, during the Omicron dominant period in Brazil among children aged 6 to 11 years. The estimated vaccine effectiveness for symptomatic infection was 39.8% (95% CI 33.7-45.4) at ≥14 days post-second dose. For hospital admission vaccine effectiveness was 59.2% (95% CI 11.3-84.5) at ≥14 days. Two doses of CoronaVac in children during the Omicron period showed low levels of protection against symptomatic infection, and modest levels against severe illness.

Effectiveness of CoronaVac, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, BNT162b2, and Ad26.COV2.S among individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection in Brazil: a test-negative, case-control study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines have proven highly effective among individuals without a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, but their effectiveness in preventing symptomatic infection and severe outcomes among individuals with previous infection is less clear. We aimed to estimate the effectiveness of four COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic infection, hospitalisation, and death for individuals with laboratory-confirmed previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Using national COVID-19 notification, hospitalisation, and vaccination datasets from Brazil, we did a test-negative, case-control study to assess the effectiveness of four vaccines (CoronaVac [Sinovac], ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [AstraZeneca], Ad26.COV2.S [Janssen], and BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNtech]) for individuals with laboratory-confirmed previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. We matched cases with RT-PCR positive, symptomatic COVID-19 with up to ten controls with negative RT-PCR tests who presented with symptomatic illnesses, restricting both groups to tests done at least 90 days after an initial infection. We used multivariable conditional logistic regression to compare the odds of test positivity and the odds of hospitalisation or death due to COVID-19, according to vaccination status and time since first or second dose of vaccines. FINDINGS: Between Feb 24, 2020, and Nov 11, 2021, we identified 213 457 individuals who had a subsequent, symptomatic illness with RT-PCR testing done at least 90 days after their initial SARS-CoV-2 infection and after the vaccination programme started. Among these, 30 910 (14·5%) had a positive RT-PCR test consistent with reinfection, and we matched 22 566 of these cases with 145 055 negative RT-PCR tests from 68 426 individuals as controls. Among individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection 14 or more days from vaccine series completion was 39·4% (95% CI 36·1-42·6) for CoronaVac, 56·0% (51·4-60·2) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 44·0% (31·5-54·2) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 64·8% (54·9-72·4) for BNT162b2. For the two-dose vaccine series (CoronaVac, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and BNT162b2), effectiveness against symptomatic infection was significantly greater after the second dose than after the first dose. Effectiveness against hospitalisation or death 14 or more days from vaccine series completion was 81·3% (75·3-85·8) for CoronaVac, 89·9% (83·5-93·8) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 57·7% (-2·6 to 82·5) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 89·7% (54·3-97·7) for BNT162b2. INTERPRETATION: All four vaccines conferred additional protection against symptomatic infections and severe outcomes among individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The provision of a full vaccine series to individuals after recovery from COVID-19 might reduce morbidity and mortality. FUNDING: Brazilian National Research Council, Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, JBS, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, and Generalitat de Catalunya.

