Objective: This systematic review investigates the effectiveness of different communication strategies to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and willingness. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), following recommendations from the Cochrane Handbook and reporting according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline. Data sources: We searched the following databases until 27 July 2022: Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection and WHO COVID-19 Global literature. Eligibility criteria for study selection: We included RCTs investigating, any population, communication-based interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and comparing these with no intervention (with or without placebo), another communication strategy or another type of intervention. Methods: Screening, data extraction and bias assessment, using the Cochrane ROB 1.0 tool, were conducted by two authors independently. We performed meta-analyses if studies were homogeneous using the Review Manager (RevMan 5) software, synthesised the remaining results narratively and assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Results: We identified 49 studies reporting on the predefined four categories of communication interventions. Evidence from our meta-analyses shows that COVID-19 vaccine uptake may increase when education and information strategies are applied (risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.28; high-certainty evidence) or social norms are communicated (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.33; high-certainty evidence) compared with no intervention. The different communication strategies mostly have little to no impact on vaccine intention; however, there may be a slight increase in vaccine confidence when gain framing is applied compared with no intervention. Conclusion: Overall, we found that education and information-based interventions or social norm-framing strategies are most effective compared with no intervention given. Our findings show that some of the investigated communication strategies might influence policy decision-making, and our results could be useful for future pandemics as well. Prospero registration number: PROSPERO (CRD42021296618).

Objective: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused a range of mental health problems, particularly self-harm. Lockdowns are the usual methods of responding to these public health emergencies. However, the effect of the COVID-19 lockdown on self-harm remains poorly characterized. This study aimed to investigate the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the incidence of self-harm. The findings may inform future policy development and strategies for managing pandemic-related mental health challenges. Methods: A meta-analysis was conducted using several database searches: APA PsycINFO, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wan Fang. Published studies with data on the incidence of self-harm during visits to medical institutions, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, were included. The pooled risk ratio (RR) value of self-harm incidence variation before and during the COVID-19 lockdown period, expressed as the comparison of clinical institution visits before and during the pandemic, was calculated. Results: Fifteen retrospective cohort studies with observational designs involving 253,600 participants were included. The pooled RR value of self-harm incidence variation was 1.386 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.205-1.595, I2 = 58.9%, p = 0.002). The subgroup analysis showed that "emergency department type" (p = 0.004) and "mean age of the sample" were the sources of the RR values' heterogeneity (p = 0.026). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic was a risk factor for self-harm. Therefore, special attention should be paid to individuals visiting the emergency department and the middle-aged and elderly populations. The prospero registration: This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023373026), https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023373026.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic presented policymakers with time-sensitive decision problems and a rapidly increasing volume of research, not all of which was robust, or relevant to local contexts. A bespoke evidence review process supporting stakeholder engagement was developed as part of the Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre (WCEC), which could flexibly react to the needs of decision-makers, to address urgent requests within days or months as required. Aims: To describe and appraise the WCEC review process and methods and identify key learning points. Methods: Three types of rapid review products were used, which could accommodate the breadth of decision problems and topics covered. Stakeholder (including public) engagement was integrated from the onset and supported throughout. The methods used were tailored depending on the needs of the decision-maker, type of research question, timeframe, and volume and type of evidence. We appraised the overall process and compared the methods used with the most recent and relevant best practice guidance. Results: The remote collaboration between research teams, establishing a clear pathway to impact upfront, and the strong stakeholder involvement embedded in the review process were considered particular strengths. Several key learning points were identified, which focused on: enhancing stakeholders' abilities to identify focused policy-relevant research questions; the collection and storage of review protocols at a central location; tightening quality assurance process regarding study selection, data extraction and quality assessment; adequate reporting of methodological shortcuts and understanding by stakeholders; piloting of an algorithm for assigning study design descriptors, and a single quality assessment tool covering multiple study designs; and incorporate, where appropriate an assessment of the confidence in the overall body of evidence using GRADE or similar framework. Conclusions: The review process enabled a high volume of questions that were directly relevant to policy and clinical decision making to be addressed in a timely manner using a transparent and tailored approach.

