All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special
permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For
articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without
permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to
https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess.
Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature
Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for
future research directions and describes possible research applications.
Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive
positive feedback from the reviewers.
Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world.
Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly
interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the
most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.
Since 1996, MDPI has been committed to supporting the research community by providing the latest research freely available and making relevant and useful research available as quickly as possible. The world is current experiencing a pandemic of COVID-19, and researchers are working extremely hard to understand it and find a cure.
The values MDPI holds strongly are particularly important at the moment, and we will continue to publish relevant, peer-reviewed research as quickly as possible in open access format. This means that it will immediately be available for researchers, health professionals, and the general public to read, distribute, and reuse. We believe that scientific advancements will be crucial to overcoming this pandemic, and will do everything we can to support researchers working looking for solutions.
This page contains a variety of information related to COVID-19 available from MDPI, including journal articles, special issues, and preprints, among others.
Burnout is a critical problem among healthcare professionals worldwide, but nationally representative data on psychosocial factors associated with burnout are lacking for Latvia’s hospital system. This study investigated twofold aims: first, it examined the association between job-related demands, psychosocial resources, and burnout in
[...] Read more.
Burnout is a critical problem among healthcare professionals worldwide, but nationally representative data on psychosocial factors associated with burnout are lacking for Latvia’s hospital system. This study investigated twofold aims: first, it examined the association between job-related demands, psychosocial resources, and burnout in a representative sample of Latvian hospital staff; and second, it tested whether specific resources buffer or amplify the impact of excessive workload. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 4756 healthcare workers across 30 inpatient institutions in Latvia. Participants completed the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire III and the Burnout Assessment Tool; regression and moderation analyses were used. Burnout was positively associated with longer working hours, multiple job-holding, and psychosocial demands such as emotional strain, time pressure, and work–life conflict. Several resources, including support from colleagues, supervisor support, recognition, sense of belonging, supervisor evaluation, and especially resources for quality work, were associated with lower burnout and weakened the relationship between workload and burnout. In contrast, high autonomy, meaning at work, organizational justice, and role conflict amplified this association. These findings suggest that in resource-constrained healthcare systems, some job resources may be associated with increased risk of burnout. Effective interventions should address both structural and relational factors to mitigate burnout among healthcare workers.
Full article
Reactive sulfur species (RSS)—hydrogen sulfide (H2S), low-molecular-weight persulfides/polysulfides and protein persulfidation—constitute a third redox axis alongside ROS and RNS. Nanomolar H2S, produced by trans-sulfuration (CBS/CSE) and 3-MST, is oxidized by sulfide–quinone reductase to persulfides that fuel the respiratory chain
[...] Read more.
Reactive sulfur species (RSS)—hydrogen sulfide (H2S), low-molecular-weight persulfides/polysulfides and protein persulfidation—constitute a third redox axis alongside ROS and RNS. Nanomolar H2S, produced by trans-sulfuration (CBS/CSE) and 3-MST, is oxidized by sulfide–quinone reductase to persulfides that fuel the respiratory chain while curbing superoxide. Reversible persulfidation reprograms cysteine sensors in metabolism (GAPDH), inflammation (NLRP3, p47^phox) and transcription (Keap1/NRF2), linking RSS to energy balance, vasodilation, innate immunity and neuroplasticity. Disrupted sulfur signaling—deficit or overload—contributes to heart failure, sarcopenia, neurodegeneration, cancer and post-COVID syndromes. Therapeutically, slow-release donors (SG1002, GYY4137), mitochondria-targeted vectors (AP39), photo- or thiol-activated “smart” scaffolds, diet-derived polysulfides/isothiocyanates and microbiota engineering aim to restore the protective RSS window. Key challenges are a narrow therapeutic margin and real-time quantification of persulfide fluxes. Harnessing RSS therefore offers a route to rebalance redox homeostasis across diverse chronic diseases.
Full article
by
Daian-Ionel Popa, Florina Buleu, Aida Iancu, Anca Tudor, Carmen Gabriela Williams, Marius Militaru, Codrina Mihaela Levai, Tiberiu Buleu, Livia Ciolac, Anda Gabriela Militaru and Ovidiu Alexandru Mederle
Background and Objectives: Long COVID has been linked with persistent neurological symptoms, but data on its effects on acute stroke presentation, management, and outcomes remain unclear. This study aimed to compare the clinical profile, management, and short-term outcome of acute ischemic stroke patients
[...] Read more.