Vaccine effectiveness of two-dose BNT162b2 against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 among adolescents in Brazil and Scotland over time: a test-negative case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about vaccine effectiveness over time among adolescents, especially against the SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1.1.529) variant. This study assessed the associations between time since two-dose vaccination with BNT162b2 and the occurrence of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 among adolescents in Brazil and Scotland. METHODS: We did test-negative, case-control studies in adolescents aged 12-17 years with COVID-19-related symptoms in Brazil and Scotland. We linked records of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and antigen tests to national vaccination and clinical records. We excluded tests from individuals who did not have symptoms, were vaccinated before the start of the national vaccination programme, received vaccines other than BNT162b2 or a SARS-CoV-2 booster dose of any kind, or had an interval between their first and second dose of fewer than 21 days. Additionally, we excluded negative SARS-CoV-2 tests recorded within 14 days of a previous negative test, negative tests recorded within 7 days after a positive test, any test done within 90 days after a positive test, and tests with missing sex and location information. Cases (SARS-CoV-2 test-positive adolescents) and controls (test-negative adolescents) were drawn from a sample of individuals in whom tests were collected within 10 days of symptom onset. We estimated the adjusted odds ratio and vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 for both countries and against severe COVID-19 (hospitalisation or death) for Brazil across fortnightly periods. FINDINGS: We analysed 503 776 tests from 2 948 538 adolescents in Brazil between Sept 2, 2021, and April 19, 2022, and 127 168 tests from 404 673 adolescents in Scotland between Aug 6, 2021, and April 19, 2022. Vaccine effectiveness peaked at 14-27 days after the second dose in both countries during both waves, and was significantly lower against symptomatic infection during the omicron-dominant period in Brazil (64·7% [95% CI 63·0-66·3]) and in Scotland (82·6% [80·6-84·5]), than it was in the delta-dominant period (80·7% [95% CI 77·8-83·3] in Brazil and 92·8% [85·7-96·4] in Scotland). Vaccine efficacy started to decline from 27 days after the second dose for both countries, reducing to 5·9% (95% CI 2·2-9·4) in Brazil and 50·6% (42·7-57·4) in Scotland at 98 days or more during the omicron-dominant period. In Brazil, protection against severe disease remained above 80% from 28 days after the second dose and was 82·7% (95% CI 68·8-90·4) at 98 days or more after receiving the second dose. INTERPRETATION: We found waning vaccine protection of BNT162b2 against symptomatic COVID-19 infection among adolescents in Brazil and Scotland from 27 days after the second dose. However, protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes remained high at 98 days or more after the second dose in the omicron-dominant period. Booster doses for adolescents need to be considered. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Scottish Government, Health Data Research UK BREATHE Hub, Fiocruz, Fazer o Bem Faz Bem programme, Brazilian National Research Council, and Wellcome Trust. TRANSLATION: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Duration of protection of CoronaVac plus heterologous BNT162b2 booster in the Omicron period in Brazil.

To date, no information has been published on the effectiveness of inactivated whole-virus COVID-19 vaccines plus heterologous booster against symptomatic infection and severe outcomes (hospitalization or death) during the dominance of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant period. We evaluated the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of CoronaVac plus BNT162b2 booster during the period of dominance of the Omicron variant in Brazil (January to April 2022). Using a test-negative design, we analysed data for 2,471,576 individuals tested during the Omicron variant's dominant period using a nationally linked database from Brazil. Compared to unvaccinated, vaccinees maintained protection against severe outcomes, with an estimated VE of 84.1% (95% CI:83.2-84.9) at more than 120 days after BNT162b2 booster. Furthermore, while we detected a high level of protection against severe outcomes for individuals up to 79 years old, waning was observed for individuals aged ≥80 years, with VE decreasing from 81.3% (95% CI:77.9-84.2) at 31-60 days to 72.9% (95% CI:70.6-75.1) at 120 days or more after the booster dose. However, no significant protection against symptomatic infection was observed at this time period. In conclusion, except for individuals aged ≥80 years, CoronaVac plus a BNT162b2 booster dose offered high and durable protection against severe outcomes due to Omicron.

Relationship between the Bolsa Família national cash transfer programme and suicide incidence in Brazil: A quasi-experimental study.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic factors have been consistently associated with suicide, and economic recessions are linked to rising suicide rates. However, evidence on the impact of socioeconomic interventions to reduce suicide rates is limited. This study investigates the association of the world's largest conditional cash transfer programme with suicide rates in a cohort of half of the Brazilian population. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used data from the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort, covering a 12-year period (2004 to 2015). It comprises socioeconomic and demographic information on 114,008,317 individuals, linked to the "Bolsa Família" programme (BFP) payroll database, and nationwide death registration data. BFP was implemented by the Brazilian government in 2004. We estimated the association of BFP using inverse probability of treatment weighting, estimating the weights for BFP beneficiaries (weight = 1) and nonbeneficiaries by the inverse probability of receiving treatment (weight = E(ps)/(1-E(ps))). We used an average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) estimator and fitted Poisson models to estimate the incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for suicide associated with BFP experience. At the cohort baseline, BFP beneficiaries were younger (median age 27.4 versus 35.4), had higher unemployment rates (56% versus 32%), a lower level of education, resided in rural areas, and experienced worse household conditions. There were 36,742 suicide cases among the 76,532,158 individuals aged 10 years, or older, followed for 489,500,000 person-years at risk. Suicide rates among beneficiaries and nonbeneficiaries were 5.4 (95% CI = 5.32, 5.47, p < 0.001) and 10.7 (95% CI = 10.51, 10.87, p < 0.001) per 100,000 individuals, respectively. BFP beneficiaries had a lower suicide rate than nonbeneficiaries (IRR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.42, 0.45, p < 0.001). This association was stronger among women (IRR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.33, 0.38, p < 0.001), and individuals aged between 25 and 59 (IRR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.40, 0.43, p < 0.001). Study limitations include a lack of control for previous mental disorders and access to means of suicide, and the possible under-registration of suicide cases due to stigma. CONCLUSIONS: We observed that BFP was associated with lower suicide rates, with similar results in all sensitivity analyses. These findings should help to inform policymakers and health authorities to better design suicide prevention strategies. Targeting social determinants using cash transfer programmes could be important in limiting suicide, which is predicted to rise with the economic recession, consequent to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Combined association of obesity and other cardiometabolic diseases with severe COVID-19 outcomes: a nationwide cross-sectional study of 21 773 Brazilian adult and elderly inpatients