The outbreak of the COVID-19 has seriously affected the whole society, and vaccines were the most effective means to contain the epidemic. This paper aims to determine the top 100 articles cited most frequently in COVID-19 vaccines and to analyze the research status and hot spots in this field through bibliometrics, to provide a reference for future research. We conducted a comprehensive search of the Web of Science Core Collection database on November 29, 2023, and identified the top 100 articles by ranking them from highest to lowest citation frequency. In addition, we analyzed the year of publication, citation, author, country, institution, journal, and keywords with Microsoft Excel 2019 and VOSviewer 1.6.18. Research focused on vaccine immunogenicity and safety, vaccine hesitancy, and vaccination intention.

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a disproportionate impact on the health of Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA, as reflected in the growing literature. However, Indigenous Peoples are often homogenised, with key differences often overlooked, failing to capture the complexity of issues and may lead to suboptimal public health policy-making. The objective of this review was to assess the extent to which the heterogeneity of the Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA has been reflected in COVID-19 research. Design: This study took the form of a scoping review. Data sources: Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science were searched for studies investigating COVID-19 pandemic outcomes among Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA. The search dates included January 2019 to January 2024. Eligibility criteria: All citations yielded by this search were subjected to title and abstract screening, full-text review and data extraction. We included original, peer-reviewed research investigating COVID-19-related outcomes among Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Australia, New Zealand or the USA. Data extraction and synthesis: Data extraction was conducted as an iterative process, reaching consensus between two of the study authors. All included studies were analysed through a combination of quantitative descriptive summary and qualitative thematic analysis. Results: Of the 9795 citations found by the initial search, 428 citations were deemed eligible for inclusion. Of these citations: 72.9% compared Indigenous participants to non-Indigenous participants; 10.0% aggregated Indigenous and non-white participants; and 17.1% provided findings for Indigenous participants exclusively. Conclusions: By overlooking the heterogeneity that exists among Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA, researchers and policy-makers run the risk of masking inequities and the unique needs of groups of Indigenous Peoples. This may lead to inefficient policy recommendations and unintentionally perpetuate health disparities during public health crises.

Problem and background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was substantial reconfiguration of maternity care services, affecting both users and healthcare providers (HCPs), in the United Kingdom (UK) and globally. Aim: To further our understanding of the impact of maternity service reconfigurations in the UK, from the perspective of maternity HCPs. Methods: Scopus, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane COVID Study Register were searched for relevant studies reporting qualitative data from the UK, published in English between 01 June 2021 and 30 September 2023. Qualitative data on HCPs' experiences of maternity care reconfiguration during the pandemic were extracted from 15 studies. Data were subjected to thematic synthesis according to key service reconfigurations. Results: Nine themes were identified: Care-seeking and Care Experience: Changes to existing care, Limitations placed on the partner, Mental health and lack of support networks, and Barriers to successful implementation of reconfiguration strategies; Virtual Care: Impact on quality of care, Increased convenience and flexibility, and Digital exclusion; and Ethical Future of Maternity Care Services: Optimising patient care, and Service users and staff as the driving force for change. No studies reported on the concepts of Self-monitoring or COVID-19 vaccination. Discussion and conclusion: The review findings highlight HCPs' views of the need for greater inclusion of partners, choice of virtual or in-person care for women and birthing people; and a need for co-designed services for future policy-making.

Introduction: The global community, during the COVID-19 pandemic, faced a vast amount of information and risks due to low levels of health literacy. Governments responded differently to the pandemic crisis based on formulated policies and their societal conditions. The present research focuses on analyzing information and health literacy policies in pandemics to present a model and identify and prioritize factors affecting the formation and implementation of the mentioned policies. Methods: This qualitative research was conducted using semi-structured interviews with key informants. Extracted codes were designed based on expert opinions, and an initial conceptual framework was developed according to the policy triangle (content, context, process, and actors). Finally, the identified issues and the conceptual framework were validated using the Delphi-quantitative method. Results: The results indicate that the content of information and health literacy policies focuses on goal-setting, planning, law formulation, and amendments and updates. The process of information and health literacy policies in pandemics was categorized into managerial, educational, dissemination, sharing, evaluation, and monitoring processes. Economic, political, social, and cultural aspects were identified as influential context, and multiple actors were identified as policymakers and facilitators of information and health literacy policies in pandemics. Conclusion: The developed model can be a suitable and useful tool for increasing the awareness of health managers and policymakers about the strengths and weaknesses of past policies regarding information and health literacy policies in pandemics. It also provides a suitable perspective for policymaking and identifying factors influencing the implementation of enacted policies.

