The Omicron variant was first detected in October 2021, which evolved from the original SARS‐CoV‐2 strain and was found to possess many mutations. Immune evasion was one of the notable consequences of these mutations. Despite Omicron exhibiting increased transmissibility, the rates of hospitalizations and deaths among patients infected with this variant were substantially lower when compared to other strains. However, concluding that the Omicron variant is less severe than other variants of SARS‐CoV‐2 requires consideration of multiple factors, including the vaccination status of infected patients as well as any previous infections with other variants. This review compiled data about any reported indicators of severity in Omicron‐infected patients, including studies comparing Omicron with other variants while adjusting for confounders. A comprehensive search was conducted using different databases to target any studies about Omicron. In total, 62 studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in this study. Many studies reported a significantly reduced risk of hospitalization, ICU admission, need for oxygenation/ventilation, and death in Omicron‐infected patients compared to patients infected with other variants, such as Delta. Some studies, however, reported comparable severity in Omicron infected patients as to other variants emphasizing a substantial risk for severe illness. Furthermore, the COVID‐19 vaccines were less effective against Omicron relative to previous lineages, except after receiving the booster dose. One study recommended vaccination during pregnancy, which may help prevent future cases of severe SARS‐CoV‐2 pneumonia in neonates and young infants due to the transfer of humoral response from the mother.

Since COVID‐19 took a strong hold around the globe causing considerable morbidity and mortality, a lot of effort was dedicated to manufacturing effective vaccines against SARS‐CoV‐2. Many questions have since been raised surrounding the safety of the vaccines, and a lot of media attention to certain side effects. This caused a state of vaccine hesitancy that may prove problematic in the global effort to control the virus. This review was undertaken with the aim of putting together all the reported cardiovascular and haematological events post COVID‐19 vaccination in published literature and to suggest possible mechanisms to explain these rare phenomena.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has affected millions of individuals worldwide. The global scientific effort to design an effective vaccine against this virus has led to the development of several vaccine candidates. The expedited rollout of these vaccines has created some public distrust regarding the safety of these new vaccines. This review compiles clinical data from reports of diagnosed immune‐related neurological events that have occurred after COVID‐19 vaccine administration with the exception of those secondary to hematological abnormalities. A systematic literature search was performed, using several databases, to identify reports of postvaccination adverse neurological events. The search resulted in 18 studies that met our criteria. These studies included 61 patients who had received COVID‐19 vaccines and experienced at least 1 neurological adverse effect. The most common neurological event was facial nerve palsy (50% of all events). Other less frequently reported events included the reactivation of herpes zoster, Guillain‐Barre syndrome, other demyelinating diseases, and neuropathy. The underlying mechanism was hypothesized to be related to vaccine‐induced type 1 interferon production leading to decreased tolerance of the myelin sheath antigens. Other hypotheses include vaccine‐induced transient lymphopenia and immune dysregulation. Most of the reported events were time limited and resolved spontaneously. Given the rarity of reported neurological events compared to the total number of vaccines administered, and the similarity in the incidence of events between COVID‐19 vaccines and other more common vaccines, there is little evidence to support a causal relationship between COVID‐19 vaccines and adverse neurological events.

The purpose of this review is to explore the breadth of research conducted on SDM in the care of Black patients. We conducted a scoping review following the methodological framework outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. We searched articles related to original research on SDM in the care of Black patients in October 2022 using PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar databases. Articles of all study designs (quantitative and qualitative), published or translated into English, were included. A standardized data extraction form and thematic analysis were used to facilitate data extraction by two independent reviewers. After removal of duplicates and screening, 30 articles were included in the final analysis. Black patients and clinician were found to not share the same understanding of SDM, and patients highly valued SDM in their care. Interventions to improve SDM yielded mixed results to enhance intent, participation in SDM, as well as health outcomes. Decision aids were the most effective form of intervention to enhance SDM. The most common barrier to SDM was patient-clinician communication, and was exacerbated by racial discordance, clinician mistrust, past experiences, and paternalistic clinician-patient dynamics. SDM has the potential to improve health outcomes in Black patients when implemented contextually within Black patients' experiences and concerns. Significant barriers such as clinician mistrust exist, and the overall perception in the Black community is that SDM does not occur sufficiently. Barriers to SDM seem to be most pronounced when there is patient-clinician racial discordance. Several interventions aimed at improving SDM with Black patients have shown mixed results. Future studies should evaluate larger-scale interventions with longer follow-up. Practice implications Shared decision making (SDM) has been proposed as a useful tool for improving quality and equity in Black patients' care. However, Black patients experience lower rates of SDM compared to other populations. SDM has the potential to improve health outcomes in Black patients when implemented contextually within Black patients' experiences and concerns.