ObjectivesTo investigate the combined association of obesity, diabetes mellitus (DM) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) with severe COVID-19 outcomes in adult and elderly inpatients.DesignCross-sectional study based on registry data from Brazil’s influenza surveillance system.SettingPublic and private hospitals across Brazil.ParticipantsEligible population included 21 942 inpatients aged ≥20 years with positive reverse transcription-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 until 9 June 2020.Main outcome measuresSevere COVID-19 outcomes were non-invasive and invasive mechanical ventilation use, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death. Multivariate analyses were conducted separately for adults (20–59 years) and elders (≥60 years) to test the combined association of obesity (without and with DM and/or CVD) and degrees of obesity with each outcome.ResultsA sample of 8848 adults and 12 925 elders were included. Among adults, obesity with DM and/or CVD showed higher prevalence of invasive (prevalence ratio 3.76, 95% CI 2.82 to 5.01) and non-invasive mechanical ventilation use (2.06, 1.58 to 2.69), ICU admission (1.60, 1.40 to 1.83) and death (1.79, 1.45 to 2.21) compared with the group without obesity, DM and CVD. In elders, obesity alone (without DM and CVD) had the highest prevalence of ICU admission (1.40, 1.07 to 1.82) and death (1.67, 1.00 to 2.80). In both age groups, obesity alone and combined with DM and/or CVD showed higher prevalence in all outcomes than DM and/or CVD. A dose–response association was observed between obesity and death in adults: class I 1.32 (1.05 to 1.66), class II 1.41 (1.06 to 1.87) and class III 1.77 (1.35 to 2.33).ConclusionsThe combined association of obesity, diabetes and/or CVD with severe COVID-19 outcomes may be stronger in adults than in elders. Obesity alone and combined with DM and/or CVD had more impact on the risk of COVID-19 severity than DM and/or CVD in both age groups. The study also supports an independent relationship of obesity with severe outcomes, including a dose–response association between degrees of obesity and death in adults.

Mortality from Congenital Zika Syndrome - Nationwide Cohort Study in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: Prenatal exposure to Zika virus has potential teratogenic effects, with a wide spectrum of clinical presentation referred to as congenital Zika syndrome. Data on survival among children with congenital Zika syndrome are limited. METHODS: In this population-based cohort study, we used linked, routinely collected data in Brazil, from January 2015 through December 2018, to estimate mortality among live-born children with congenital Zika syndrome as compared with those without the syndrome. Kaplan-Meier curves and survival models were assessed with adjustment for confounding and with stratification according to gestational age, birth weight, and status of being small for gestational age. RESULTS: A total of 11,481,215 live-born children were followed to 36 months of age. The mortality rate was 52.6 deaths (95% confidence interval [CI], 47.6 to 58.0) per 1000 person-years among live-born children with congenital Zika syndrome, as compared with 5.6 deaths (95% CI, 5.6 to 5.7) per 1000 person-years among those without the syndrome. The mortality rate ratio among live-born children with congenital Zika syndrome, as compared with those without the syndrome, was 11.3 (95% CI, 10.2 to 12.4). Among infants born before 32 weeks of gestation or with a birth weight of less than 1500 g, the risks of death were similar regardless of congenital Zika syndrome status. Among infants born at term, those with congenital Zika syndrome were 14.3 times (95% CI, 12.4 to 16.4) as likely to die as those without the syndrome (mortality rate, 38.4 vs. 2.7 deaths per 1000 person-years). Among infants with a birth weight of 2500 g or greater, those with congenital Zika syndrome were 12.9 times (95% CI, 10.9 to 15.3) as likely to die as those without the syndrome (mortality rate, 32.6 vs. 2.5 deaths per 1000 person-years). The burden of congenital anomalies, diseases of the nervous system, and infectious diseases as recorded causes of deaths was higher among live-born children with congenital Zika syndrome than among those without the syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of death was higher among live-born children with congenital Zika syndrome than among those without the syndrome and persisted throughout the first 3 years of life. (Funded by the Ministry of Health of Brazil and others.).