COVID-19 is not only associated with substantial acute liver and kidney injuries, but also with an elevated risk of post-acute sequelae involving the kidney and liver system. We aimed to investigate whether COVID-19 exposure increases the long-term risk of kidney and liver disease, and what are the magnitudes of these associations. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, , and the Living Overview of the Evidence COVID-19 Repository for cohort studies estimating the association between COVID-19 and kidney and liver outcomes. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to combine the results of the included studies. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Fifteen cohort studies with more than 32 million participants were included in the systematic review COVID-19 was associated with a 35% greater risk of kidney diseases (10 more per 1000 persons; low certainty evidence) and 54% greater risk of liver disease (3 more per 1000 persons; low certainty evidence). The absolute increases due to COVID-19 for acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, and liver test abnormality were 3, 8, and 3 per 1000 persons, respectively. Subgroup analyses found no differences between different type of kidney and liver diseases. The findings provide further evidence for the association between COVID-19 and incident kidney and liver conditions. The absolute magnitude of the effect of COVID-19 on kidney and liver outcomes was, however, relatively small.

Objectives: The co-occurring flood and coronavirus disease (COVID-19) increase the consequences for health and life. This study examined the strategies to manage the health consequences of the co-occurring flood and COVID-19, with a specific focus on these 2 challenges. Methods: This review included all the studies published in peer-reviewed journals between January 1980 and June 2021. Several electronic databases were searched, including Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed. Mixed Methods Appraisal Tools (MMT), version 2018, assessed the articles retrieved through a comprehensive and systematic literature search. Descriptive and thematic analyses were carried out to derive strategies for managing the health consequences of the simultaneous flood and COVID-19. Results: Among 4271 identified articles, 10 were eligible for inclusion. In total, 199 strategies were identified in this review for managing the multi-hazard health consequences of flooding and COVID-19, which were classified into 9 categories and 25 subcategories. The categories included policy making and decision making, coordination, risk communication, logistics, planning, preparedness measures, response measures, social and humanitarian support, and actions of local communities and non-governmental organizations. Conclusions: Managing a multi-hazard and reducing its health consequences requires various actions. Flood management must be needed, and flood-affected people and their health should be protected.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in widespread disruptions to primary healthcare delivery and shifts to virtual care. Reduced in-person paediatric primary care visit rates have been reported. However, the extent to which access to primary preventative care has been impacted remains unclear. The objective of this scoping review is to characterise the utilisation of preventative primary care and its association with child development for children ages 0-5 years old during the COVID-19 era. In addition, we will determine if specific groups of children are at greater risk for reduced access to care. Methods: A systematic search will be conducted for studies published between March 11, 2020, and October 2023 in the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Library (CENTRAL and CDSR), Web of Science, and CINAHL (EBSCOhost). This scoping review will follow the methodological framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley and updated by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). Studies related to primary preventative care of children aged 0-5 years old conducted in English and in high-income countries will be screened. Studies published before March 11, 2020, in acute care and low-middle-income settings will be excluded. Results will be summarised for appointments attended, delayed, and missed. In addition, we will summarise findings on the impact of COVID-19 on child development. Findings will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Discussion: Further investigation is required to better understand the relationship between attendance of preventative primary care for children and its effects on child development. The findings obtained from this review will offer essential context to guide policy-making and healthcare service planning for the period following the pandemic.

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic posed a detrimental impact on the conduct of non-COVID-19 related clinical trials, raising concerns about the completeness of these studies and waste of resources. While several measures and strategies have been suggested to address these issues, a thorough and timely summarisation is still lacking. Therefore, our aim is to conduct a scoping review to summarise the negative effects of COVID-19 on non-COVID-19 clinical trials, outline the effective measures for mitigating these impacts, and provide insights for future pandemics.Methods and analysisThis scoping review will be conducted in line with the Joanna Briggs Institute's scoping review methodological framework, and the results will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Relevant articles will be searched in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library from 1 December 2019 to 1 July 2023. We will also screen the reference lists of the included studies manually to identify more potentially relevant articles. Articles focusing on the adverse impacts of COVID-19 on non-COVID-19 clinical trials and effective measures for mitigating them will be included. Two investigators will perform study selection and data extraction independently. A narrative summary as well as a descriptive analysis of the basic characteristics and key results of the included studies will be performed.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required, as this scoping review will be completed based only on published literature. The findings of this scoping review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and/or conference presentations.

