Explore the vast range of titles available.

Assessing the epidemiological association between herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) and type 2 (HSV-2) infections in the United States, and characterizing the trends in the standardized HSV-1 and HSV-2 antibody prevalences (seroprevalences), 1999-2016. Source of data was the cross-sectional and nationally-representative biennial surveys of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). All nine NHANES rounds for 1999-2016 were included in analysis. Datasets of these rounds were combined and analyzed accounting for survey design and applying weighting procedures. Logistic regressions were used to identify associations with seropositivity. Sensitivity analyses were conducted. Odds of HSV-1 infection declined by 2.84% (95% CI: 1.70%-4.00%) annually among men, and by 2.22% (95% CI: 1.23%-3.21%) among women. Declines were highest at younger ages. Odds of HSV-2 infection declined by 2.23% (95% CI: 0.71%-3.82%) annually among men, and by 2.89% (95% CI: 1.57%-4.28%) among women. Odds ratio of the association between HSV-2 and HSV-1 seropositivity was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.60-0.84) for men and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.72-0.91) for women, after adjustment for age, ethnicity, and year. HSV-1 and HSV-2 seroprevalences showed a strong declining trend for at least two decades, for both sexes and for the different ethnicities, possibly reflecting improvements in hygiene and living conditions (for HSV-1), and safer sexual behavior (for HSV-2). HSV-1 seroprevalence declines are most pronounced among young individuals. There is evidence for cross protection between the two infections, suggestive of HSV-1 seropositivity being partially protective against HSV-2 infection.

As of March 31, 2021, more than 265,000 people in Qatar had received both doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine. Viral sequencing indicated that 50.0% of infections from February 23 to March 18 were caused by B.1.351 and 44.5% by B.1.1.7. Vaccine effectiveness was 89.5% against the B.1.1.7 variant and 75.0% against the B.1.351 variant. Effectiveness against severe, critical, or fatal disease was 97.4%.

Background The true extent of the severity and fatality caused by the COVID‐19 pandemic remains uncertain. This study provides an approximate estimate of the global disease burden from the pandemic. Methods A cohort study followed the Qatari population from the onset of the pandemic to March 18, 2024, to estimate the age‐specific incidence rates of severe, critical, and fatal COVID‐19, classified according to World Health Organization criteria. A mathematical model then utilized these rates to generate regional and global estimates of COVID‐19 severity and fatality. Results The incidence rate of any severe, critical, or fatal COVID‐19 throughout the pandemic was 1.13 (95% CI: 1.07–1.19) per 1000 person‐years, while that of fatal COVID‐19 alone was 0.11 (95% CI: 0.09–0.13) per 1000 person‐years. Globally, the number of severe, critical, or fatal COVID‐19 cases was estimated at 61.9 million (95% UI: 55.0–69.9 million), while the number of fatal COVID‐19 cases alone was estimated at 11.3 million (95% UI: 7.8–17.4 million). Both estimates showed large regional variations. Most severe, critical, and fatal COVID‐19 cases occurred during the pre‐Omicron phase of the pandemic. Conclusions The COVID‐19 pandemic had a profound global impact on morbidity and mortality, emphasizing the critical need for preparedness for future pandemics.

The SARS-CoV-2 beta variant has immune-evasion mutations. Investigators from Qatar assessed the effect of the beta variant surge on the incidence of second infection. Substantial protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection was observed.

To generate estimates of the global prevalence and incidence of urogenital infection with chlamydia, gonorrhoea, trichomoniasis and syphilis in women and men, aged 15-49 years, in 2016. For chlamydia, gonorrhoea and trichomoniasis, we systematically searched for studies conducted between 2009 and 2016 reporting prevalence. We also consulted regional experts. To generate estimates, we used Bayesian meta-analysis. For syphilis, we aggregated the national estimates generated by using Spectrum-STI. For chlamydia, gonorrhoea and/or trichomoniasis, 130 studies were eligible. For syphilis, the Spectrum-STI database contained 978 data points for the same period. The 2016 global prevalence estimates in women were: chlamydia 3.8% (95% uncertainty interval, UI: 3.3-4.5); gonorrhoea 0.9% (95% UI: 0.7-1.1); trichomoniasis 5.3% (95% UI:4.0-7.2); and syphilis 0.5% (95% UI: 0.4-0.6). In men prevalence estimates were: chlamydia 2.7% (95% UI: 1.9-3.7); gonorrhoea 0.7% (95% UI: 0.5-1.1); trichomoniasis 0.6% (95% UI: 0.4-0.9); and syphilis 0.5% (95% UI: 0.4-0.6). Total estimated incident cases were 376.4 million: 127.2 million (95% UI: 95.1-165.9 million) chlamydia cases; 86.9 million (95% UI: 58.6-123.4 million) gonorrhoea cases; 156.0 million (95% UI: 103.4-231.2 million) trichomoniasis cases; and 6.3 million (95% UI: 5.5-7.1 million) syphilis cases. Global estimates of prevalence and incidence of these four curable sexually transmitted infections remain high. The study highlights the need to expand data collection efforts at country level and provides an initial baseline for monitoring progress of the 1.