Background and Objectives: Long COVID has been linked with persistent neurological symptoms, but data on its effects on acute stroke presentation, management, and outcomes remain unclear. This study aimed to compare the clinical profile, management, and short-term outcome of acute ischemic stroke patients with and without Long COVID. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 132 patients who presented at admission with code stroke alert in our Emergency Department (ED). Out of those, 26 were identified to have the Long COVID condition and assigned to the Long COVID group, and 106 were without the Long COVID condition and assigned to the No Long COVID group. Baseline demographics, stroke severity by NIHSS (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale), risk factors, admission symptoms, laboratory findings, Emergency department time targets, reperfusion treatments received, and outcomes between the two groups were compared. Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in age, gender, baseline NIHSS scores, ED time targets, or laboratory values. The proportion of patients with Long COVID significantly increased among non-smokers (Fisher’s Exact Test chi-squared, p = 0.027). Also, patients suffering from Long COVID exhibited higher incidences of headache (19.2% compared to 5.7%, OR = 3.97, p = 0.040) and facial drooping (42.3% compared to 19.8%, OR = 2.97, p = 0.022). The mechanical thrombectomy was more frequent among the group with Long COVID (30.8% vs. 16.0%), but this difference was not statistically significant. More hemorrhagic transformations happened in the Long COVID group (26.9% vs. 14.2%, p = 0.143). Discharge rates and hospital length of stay in days were similar between groups. Conclusions: Long COVID patients did not present notable differences in emergency department time targets, baseline stroke severity, or short-term outcomes when presenting with code stroke alert. Nevertheless, specific clinical characteristics—such as elevated occurrences of headache and facial drooping—were more frequently observed in patients with Long COVID, alongside non-significant trends indicating a greater utilization of mechanical thrombectomy and increased rates of hemorrhagic transformation. These results imply that Long COVID may have a subtle impact on stroke presentation and potentially on underlying cerebrovascular susceptibility. Further prospective studies with larger sample sizes are necessary to investigate Long COVID’s long-term neurological and vascular consequences.
Full article
Pathogenic enteric viruses are a leading cause of gastroenteritis-related mortality worldwide. However, the architecture of this research field remains poorly quantified. This bibliometric analysis provides a comprehensive overview of 35 years of global scientific output on major enteric viruses, such as rotavirus, norovirus,
[...] Read more.
Pathogenic enteric viruses are a leading cause of gastroenteritis-related mortality worldwide. However, the architecture of this research field remains poorly quantified. This bibliometric analysis provides a comprehensive overview of 35 years of global scientific output on major enteric viruses, such as rotavirus, norovirus, astrovirus, sapovirus, and non-polio enteroviruses, to map trends, methodological developments, and geographic disparities. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed and Scopus (1990–2024), identifying 10,017 records. After deduplication and eligibility screening, a final corpus of 8320 publications was analyzed using Bibliometrix (Biblioshiny 5.0) in R (version 4.3.0) and VOSviewer (Version 1.6.20). We found that scientific production grew steadily (CAGR = 5.84%), reaching its peak in 2021. The field is characterized by profound thematic and geographic disparity: rotavirus dominated the literature (56.3% of publications), followed by norovirus (30.8%), while other viruses were severely underrepresented (<9% each). Geographically, output was highly concentrated, with the top five countries (the USA, China, Japan, India, and Brazil) producing 92.4% of the publications. In contrast, high-burden regions, such as sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, contributed only 7.6%. Genomic sequencing gained prominence, being cited in over 26.2% of publications from 2020 to 2024, reflecting a methodological shift accelerated by the application of wastewater-based epidemiology during the COVID-19 pandemic. In conclusion, while genomic tools and environmental monitoring are transforming enteric virus research, its progress is hampered by deep and persistent inequalities. These include a narrow focus on rotavirus and a significant disparity between regions with high disease burdens and those with high research outputs. Closing this gap requires targeted investments in equitable collaboration, local genomic capacity, and integrated public health interventions combining vaccination, WASH, and One Health strategies.
