Dissecting Supplement and Nutrients Intake of Adults with and without COVID-19 History through the Lens of Health Belief Model.

Over the past two years, the world has faced the pandemic, COVID-19, and various changes. Several regulations and recommendations from the Ministry of Health of Indonesia have contributed to behavioral changes among Indonesian residents, especially in food consumption patterns. The change in food consumption patterns can be a positive change that formed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to examine whether the application of a Health Belief Model (HBM)-based nutrition education programme can be effectively used in changing the beliefs of adults with or without a COVID-19 history in supplement and nutrient intake. This study was a cross-sectional study involving 140 adults. This study placed 70 adults with/without a COVID-19 history into the intervention group. The intervention group participated in a nutrition education programme. The respondents were asked to fill out the questionnaire. The data were analyzed by independent and paired t-tests and Chi-square test. The result of this study showed no association between perceived susceptibility, severity, benefit, barrier, and self-efficacy, of nutrient and supplement intake with the history of COVID-19 among the respondents. However, most of the respondents in this study were low in their scores of perceivedness. Thus, it is still important for the government to increase nutrient and supplement intake education, especially in young adults aged below 25 years old.

Adverse Events Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials of COVID-19 Vaccine Using the CONSORT Criteria for Reporting Harms: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Assessing the quality of evidence from vaccine clinical trials is essential to ensure the safety and efficacy of the vaccine and further enhance public acceptance. This study aims to summarize and critically evaluate the quality of harm reporting on randomized controlled trials for the COVID-19 vaccine and determine the factors associated with reporting quality. METHODS: We systematically searched the literature using PRISMA guidelines for randomized controlled trials (RCT) on COVID-19 Vaccine until 30 December 2021. Published articles were searched from electronic databases such as PubMed, Science Direct, Google Scholar, and Bibliovid. Bias analysis was performed using RoB-2 tools. The quality of reporting was assessed by the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) harm extension modified into 21 items. RESULTS: A total of 61 RCT studies (402,014 patients) were analyzed. Over half the studies demonstrated adequate reporting (59.02%), and 21 studies (34.4%) reported a low risk of bias. All studies reported death and serious adverse events (AEs), but only six studies mentioned how to handle the recurrent AEs. Reporting of AEs in subgroup analysis was also poor (25%). CONCLUSION: The RCTs on the COVID-19 vaccine were less biased with good quality on reporting harm based on the modified CONSORT harm extension. However, study quality must be considered, especially for a balance of information between effectivity and safety.