CoronaVac vaccine is effective in preventing symptomatic and severe COVID-19 in pregnant women in Brazil: a test-negative case-control study.

BACKGROUND: More doses of CoronaVac have been administered worldwide than any other COVID-19 vaccine. However, the effectiveness of COVID-19 inactivated vaccines in pregnant women is still unknown. We estimated the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of CoronaVac against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 in pregnant women in Brazil. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative design study in all pregnant women aged 18-49 years with COVID-19-related symptoms in Brazil from March 15, 2021, to October 03, 2021, linking records of negative and positive SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests to national vaccination records. We also linked records of test-positive cases with notifications of severe, hospitalised or fatal COVID-19. Using logistic regression, we estimated the adjusted odds ratio and VE against symptomatic COVID-19 and against severe COVID-19 by comparing vaccine status in test-negative subjects to test-positive symptomatic cases and severe cases. RESULTS: Of the 19,838 tested pregnant women, 7424 (37.4%) tested positive for COVID-19 and 588 (7.9%) had severe disease. Only 83% of pregnant women who received the first dose of CoronaVac completed the vaccination scheme. A single dose of the CoronaVac vaccine was not effective at preventing symptomatic COVID-19. The effectiveness of two doses of CoronaVac was 41% (95% CI 27.1-52.2) against symptomatic COVID-19 and 85% (95% CI 59.5-94.8) against severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: A complete regimen of CoronaVac in pregnant women was effective in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 and highly effective against severe illness in a setting that combined high disease burden and marked COVID-19-related maternal deaths.

The effect of primary health care on tuberculosis in a nationwide cohort of 7·3 million Brazilian people: a quasi-experimental study.

BACKGROUND: Universal health coverage is one of the WHO End TB Strategy priority interventions and could be achieved-particularly in low-income and middle-income countries-through the expansion of primary health care. We evaluated the effects of one of the largest primary health-care programmes in the world, the Brazilian Family Health Strategy (FHS), on tuberculosis morbidity and mortality using a nationwide cohort of 7·3 million individuals over a 10-year study period. METHODS: We analysed individuals who entered the 100 Million Brazilians Cohort during the period Jan 1, 2004, to Dec 31, 2013, and compared residents in municipalities with no FHS coverage with residents in municipalities with full FHS coverage. We used a cohort design with multivariable Poisson regressions, adjusted for all relevant demographic and socioeconomic variables and weighted with inverse probability of treatment weighting, to estimate the effect of FHS on tuberculosis incidence, mortality, cure, and case fatality. We also performed a range of stratifications and sensitivity analyses. FINDINGS: FHS exposure was associated with lower tuberculosis incidence (rate ratio [RR] 0·78, 95% CI 0·72-0·84) and mortality (0·72, 0·55-0·94), and was positively associated with tuberculosis cure rates (1·04, 1·00-1·08). FHS was also associated with a decrease in tuberculosis case-fatality rates, although this was not statistically significant (RR 0·84, 95% CI 0·55-1·30). FHS associations were stronger among the poorest individuals for all the tuberculosis indicators. INTERPRETATION: Community-based primary health care could strongly reduce tuberculosis morbidity and mortality and decrease the unequal distribution of the tuberculosis burden in the most vulnerable populations. During the current marked rise in global poverty due to the COVID-19 pandemic, investments in primary health care could help protect against the expected increases in tuberculosis incidence worldwide and contribute to the attainment of the End TB Strategy goals. FUNDING: TB Modelling and Analysis Consortium (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation), Wellcome Trust, and Brazilian Ministry of Health. TRANSLATION: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.