(1) Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines were developed in only a short amount of time and were widely distributed. We conducted this meta-analysis to understand the safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. (2) Methods: We searched the corresponding literature published from 1 January 2020 to 20 October 2021. Information of adverse events (AEs) of each selected work was collected. The quality and bias of studies was evaluated, and meta-analysis was carried out by using Stata 17.0. (3) Results: Totally, 11,451 articles were retrieved, and 53 of them were included for analysis. The incidence rate of AEs was 20.05–94.48%. The incidence rate of vascular events increased after viral vector vaccination, while the incidence rate of vascular events decreased after mRNA vaccination. Viral vector vaccine had a higher AE rate compared to mRNA vaccines and inactivated vaccines. In most circumstances, the incidence of AEs was higher in older people, female and after the second dose. The sensitivity of meta-analysis was acceptable; however, the literature was subject to a certain publication bias. (4) Conclusions: The safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines was acceptable. The incidence of allergic symptoms and cardiovascular and cerebrovascular symptoms was low. Viral vector vaccine had a higher risk of leading to thrombosis events. The understanding of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine AEs should be enhanced, so as to promote the vaccination.

Objective:To describe patterns of utilization of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Methods:Adult patients with COVID-19 who received TCM treatment were divided into a non-serious group (mild and moderate types) and a serious group (severe and critical types) according to their admission conditions. The medical records and prescriptions of these patients were investigated to determine their TCM utilization patterns.Results:In all, 3,872 COVID-19 patients were included. Oral Chinese traditional patent medicine (CPM) was the most commonly used type of TCM, followed by decoction. The proportion of multi-drug combinations was higher than single drug use (55.0% vs. 45.0%). Decoction combined with oral CPM was the most common combination (39.1%, 1,514/3,872). Orally administered, injected, and externally applied CPM were significantly more common in the serious group than in the non-serious, while decoction and non-drug TCM treatments were more common in the non-serious than in the serious group. Multi-drug combinations were used for the majority of patients in both groups, mainly in the form of decoctions combined with oral CPM. Among the serious patients, injected CPM was more often used in patients who died during treatment (35.0%, 36/103). The two most common medication patterns were decoction combined with oral CPM and oral CPM alone in the two finally discharged groups. Oral CPM alone or used in combination with injected CPM were seen most commonly in the death group. Significant differences were established in TCM utilization and medication patterns among patients in three groups who had different prognoses and outcomes.Conclusions:The treatment measures and medication patterns of TCM commonly used in COVID-19 patients with the range of conditions found in this study should be further explored in the future to provide a more complete reference for COVID-19 treatment.

Background Parents are usually the decision-makers for vaccinations of children. Therefore, it is important to understand parental beliefs and attitudes toward severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine for themselves and their children when it was approved for children age 3–17. Method A cross-sectional survey based on an anonymous online questionnaire for parents was conducted in seven provinces of China, and demographic information, vaccination history, parental decision motives, and health belief model toward themselves and their children were collected, respectively. Results The overall parental hesitancy rate toward themselves was 20.30%, and that toward their children was 7.80%. More parental concerns on disease severity (odd ratio [OR] = 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01–1.61) and susceptibility (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.01–1.63) of children could be the causes of discrepancy in hesitancy for themselves and for their children. Parents who hesitated to vaccinate themselves might also be hesitated to vaccinate their children (β = 0.077, P < 0.001). Conclusion Threat perception may lead to inconsistencies in parental vaccination decisions toward themselves and toward their children. Correcting misinformation and strengthening education about COVID-19 are of great significance in addressing vaccine hesitancy among parents and children.