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.

This study aimed to assess the preparedness of European countries regarding personal protective equipment (PPE) for health and care workers (HCWs), the COVID-19 infection rates of HCWs compared to the general working age population, and the association between these. We developed a PPE-preparedness scale based on responses to a questionnaire from experts in the Health Systems and Policy Monitor network, with a response rate of 19 out of 31 countries. COVID-19 infection data were retrieved form the European center for Disease Prevention and Control. Shortages of PPE were found in most countries, in particular in home care and long-term care. HCW infection rates, compared to the general population, varied strongly between countries, influenced by different testing regimes. We found no relationships between HCW infection rates, PPE preparedness and shortages of PPE. Improved surveillance in the population as well as for HCWS are needed to be able to better assess these relationships.

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.

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.

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

Conspiracy theories have been widespread in public discourses about COVID-19. Belief in conspiracy theories has negative effects on COVID-19 protective and preventive behaviour. However, evidence on the prevalence of belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories, remains fragmented. We conducted a systematic review on the adult general population prevalence of belief in different COVID-19 conspiracy theories at country and regional level around the globe. Searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar databases (end of search: March 22, 2022). We followed guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We identified 1637 potentially relevant titles in our search and included 33 studies in our review, reflecting conspiracy theory endorsement between March 2020 and August 2021. We found high belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories in most studies: 29 studies measured at least one conspiracy theory belief prevalence ≥20%. For several conspiracy theories, e.g. “Lab origin” or “Destabilization and power gain”, prevalence was often between 20 and 50%. Our findings call for increased awareness about COVID-19 conspiracy theories and the need for tailored, context specific conspiracy theory preparedness, prevention and control. Development and integration of a public health oriented communication and infodemic management strategy, alongside the implementation of conspiracy theory endorsement risk assessments are essential for supporting public health policy in future health emergencies.

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.

Background: The potential effectiveness of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) against "epidemic diseases " has highlighted the knowledge gaps associated with TCM in COVID-19 management. This study aimed to map the matrix for rigorously assessing, organizing, and presenting evidence relevant to TCM in COVID-19 management.Methods: In this study, we used the methodology of evidence mapping (EM). Nine electronic databases, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, , gray literature, reference lists of articles, and relevant Chinese conference proceedings, were searched for articles published until 23 March 2022. The EndNote X9, Rayyan, EPPI, and R software were used for data entry and management.Results: In all, 126 studies, including 76 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 50 systematic reviews (SRs), met our inclusion criteria. Of these, only nine studies (7.14%) were designated as high quality: four RCTs were assessed as "low risk of bias " and five SRs as "high quality. " Based on the research objectives of these studies, the included studies were classified into treatment (53 RCTs and 50 SRs, 81.75%), rehabilitation (20 RCTs, 15.87%), and prevention (3 RCTs, 2.38%) groups. A total of 76 RCTs included 59 intervention categories and 57 efficacy outcomes. All relevant trials consistently demonstrated that TCM significantly improved 22 outcomes (i.e., consistent positive outcomes) without significantly affecting four (i.e., consistent negative outcomes). Further, 50 SRs included nine intervention categories and 27 efficacy outcomes, two of which reported consistent positive outcomes and two reported consistent negative outcomes. Moreover, 45 RCTs and 38 SRs investigated adverse events; 39 RCTs and 30 SRs showed no serious adverse events or significant differences between groups.Conclusion: This study provides evidence matrix mapping of TCM against COVID-19, demonstrating the potential efficacy and safety of TCM in the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 and rehabilitation of COVID-19 patients, and also addresses evidence gaps. Given the limited number and poor quality of available studies and potential concerns regarding the applicability of the current clinical evaluation standards to TCM, the effect of specific interventions on individual outcomes needs further evaluation.