Full article
by
Gerald Waweru, Ruth Nyakundi, Bernadette Kutima, Sharon Owuor, Gloria Konyino, John Gitonga, Doreen Lugano, Angela Maina, Jennifer Musyoki, Lucy Ochola, Martin Omondi, Christopher K. Kariuki, Paul Ogongo, Christina Mwachari, Faiz Shee, Charles Agoti, Charles Sande, Sophie Uyoga, Eunice Kagucia, Ambrose Agweyu, Philip Bejon, J. Anthony G. Scott, George M. Warimwe, L. Isabella Ochola-Oyier and James Nyagwangeadd
Show full author list
remove
Hide full author list
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to evolve, with mutations leading to the emergence of new variants. JN.1, a subvariant of omicron BA.2.86, has demonstrated marked immune escape and is now included in updated vaccine formulations. While reduced sensitivity has been
[...] Read more.
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to evolve, with mutations leading to the emergence of new variants. JN.1, a subvariant of omicron BA.2.86, has demonstrated marked immune escape and is now included in updated vaccine formulations. While reduced sensitivity has been reported for antibody assays using ancestral spike protein subunits to detect omicron-induced responses, the performance of full-length spike-based assays against omicron sublineages remains unclear. We aimed to compare the sensitivity of ELISA and Luminex assays using full-length spike proteins from the ancestral Wuhan strain and the JN.1 variant. Methods: Wuhan and JN.1 full-length spike protein constructs were designed and expressed in Expi293F mammalian cells. In-house ELISAs based on previously validated protocols were used to measure anti-spike IgG levels. Additionally, a Luminex-based assay for anti-spike antibody detection was developed and validated. Both assays were applied to the following sample groups: pre-pandemic samples (designated “gold standard negatives”); PCR confirmed 2020 positives (“gold standard wildtype positives”); PCR confirmed 2024 positives (“gold standard omicron positives”); 2022 vaccinated individuals with verbal confirmed infection (“gold standard hybrid positives”); and 2024 household samples (“unknowns”). Results: Wuhan spike protein showed a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 0.88–1.0) in detecting omicron-specific antibodies using gold standard omicron positives with JN.1 spike protein as a reference assay. Overall, across all samples, in ELISA, the Wuhan antigen had a sensitivity of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.89–0.95) and a specificity of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.94–0.99). The JN.1 antigen showed a sensitivity of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87–0.94) and a specificity of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.93–0.99). In Luminex, sensitivity was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.91–0.97) for Wuhan and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91–0.96) for JN.1. Specificity for both antigens in Luminex was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.94–0.99). Conclusions: Both ELISA and Luminex assays showed comparable sensitivity and specificity for both Wuhan and JN.1 antigens, indicating that mutations in the JN.1 variant do not significantly impact assay performance. This suggests preserved antigenic recognition across variants.
Full article
by
Kylie M. Wagstaff, Mark S. Stein, Alan Herschtal, Jean-Jacques Rajter, Juliana Cepelowicz Rajter, Michele Sallaberger, Alexia Smileski, Amala Kanagalingam and David A. Jans
Background: The efficacy of a single oral dose of Ivermectin as prophylaxis for SARS-CoV-2 is uncertain. This trial sought to evaluate the effectiveness of a single oral low dose of Ivermectin to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection or reduce symptoms if infection did occur. Methods: [...] Read more.
