Snakebite envenomations (SBE) are a significant global public health threat due to their morbidity and mortality. This is a neglected public health issue in many tropical and subtropical countries. Brazil is in the top ten countries affected by SBE, with 32,160 cases reported only in 2020, posing a high burden for this population. In this paper, we describe the data structure of snakebite records from 2007 to 2020 in the Notifiable Disease Information System (SINAN), made available by the Brazilian Ministry of Health (MoH). In addition, we also provide R scripts that allow a quick and automatic updating of data from the SINAN according to its availability. The data presented in this work are related to clinical and demographic information on SBE cases. Also, data on outcomes, laboratory results, and treatment are available. The dataset is available and freely accessible; however, preprocessing, adjustments, and standardization are necessary due to incompleteness and inconsistencies. Regardless of these limitations, it provides a solid basis for assessing different aspects and the national burden of envenoming.

Snakebite envenomations (SBE) are a significant global public health threat due to their morbidi-ty and mortality. It is a neglected public health issue in many tropical and subtropical countries. Brazil is in the top ten countries affected by SBE, with 32,160 cases reported in Brazil only in 2020, posing a high burden for this population. We describe the data structure of the Snakebite data on Notifiable Disease Information System (SINAN) made available by the Brazilian Minis-try of Health from 2007 to 2020. In addition, we also provide R scripts that allow a quick and automatic updating of data from the SINAN according to its availability. The data presented in this work is related to clinical and demographic information of SBE cases. Also, data on out-comes, laboratory results, and treatment is available. The database is available and freely acces-sible; however, preprocessing, adjustments, and standardization are necessary due to incom-pleteness and inconsistencies. Regardless of these limitations, it provides a solid basis for as-sessing different aspects and the national burden of envenoming.

CoronaVac, an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, was one of the first deployed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the limited vaccine availability and the urgent need to assess effectiveness in target populations, a risk-based allocation clinical trial was designed to generate evidence under the ethical and logistical constraints at the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination. In Manaus, Brazil, participants working in public service (education and public safety) aged 18–49 years were assessed regarding the risk of severe COVID-19 disease. Participants with one or more comorbidities, who were considered at higher risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes if infected, were allocated to early vaccination, while participants without comorbidities were enrolled as an unvaccinated comparison group. Blood samples were collected before each vaccine dose (D0 and D28) and during in-person follow-up visits (D90 and D180). Additional information was obtained through phone calls. Clinical cases of COVID-19, hospitalizations, deaths, and antibody titrations were the evaluated endpoints, considered after the second week following the second dose of the vaccine. A total of 6,226 participants were included: 1,139 in the low-risk group, and 5,087 in the high-risk vaccinated group. COVID-19 incidence was statistically significantly lower ( p < 0.001) in the vaccinated group at D28 (5.2% vs. 40.9%) and D90 (10.3% vs 31.6%). Hospitalization and death rates were low, with no difference observed between the groups. There was a decline in highly reactive titers at D180 in the vaccinated group. This pioneer risk-based allocation clinical trial provided evidence that CoronaVac reduced the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes among individuals with comorbidities, effectively aligning their risk with that of lower-risk, unvaccinated individuals. Beyond its clinical implications, the study underscores the importance of adaptive, real-world research designs in rapidly generating actionable evidence in response to emerging public health threats. ClinicalTrials.gov Registration: NCT04789356

Introdução: A investigação de medidas psicológicas via internet se tornou uma estratégia amplamente utilizada. Este estudo objetivou avaliar a invariância de medidas em escalas aplicadas presencial e virtualmente, considerando as variáveis procrastinação acadêmica, ansiedade, depressão, estresse, regulação emocional e projetos de vida. Método: Trata-se de um estudo quantitativo, exploratório e transversal, com a participação de 445 universitários que responderam à Escala de Procrastinação Acadêmica, à Escala de Depressão, Ansiedade e Estresse (DASS-21), ao Questionário de Regulação Emocional e à Escala de Projetos de Vida. A coleta virtual foi realizada via plataforma Redcap e a coleta presencial ocorreu de forma coletiva, com protocolos impressos. Para testar a invariância fatorial dos instrumentos, foram conduzidas Análises Fatoriais Confirmatórias Multigrupo. Resultados: As escalas demonstraram invariância nos níveis configural, métrico, estrutural e residual, indicando que os dados coletados em ambos os métodos de coleta são psicometricamente equivalentes. Discussão: Os achados fornecem evidências que reforçam a viabilidade de coletas on-line, além de corroborar com a adequação psicométrica dos instrumentos avaliados. Conclusão: o estudo apresenta contribuições para a literatura acerca da equivalência entre os formatos de coleta de dados e fornece direções para pesquisas futuras.