Aims/Introduction To investigate and forecast type 2 diabetes mellitus epidemic, its related risk factors and cost in Oman by 2050. Materials and Methods An age‐structured mathematical model was used to characterize type 2 diabetes mellitus epidemiology and trends in Oman between 1990 and 2050. The model was parametrized using current and quality data, including six nationally representative population‐based epidemiological surveys for type 2 diabetes mellitus and its key risk factors. Results The projected type 2 diabetes mellitus prevalence increased from 15.2% in 2020 to 23.8% in 2050. The prevalence increased from 16.8 and 13.8% in 2020 among women and men to 26.3 and 21.4% in 2050, respectively. In 2020, 190,489 Omanis were living with type 2 diabetes mellitus compared with 570,227 in 2050. The incidence rate per 1,000 person‐years changed from 8.3 in 2020 to 12.1 in 2050. Type 2 diabetes mellitus’ share of Oman’s national health expenditure grew by 36% between 2020 and 2050 (from 21.2 to 28.8%). Obesity explained 56.7% of type 2 diabetes mellitus cases in 2020 and 71.4% in 2050, physical inactivity explained 4.3% in 2020 and 2.7% in 2050, whereas smoking accounted for <1% of type 2 diabetes mellitus cases throughout 2020–2050. Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses affirmed these predictions. Conclusions The type 2 diabetes mellitus epidemic in Oman is expected to increase significantly over the next three decades, consuming nearly one‐third of the national health expenditure. The type 2 diabetes mellitus burden is heavily influenced by obesity. Interventions targeting this single risk factor should be a national priority to reduce and control the burden of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Oman. The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Oman was projected to grow by 57% by 2050, whereas the incidence was projected to grow by 200% by 2050. By 2050, type 2 diabetes mellitus will consume 30% of Oman’s health expenditure. The type 2 diabetes mellitus epidemic in Oman is driven by the high obesity level.

Knowing whether COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness wanes is crucial for informing vaccine policy, such as the need for and timing of booster doses. We aimed to systematically review the evidence for the duration of protection of COVID-19 vaccines against various clinical outcomes, and to assess changes in the rates of breakthrough infection caused by the delta variant with increasing time since vaccination. This study was designed as a systematic review and meta-regression. We did a systematic review of preprint and peer-reviewed published article databases from June 17, 2021, to Dec 2, 2021. Randomised controlled trials of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and observational studies of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness were eligible. Studies with vaccine efficacy or effectiveness estimates at discrete time intervals of people who had received full vaccination and that met predefined screening criteria underwent full-text review. We used random-effects meta-regression to estimate the average change in vaccine efficacy or effectiveness 1–6 months after full vaccination. Of 13 744 studies screened, 310 underwent full-text review, and 18 studies were included (all studies were carried out before the omicron variant began to circulate widely). Risk of bias, established using the risk of bias 2 tool for randomised controlled trials or the risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions tool was low for three studies, moderate for eight studies, and serious for seven studies. We included 78 vaccine-specific vaccine efficacy or effectiveness evaluations (Pfizer–BioNTech-Comirnaty, n=38; Moderna-mRNA-1273, n=23; Janssen-Ad26.COV2.S, n=9; and AstraZeneca-Vaxzevria, n=8). On average, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection decreased from 1 month to 6 months after full vaccination by 21·0 percentage points (95% CI 13·9–29·8) among people of all ages and 20·7 percentage points (10·2–36·6) among older people (as defined by each study, who were at least 50 years old). For symptomatic COVID-19 disease, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness decreased by 24·9 percentage points (95% CI 13·4–41·6) in people of all ages and 32·0 percentage points (11·0–69·0) in older people. For severe COVID-19 disease, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness decreased by 10·0 percentage points (95% CI 6·1–15·4) in people of all ages and 9·5 percentage points (5·7–14·6) in older people. Most (81%) vaccine efficacy or effectiveness estimates against severe disease remained greater than 70% over time. COVID-19 vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against severe disease remained high, although it did decrease somewhat by 6 months after full vaccination. By contrast, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against infection and symptomatic disease decreased approximately 20–30 percentage points by 6 months. The decrease in vaccine efficacy or effectiveness is likely caused by, at least in part, waning immunity, although an effect of bias cannot be ruled out. Evaluating vaccine efficacy or effectiveness beyond 6 months will be crucial for updating COVID-19 vaccine policy. Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.

