Dataset Information

Seroprevalence and lethality by SARS-CoV-2 in indigenous populations of Latin America and the Caribbean: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) has presented some of the highest numbers of cases and deaths due to COVID-19 in the world. Even though indigenous communities represent 8% of the total population in this region, the impact of COVID-19 on this historically vulnerable population has only been briefly explored. Thus, this study aimed to estimate the seroprevalence and lethality attributable to SARS-CoV-2 in the indigenous population of LAC.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted utilizing multiple databases (registry PROSPERO: CRD42020207862). Studies published in English, Spanish or Portuguese were selected between December 1st, 2019, and April 14^th, 2021. The evaluation of the quality of the study was carried out utilizing the Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. A qualitative synthesis of the data analyzed was conducted following the MOOSE and PRISMA declarations.

Results

Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Eleven studies were carried out in a Brazilian population, three in a Mexican population, and one in a Colombian population. Four studies reported data about the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in indigenous populations of Brazil (range: 4.2-81.65%). Twelve studies reported lethality in indigenous people (eight in Brazil, three in Mexico, and one in Colombia). In Brazil, a lethality of 53.30% was described in a hospital setting and between 1.83% and 4.03% in community studies. In Mexico, the lethality of COVID-19 ranged between 16.5% and 19.9%. Meanwhile, in Colombia, a lethality of 3.41% was reported. Most studies were deemed to be of good quality.

Conclusions

Despite COVID-19 affecting indigenous populations of LAC, there is limited evidence of the seroprevalence and lethality of the infection by SARS-CoV-2 in this population. Future investigations should ensure standardized methods that allow comparability among studies and ensure the precision of the results obtained.

SUBMITTER: Hernandez-Vasquez A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8684739 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented stress on economies, food systems, and health care resources in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Existing surveillance provides a proxy of the COVID-19 caseload and mortalities; however, these measures make it difficult to identify the dynamics of the pandemic and places where outbreaks are likely to occur. Moreover, existing surveillance techniques have failed to measure the dynamics of the pandemic.ObjectiveThis study aimed to provide additional surveillance metrics for COVID-19 transmission to track changes in the speed, acceleration, jerk, and persistence in the transmission of the pandemic more accurately than existing metrics.MethodsThrough a longitudinal trend analysis, we extracted COVID-19 data over 45 days from public health registries. We used an empirical difference equation to monitor the daily number of cases in the LAC as a function of the prior number of cases, the level of testing, and weekly shift variables based on a dynamic panel model that was estimated using the generalized method of moments approach by implementing the Arellano-Bond estimator in R. COVID-19 transmission rates were tracked for the LAC between September 30 and October 6, 2020, and between October 7 and 13, 2020.ResultsThe LAC saw a reduction in the speed, acceleration, and jerk for the week of October 13, 2020, compared to the week of October 6, 2020, accompanied by reductions in new cases and the 7-day moving average. For the week of October 6, 2020, Belize reported the highest acceleration and jerk, at 1.7 and 1.8, respectively, which is particularly concerning, given its high mortality rate. The Bahamas also had a high acceleration at 1.5. In total, 11 countries had a positive acceleration during the week of October 6, 2020, whereas only 6 countries had a positive acceleration for the week of October 13, 2020. The TAC displayed an overall positive trend, with a speed of 10.40, acceleration of 0.27, and jerk of -0.31, all of which decreased in the subsequent week to 9.04, -0.81, and -0.03, respectively.ConclusionsMetrics such as new cases, cumulative cases, deaths, and 7-day moving averages provide a static view of the pandemic but fail to identify where and the speed at which SARS-CoV-2 infects new individuals, the rate of acceleration or deceleration of the pandemic, and weekly comparison of the rate of acceleration of the pandemic indicate impending explosive growth or control of the pandemic. Enhanced surveillance will inform policymakers and leaders in the LAC about COVID-19 outbreaks.

Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular prognostic models guide treatment allocation and support clinical decisions. Whether there are valid models for Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) populations is unknown.ObjectiveThis study sought to identify and critically appraise cardiovascular prognostic models developed, tested, or recalibrated in LAC populations.MethodsThe systematic review followed the CHARMS (CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies) framework (PROSPERO [International Prospective Register of Systemic Reviews]: CRD42018096553). Reports were included if they followed a prospective design and presented a multivariable prognostic model; reports were excluded if they studied symptomatic individuals or patients. The following search engines were used: EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus, SciELO, and LILACS. Risk of bias assessment was conducted with PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool). No quantitative summary was conducted due to large heterogeneity.ResultsFrom 2,506 search results, 8 studies (N = 130,482 participants) were included for qualitative synthesis. We could not identify any cardiovascular prognostic model developed for LAC populations; reviewed reports evaluated available models or conducted a recalibration analysis. Only 1 study included a Caribbean population (Puerto Rico); 3 studies were retrieved from Chile; 2 from Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Uruguay; and 1 from Mexico. Four studies included population-based samples, and the other 4 included people affiliated to a health facility (e.g., prevention clinics). Most studied participants were older than 50 years, and there were more women in 5 reports. The Framingham model was assessed 6 times, and the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association pooled equation was assessed twice. Across the prognostic models assessed, calibration varied widely from one population to another, showing great overestimation particularly in some subgroups (e.g., highest risk). Discrimination (e.g., C-statistic) was acceptable for most models; for Framingham it ranged from 0.66 to 0.76. The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association pooled equation showed the best discrimination (0.78). That there were few outcome events was the most important methodological limitation of the identified studies.ConclusionsNo cardiovascular prognostic models have been developed in LAC, hampering key evidence to inform public health and clinical practice. Validation studies need to improve methodological issues.