The global impact of COVID-19 pandemic has led to a rapid development and utilization of mobile health applications. These are addressing the unmet needs of healthcare and public health system including contact tracing, health information dissemination, symptom checking and providing tools for training healthcare providers. Here we provide an overview of mobile applications being currently utilized for COVID-19 and their assessment using the Mobile Application Rating Scale. We performed a systematic review of the literature and mobile platforms to assess mobile applications currently utilized for COVID-19, and a quality assessment of these applications using the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) for overall quality, Engagement, Functionality, Aesthetics, and Information. Finally, we provide an overview of the key salient features that should be included in mobile applications being developed for future use. Our search identified 63 apps that are currently being used for COVID-19. Of these, 25 were selected from the Google play store and Apple App store in India, and 19 each from the UK and US. 18 apps were developed for sharing up to date information on COVID-19, and 8 were used for contact tracing while 9 apps showed features of both. On MARS Scale, overall scores ranged from 2.4 to 4.8 with apps scoring high in areas of functionality and lower in Engagement. Future steps should involve developing and testing of mobile applications using assessment tools like the MARS scale and the study of their impact on health behaviours and outcomes.

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to be a cause of unprecedented global morbidity and mortality. Whilst COVID-19 vaccination has emerged as the only tangible solution to reducing poor clinical outcomes, vaccine hesitancy continues to be an obstacle to achieving high levels of vaccine uptake. This represents particular risk to patients with autoimmune diseases, a group already at increased risk of hospitalization and poor clinical outcomes related to COVID-19 infection. Whilst there is a paucity of long-term safety and efficacy data of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with autoimmune diseases, the current evidence strongly suggests that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of adverse effects and disease flares. Herein, we report the protocol of the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study, an ongoing international collaborative study involving 29 countries and over 110 investigators.

Introduction/Aims: In this study we investigated COVID‐19 vaccination–related adverse events (ADEs) 7 days postvaccination in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) and other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders (SAIDs).Methods: Seven‐day vaccine ADEs were collected in an international patient self‐reported e‐survey. Descriptive statistics were obtained and multivariable regression was performed.Results: Ten thousand nine hundred respondents were analyzed (1227 IIM cases, 4640 SAID cases, and 5033 healthy controls [HCs]; median age, 42 [interquartile range, 30‐455] years; 74% female; 45% Caucasian; 69% completely vaccinated). Major ADEs were reported by 76.3% of the IIM patients and 4.6% reported major ADEs. Patients with active IIMs reported more frequent major (odds ratio [OR], 2.7; interquartile range [IQR], 1.04‐7.3) and minor (OR, 1.5; IQR, 1.1‐2.2) ADEs than patients with inactive IIMs. Rashes were more frequent in IIMs (OR, 2.3; IQR, 1.2‐4.2) than HCs. ADEs were not impacted by steroid dose, although hydroxychloroquine and intravenous/subcutaneous immunoglobulins were associated with a higher risk of minor ADEs (OR, 1.9; IQR, 1.1‐3.3; and OR, 2.2; IQR, 1.1‐4.3, respectively). Overall, ADEs were less frequent in inclusion‐body myositis (IBM) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer) vaccine recipients.Discussion: Seven‐day postvaccination ADEs were comparable in patients with IIMs, SAIDs, and HCs, except for a higher risk of rash in IIMs. Patients with dermatomyositis with active disease may be at higher risk, and IBM patients may be at lower risk of specific ADEs. Overall, the benefit of preventing severe COVID‐19 through vaccination likely outweighs the risk of vaccine‐related ADEs. Our results may inform future guidelines regarding COVID‐19 vaccination in patients with SAIDs, specifically in those with IIMs. Studies to evaluate long‐term outcomes and disease flares are needed to shed more light on developing future COVID‐19 vaccination guidelines.

Vaccine hesitancy is considered a major barrier to achieving herd immunity against COVID-19. While multiple alternative and synergistic approaches including heterologous vaccination, booster doses, and antiviral drugs have been developed, equitable vaccine uptake remains the foremost strategy to manage pandemic. Although none of the currently approved vaccines are live-attenuated, several reports of disease flares, waning protection, and acute-onset syndromes have emerged as short-term adverse events after vaccination. Hence, scientific literature falls short when discussing potential long-term effects in vulnerable cohorts. The COVAD-2 survey follows on from the baseline COVAD-1 survey with the aim to collect patient-reported data on the long-term safety and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccines in immune modulation. The e-survey has been extensively pilot-tested and validated with translations into multiple languages. Anticipated results will help improve vaccination efforts and reduce the imminent risks of COVID-19 infection, especially in understudied vulnerable groups.

COVID-19 vaccines have been proven to be safe in the healthy population. However, gaps remain in the evidence of their safety in patients with systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders (SAIDs). COVID-19 vaccination-related adverse events (AEs) in patients with SAIDs and healthy controls (HC) seven days post-vaccination were assessed in the COVAD study, a patient self-reported cross-sectional survey. The survey was circulated in early 2021 by >110 collaborators (94 countries) to collect SAID details, COVID-19 vaccination details and 7-day vaccine AEs, irrespective of respondent vaccination status. Analysis was performed based on data distribution and variable type. Ten thousand nine hundred respondents [median (interquartile range) age 42 (30–55) years, 74% females and 45% Caucasians] were analysed; 5867 patients (54%) with SAIDs were compared with 5033 HCs. Seventy-nine percent had minor and only 3% had major vaccine AEs requiring urgent medical attention (but not hospital admission) overall. Headache [SAIDs = 26%, HCs = 24%; odds ratio (OR) = 1.1 (95% CI: 1.03, 1.3); P = 0.014], abdominal pain [SAIDs = 2.6%, HCs = 1.4%; OR = 1.5 (95% CI: 1.1, 2.3); P = 0.011], and dizziness [SAIDs = 6%, HCs = 4%; OR = 1.3 (95% CI: 1.07, 1.6); P = 0.011], were slightly more frequent in SAIDs. Overall, major AEs [SAIDs = 4%, HCs = 2%; OR = 1.9 (95% CI: 1.6, 2.2); P < 0.001] and, specifically, throat closure [SAIDs = 0.5%, HCs = 0.3%; OR = 5.7 (95% CI: 2.9, 11); P = 0.010] were more frequent in SAIDs though absolute risk was small (0–4%). Major AEs and hospitalizations (<2%) were comparable across vaccine types in SAIDs. Vaccination against COVID-19 is safe in SAID patients. SAIDs were at a higher risk of major AEs than HCs, though absolute risk was small. There are small differences in minor AEs between vaccine types in SAID patients.