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been extensively employed for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, there is demand for discovering more SARS-CoV-2 Mpro inhibitors with diverse scaffolds to optimize anti-SARS-CoV-2 lead compounds. In this study, comprehensive in silico and in vitro assays were utilized to determine the potential inhibitors from TCM compounds against SARS-CoV-2 Mpro, which is an important therapeutic target for SARS-CoV-2. The ensemble docking analysis of 18263 TCM compounds against 15 SARS-CoV-2 Mpro conformations identified 19 TCM compounds as promising candidates. Further in vitro testing validated three compounds as inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 Mpro and showed IC50 values of 4.64 ± 0.11, 7.56 ± 0.78, and 11.16 ± 0.26 μM, with EC50 values of 12.25 ± 1.68, 15.58 ± 0.77, and 29.32 ± 1.25 μM, respectively. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations indicated that the three complexes remained stable over the last 100 ns of production run. An analysis of the binding mode revealed that the active compounds occupy different subsites (S1, S2, S3, and S4) of the active site of SARS-CoV-2 Mpro via specific poses through noncovalent interactions with key amino acids (e.g., HIS 41, ASN 142, GLY 143, MET 165, GLU 166, or GLN 189). Overall, this study provides evidence indicating that the three natural products obtained from TCM could be further used for anti-COVID-19 research, justifying the investigation of Chinese herbal medicinal ingredients as bioactive constituents for therapeutic targets.

Intensive care unit (ICU) strain, characterized by a discrepancy between perceived or actual intensive care resources and demand, significantly impacts patient outcomes and healthcare worker well-being. The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic exacerbated ICU strain, leading to increased mortality and extended hospital stays, affecting both critically ill patients with and without COVID-19. A systematic review identified 16 leading and lagging indicators of ICU capacity strain, including queuing, premature and after-hours ICU discharge, use of temporary space, length of stay, burnout, staffing and nurse-to-patient ratio, ICU census, acuity and turnover, standardized mortality ratio, readmissions, availability of critical supplies, ventilator use, and surgery cancellation. However, variability in operational definitions and limited evidence regarding the reliability, validity, usability, and feasibility limit the value of single indicators for informed strategic planning and policy guidance. Regional and national policies and programs are essential to enhance real-time monitoring for effective management of critical care resources, and they mitigate the impact of ICU strain, facilitating complex interhospital transfers to reduce strain and ensuring comprehensive strategies for enhancing ICU resilience. Proactive regional cooperation is advocated for policy formulation, knowledge exchange, and resource allocation to anticipate and mitigate ICU strain, ensuring equitable healthcare access during global health crises. The policy implications for future preparedness emphasize the importance of evidence-based triage and adaptable patient management strategies alongside ethical considerations in resource allocation and the role of behavioral economic insights in optimizing resource utilization and collaborative healthcare practices. This multifaceted approach for addressing ICU strain comprehensively and effectively during a pandemic would promote health equity and enhance healthcare system resilience under both routine operations and crisis conditions.

Background: Before the pandemic, digital health was merely a potential alternative to established systems of healthcare provision in Hungary. The technology was available but there was no governmental strategy regarding digital health use and development. The legal framework for digital solutions in healthcare was fragmented. COVID-19 created conditions in which digital solutions became the most feasible form of healthcare provision. We present the legislative and policy-making activities of the Hungarian government during the pandemic aimed at enhancing the organised and systematic use of these technologies. Methods: The core method used in our research is a review of legislation using the principles and methods of a systematic literature review. We searched the National Legislation Database for digital health related legislation for the period January 31, 2020 - June 1, 2022. To provide the context for the analysis, other relevant documents were identified through desk research. Results: Although established in 2017, the electronic health records (EHRs) were only widely used after the onset of the pandemic. Hungary used temporary state of emergency regulations to facilitate an increase in the number of teleconsultations. Our search identified 7 pieces of legislation that enabled healthcare providers to put digital solutions to instant use. They defined the conditions healthcare providers must meet for teleconsultations, set what interventions may be done, what can be reimbursed and dealt with security issues. The National Health Informatics Strategy of July 2021 is complex but mainly deals with technical issues. The three basic principles of the strategy are people centeredness, digital transformation and integrated care. Conclusion: Hungarian digital health solutions and policies fare well in international comparison. This is due to the intensive legislative activity of the pandemic period. The National Health Informatics Strategy ensures that the digital health solutions implemented during the pandemic outlive COVID-19.