Dengue virus (DENV) infection is widespread and its disease burden has increased in past decades. However, little is known about the epidemiology of dengue in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Following Cochrane Collaboration guidelines and reporting our findings following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed available records across MENA describing dengue occurrence in humans (prevalence studies, incidence studies, and outbreak reports), occurrence of suitable vectors (Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus), and DENV vector infection rates. We identified 105 human prevalence measures in 13 of 24 MENA countries; 81 outbreaks reported from 9 countries from 1941-2015; and reports of Ae. aegypti and/or Ae. albopictus occurrence in 15 countries. The majority of seroprevalence studies were reported from the Red Sea region and Pakistan, with multiple studies indicating >20% DENV seroprevalence in general populations (median 25%, range 0-62%) in these subregions. Fifty percent of these studies were conducted prior to 1990. Multiple studies utilized assays susceptible to serologic cross-reactions and 5% of seroprevalence studies utilized viral neutralization testing. There was considerable heterogeneity in study design and outbreak reporting, as well as variability in subregional study coverage, study populations, and laboratory methods used for diagnosis. DENV seroprevalence in the MENA is high among some populations in the Red Sea region and Pakistan, while recent outbreaks in these subregions suggest increasing incidence of DENV which may be driven by a variety of ecologic and social factors. However, there is insufficient study coverage to draw conclusions about Aedes or DENV presence in multiple MENA countries. These findings illustrate the epidemiology of DENV in the MENA while revealing priorities for DENV surveillance and Aedes control.

The burgeoning epidemic of diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the major global health challenges. We systematically reviewed the published literature to provide a summary estimate of the association between DM and active tuberculosis (TB). We searched Medline and EMBASE databases for studies reporting adjusted estimates on the TB-DM association published before December 22, 2015, with no restrictions on region and language. In the meta-analysis, adjusted estimates were pooled using a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model, according to study design. Risk of bias assessment and sensitivity analyses were conducted. 44 eligible studies were included, which consisted of 58,468,404 subjects from 16 countries. Compared with non-DM patients, DM patients had 3.59-fold (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.25-5.73), 1.55-fold (95% CI 1.39-1.72), and 2.09-fold (95% CI 1.71-2.55) increased risk of active TB in four prospective, 16 retrospective, and 17 case-control studies, respectively. Country income level (3.16-fold in low/middle-vs. 1.73-fold in high-income countries), background TB incidence (2.05-fold in countries with >50 vs. 1.89-fold in countries with ≤50 TB cases per 100,000 person-year), and geographical region (2.44-fold in Asia vs. 1.71-fold in Europe and 1.73-fold in USA/Canada) affected appreciably the estimated association, but potential risk of bias, type of population (general versus clinical), and potential for duplicate data, did not. Microbiological ascertainment for TB (3.03-fold) and/or blood testing for DM (3.10-fold), as well as uncontrolled DM (3.30-fold), resulted in stronger estimated association. DM is associated with a two- to four-fold increased risk of active TB. The association was stronger when ascertainment was based on biological testing rather than medical records or self-report. The burgeoning DM epidemic could impact upon the achievements of the WHO \"End TB Strategy\" for reducing TB incidence.

The global surge in the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant has resulted in many individuals with hybrid immunity (immunity developed through a combination of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination). We aimed to systematically review the magnitude and duration of the protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against infection and severe disease caused by the omicron variant. For this systematic review and meta-regression, we searched for cohort, cross-sectional, and case–control studies in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the WHO COVID-19 database, and Europe PubMed Central from Jan 1, 2020, to June 1, 2022, using keywords related to SARS-CoV-2, reinfection, protective effectiveness, previous infection, presence of antibodies, and hybrid immunity. The main outcomes were the protective effectiveness against reinfection and against hospital admission or severe disease of hybrid immunity, hybrid immunity relative to previous infection alone, hybrid immunity relative to previous vaccination alone, and hybrid immunity relative to hybrid immunity with fewer vaccine doses. Risk of bias was assessed with the Risk of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions Tool. We used log-odds random-effects meta-regression to estimate the magnitude of protection at 1-month intervals. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022318605). 11 studies reporting the protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and 15 studies reporting the protective effectiveness of hybrid immunity were included. For previous infection, there were 97 estimates (27 with a moderate risk of bias and 70 with a serious risk of bias). The effectiveness of previous infection against hospital admission or severe disease was 74·6% (95% CI 63·1–83·5) at 12 months. The effectiveness of previous infection against reinfection waned to 24·7% (95% CI 16·4–35·5) at 12 months. For hybrid immunity, there were 153 estimates (78 with a moderate risk of bias and 75 with a serious risk of bias). The effectiveness of hybrid immunity against hospital admission or severe disease was 97·4% (95% CI 91·4–99·2) at 12 months with primary series vaccination and 95·3% (81·9–98·9) at 6 months with the first booster vaccination after the most recent infection or vaccination. Against reinfection, the effectiveness of hybrid immunity following primary series vaccination waned to 41·8% (95% CI 31·5–52·8) at 12 months, while the effectiveness of hybrid immunity following first booster vaccination waned to 46·5% (36·0–57·3) at 6 months. All estimates of protection waned within months against reinfection but remained high and sustained for hospital admission or severe disease. Individuals with hybrid immunity had the highest magnitude and durability of protection, and as a result might be able to extend the period before booster vaccinations are needed compared to individuals who have never been infected. WHO COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.