Background: The efficacy of a single oral dose of Ivermectin as prophylaxis for SARS-CoV-2 is uncertain. This trial sought to evaluate the effectiveness of a single oral low dose of Ivermectin to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection or reduce symptoms if infection did occur. Methods: Asymptomatic community-dwelling adults were enrolled in this study within 72 h of close contact with a case of SARS-CoV-2. Participants were randomised, stratified by vaccination status and exposure site, to a single oral 200 µg/kg dose of Ivermectin or placebo. The primary outcome was conversion to a positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or rapid antigen test (RAT) for SARS-CoV-2 within 14 days of close contact. Secondary outcomes were restricted to those who met the primary outcome. They included the following: days alive free of symptoms in the 14 (DAFS1-14) and 28 (DAFS1-28) days following intervention and days from close contact until a positive PCR or RAT for SARS-CoV-2. Results: A total of 536 participants registered for this trial. Of these, 86 met inclusion criteria and were randomised. 68 adhered to the trial protocol and were included in the analysis. A total of 11/36 (Ivermectin arm) and 11/32 (placebo arm) met the primary outcome. After controlling for age and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, the estimate (95% confidence interval (95% CI)) of the effect of Ivermectin (compared to placebo) on the absolute value of the proportion of participants converting to a positive PCR or RAT was −0.051 (−0.26 to 0.16), p = 0.63. After controlling for prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, age, body mass index, hypertension and lung disease, the average treatment effect (Ivermectin versus placebo) on DAFS1-14 was 2.5 days (95%CI 1.1 to 4.5), p = 0.036, and for DAFS1-28, was 2.3 days (95% CI 0.7 to 3.3), p = 0.35. The mean (standard deviation) number of days from close contact until a positive PCR or RAT was 5.0 (4.1) days for the Ivermectin group versus 2.6 (0.8) days for the placebo group. After controlling for age and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, the average treatment effect (95%CI), Ivermectin versus placebo, on days from close contact until a positive PCR or RAT was 2.3 days (95% CI 1.1 to 3.4), p = 0.033. Conclusions: We did not demonstrate that a single oral low dose of Ivermectin administered to asymptomatic adults within 72 h of close contact with a case of SARS-CoV-2 prevents conversion to a positive PCR or RAT. However, the trial had a small sample size and does not exclude a clinically meaningful effect of Ivermectin on conversion to a positive PCR or RAT. Amongst those who did convert to a positive PCR or RAT, the use of Ivermectin significantly lengthened the time from close contact to conversion and increased the number of days alive free of symptoms following intervention.
Full article
The first webinar in the series, held on 17 April 2020, saw both Prof. Dr. Antoine Flahault, Director of the Institute of Global Health, University of Geneva, Switzerland, and Prof. Dr. Evelyne Bischof, Associate Professor, Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Shanghai, China and Research physician, University Hospital of Basel, Basel, Switzerland speak on this topic.
The second webinar in the series, entitled “Coronaviruses: history, replication, innate immune antagonism”, saw Prof. Dr. Susan R. Weiss, Professor of Microbiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania speak on this topic.
WEBINAR 3: Could the COVID-19 Crisis be the Opportunity to Make Cities Carbon Neutral, Liveable and Healthy
The third webinar in this series was presented by Prof. Dr. Mark Nieuwenhuijsen, a world leading expert in environmental exposure assessment, epidemiology, and health risk/impact assessment with a strong focus and interest on healthy urban living.
WEBINAR 4: COVID-19 - Global Supply Chains and the SDGs
For the fourth webinar of this series, Prof. Dr. Max Bergman, Dr. Dorothea Schostok and Prof. Dr. Patrick Paul Walsh gave a presentation on Global Supply Chains and the SDGs.
WEBINAR 5: The New Role of Family Physicians in Times of COVID-19
The fifth webinar of the COVID-19 Series saw Prof. Dr. Christos Lionis discuss the new role of family physicians that emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic.
WEBINAR 6: Survey on Symptoms/Signs, Protective Measures, Level of Awareness and Perception Regarding COVID-19 Outbreak among Dentists
In the sixth webinar of this series, Prof. Dr. Guglielmo Campus and Prof. Dr. Maria Grazia present and discuss the risk and the preventions that can and should be taken by dentists during this pandemic.
WEBINAR 7: Living with COVID-19: An Early Intervention Therapeutic Strategy to Control the Pandemic
The seventh webinar of the COVID-19 series, Dr. Hamid Merchant discussed the different therapeutic strategies that can be adopted in the early stages of the infection.
WEBINAR 8: Impact of COVID-19 on Routine Immunization, Reproduction and Pregnancy Outcome
For the eighth COVID-19 webinar, Prof. Dr. Jon Øyvind Odland discussed the effect that COVID-19 seems to have on pregnant women; whereas Prof. Dr. Giovanni Gabutti discussed the role of routine immunization as a way of fighting COVID-19.