Background: The clinical efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) treatment for COVID-19 remain controversial. This study aimed to map the current status and gaps of available evidence, and conduct a meta-analysis to further investigate the benefit of IVIg in COVID-19 patients. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SR/MAs), primary studies with control groups, reporting on the use of IVIg in patients with COVID-19. A random-effects meta-analysis with subgroup analyses regarding study design and patient disease severity was performed. Our outcomes of interest determined by the evidence mapping, were mortality, length of hospitalization (days), length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (days), number of patients requiring mechanical ventilation, and adverse events. Results: We included 34 studies (12 SR/MAs, 8 prospective and 14 retrospective studies). A total of 5571 hospitalized patients were involved in 22 primary studies. Random-effects meta-analyses of very low to moderate evidence showed that there was little or no difference between IVIg and standard care or placebo in reducing mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.91; 95% CI 0.78-1.06; risk difference [RD] 3.3% fewer), length of hospital (mean difference [MD] 0.37; 95% CI - 2.56, 3.31) and ICU (MD 0.36; 95% CI - 0.81, 1.53) stays, mechanical ventilation use (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.68-1.24; RD 2.8% fewer), and adverse events (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.84-1.14; RD 0.5% fewer) of patients with COVID-19. Sensitivity analysis using a fixed-effects model indicated that IVIg may reduce mortality (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.60-0.97), and increase length of hospital stay (MD 0.68; 95% CI 0.09-1.28). Conclusion: Very low to moderate certainty of evidence indicated IVIg may not improve the clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Given the discrepancy between the random- and fixed-effects model results, further large-scale and well-designed RCTs are warranted

Background: Studies assessing the indirect impact of COVID-19 using mathematical models have increased in recent years. This scoping review aims to identify modelling studies assessing the potential impact of disruptions to essential health services caused by COVID-19 and to summarise the characteristics of disruption and the models used to assess the disruptions. Methods: Eligible studies were included if they used any models to assess the impact of COVID-19 disruptions on any health services. Articles published from January 2020 to December 2022 were identified from PubMed, Embase and CINAHL, using detailed searches with key concepts including COVID-19, modelling and healthcare disruptions. Two reviewers independently extracted the data in four domains. A descriptive analysis of the included studies was performed under the format of a narrative report. Results: This scoping review has identified a total of 52 modelling studies that employed several models (n=116) to assess the potential impact of disruptions to essential health services. The majority of the models were simulation models (n=86; 74.1%). Studies covered a wide range of health conditions from infectious diseases to non-communicable diseases. COVID-19 has been reported to disrupt supply of health services, demand for health services and social change affecting factors that influence health. The most common outcomes reported in the studies were clinical outcomes such as mortality and morbidity. Twenty-five studies modelled various mitigation strategies; maintaining critical services by ensuring resources and access to services are found to be a priority for reducing the overall impact. Conclusion: A number of models were used to assess the potential impact of disruptions to essential health services on various outcomes. There is a need for collaboration among stakeholders to enhance the usefulness of any modelling. Future studies should consider disparity issues for more comprehensive findings that could ultimately facilitate policy decision-making to maximise benefits to all.

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the scale of global unpreparedness to deal with the fast-arising needs of global health threats. This problem was coupled with a crisis of governance and presented in the context of globally hitting climate crisis and disasters. Although such a pandemic was predictable due to the known effects of human intervention on the surrounding environment and its devastating secondary effects, such as climate change and increased zoonoses, most countries were unprepared to deal with the scale and scope of the pandemic. In this context, such as that of the climate crisis, the Global North and Global South faced several common challenges, including, first and foremost, the scarcity of resources required for health, policy, wellbeing and socioeconomic wellness. In this paper, we review the most recent evidence available in the literature related to pandemic preparedness and governance, focusing on principles and practices used during the COVID-19 pandemic, and we place it in the context of a European Parliament Interest Group meeting (this event took place on 21 March 2023 during the "European Health Tech Summit") to ground it within ongoing discussions and narratives of policy and praxis. The review identified key practices and principles required to better face future health threats and emergencies. Beyond health practices relying on technology and innovation, it is useful to mention the importance of contextualising responses and linking them to clear goals, improving the agreement between science and policymaking, thus building trust and enabling transparent communication with the general public based on clear ethical frameworks.

Background Molnupiravir has been considered a promising candidate for COVID-19. Its efficacy and safety in non-severe COVID-19 patients and the differences between patients with different risk factors need further evaluation. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that allocated adult patients with non-severe COVID-19 to molnupiravir or a control. We used random-effects models, and conducted subgroup analyses and meta-regression for COVID-19 patients with high-risk factors. The GRADE approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. Results Fourteen trials with 34 570 patients were included. Moderate- to low-certainty evidence showed that molnupiravir was associated with a reduction in the risk of hospitalization (relative risk [RR] = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.47-0.85), risk of mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.19-0.72) and time to symptom resolution (mean differences [MD] = -2.91 days, 95% CI: -3.66 to -2.16). However, no significant differences were found in adverse events, all-cause mortality, rate of and time to viral clearance, or duration of hospitalization. For the rate of viral clearance, subgroup effects were found between trials with low and high risk of bias (P = 0.001) and between trials with male or female majority (P < 0.001). For admission to hospital, subgroup effects were also found between trials with & GE;50% and <50% of the participants being female (P = 0.04). Meta-regression showed a significant association between higher trial mean age and elevated risk of hospitalization (P = 0.011), and female majority and elevated risk of hospitalization (P = 0.011). Conclusions Molnupiravir was found to be effective in non-severe COVID-19, but the efficacy varied with age and sex.

IntroductionHealth information literacy is critical for individuals to obtain, understand, screen, and apply health information. However, there is currently no specific tool available to evaluate all four dimensions of health information literacy in China. Public health emergencies can present an opportunity to evaluate and monitor the health information literacy level of residents. Therefore, this study aimed to develop a questionnaire to evaluate the level of health information literacy and to measure the reliability and validity. MethodsThe development process of the questionnaire consisted of the determination of questionnaire items, expert consultation, and validation. Based on the National Residents Health Literacy Monitoring Questionnaire (2020) and the 2019 Informed Health Choices key concepts, the researchers drafted the questionnaire, including all four dimensions of health information literacy. Experts in relevant fields were invited to evaluate the draft questionnaire, and revisions were made accordingly. Finally, the reliability and validity of the finalized version were examined in Gansu Province, China. ResultsThe research team preliminarily formulated 14 items encompassing the four dimensions of health information literacy. After consulting with 28 experts, modifications were made. A convenience sample of 185 Chinese residents was invited to participate. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.715 and McDonald's omega was 0.739 for internal consistency, and the test-retest intra-class correlation coefficient after 4 weeks was 0.906, indicating that the questionnaire content and measurement structure was relatively stable. ConclusionThis questionnaire is the first evidence-based assessment tool developed for monitoring health information literacy in China, and it has shown good reliability and validity. It can help to monitor the health information literacy levels of Chinese residents, promote evidence-based decision-making, and guide interventions to improve health information literacy.

Herd immunity through vaccination is a key measure to control COVID-19 pandemic. However, vaccine hesitancy remains a public health threat, which is still common among healthcare workers (HCWs). This systematic review aimed to synthesise evidence on HCWs' attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination and analyse associated factors to provide information for vaccine policy development and practice. We searched PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, Web of Science and three Chinese databases for literature published on 12 February 2021. Two researchers screened the literature independently, and 13 studies were included in the systematic review. Vaccine acceptance varied widely and ranged from 27.7% to 77.3%. HCWs had positive attitudes towards future COVID-19 vaccines, while vaccine hesitancy was still common. Demographic variables such as men, older age and physicians were positive predictive factors. Women and nurses had more vaccine hesitancy. Previous influenza vaccination and self-perceived risk were facilitators. Concerns for safety, efficacy and effectiveness and distrust of the government were barriers. Influences of direct (COVID-19) patient care towards vaccination intention were less conclusive. Tailored communication strategies were needed to increase the uptake rate of COVID-19 vaccines among HCWs. More importantly, more data and information on the safety and efficacy of vaccines should be provided with transparency.