Objectives: The objective of this study was to develop the Guidelines for Recommendation Reporting (G-RECO) for use in the Public Health Weekly Report (PHWR) in Korea, aiming to improve the standardization, scientific accuracy, and practical applicability of recommendation reports in clinical practice guidelines. Methods: The methodology of this study aligned with the EQUATOR Network standards. A multidisciplinary research committee was formed, comprising experts in various relevant fields. The development process included a comprehensive literature review, analysis of existing guidelines, and formulation of a structured G-RECO framework with 21 key items. This was supplemented with Explanation & Elaboration documents for each item. The draft underwent rigorous revisions and evaluations by both internal and external experts. Results: By November 2023, significant progress had been made in developing a detailed G-RECO checklist and accompanying E&E documents. These tools are designed to guide authors in clear and consistent reporting of recommendation reports. The team is poised to finalize and publish the checklist and E&E documents by December 2024. Conclusion The G-RECO guidelines represent a significant advancement in the formalization and standardization of recommendation reports for the PHWR. They are expected to improve the quality of research and publications in clinical practice guidelines, contributing to the evolution of the field and enriching public health discourse. The guidelines, with their comprehensive nature and user-friendly design, will become an invaluable resource for researchers, editors, and peer reviewers in public health and epidemiology.

Objectives: The objective of this study was to develop a reporting guideline for epidemiological survey reports, referred to as “Guidelines for Survey Reporting (G-SURE).” Methods: To develop G-SURE, we adopted a systematic approach, starting with a detailed review of recent survey reports in Public Health Weekly Report, Eurosurveillance, and Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report and an analysis of current reporting standards. After drafting the guidelines, our team conducted an in-depth internal evaluation to assess their effectiveness and applicability. We then refined the guidelines based on insights from external experts and potential users, particularly those with significant experience in survey reporting. The plan also includes ongoing efforts to widely share the guidelines and update them periodically, incorporating new findings and user feedback. Results: G-SURE will provide a structured framework for reporting outbreak investigations, comprising a detailed checklist and Explanation & Elaboration documents. These will improve the transparency, consistency, and quality of public health documentation. Conclusion In this protocol article, we introduce G-SURE, a guideline developed to improve epidemiological survey research. G-SURE addresses the critical need for uniform reporting standards in epidemiological surveys, aiming to improve the quality and relevance of research outcomes in this area. This guideline is also designed to be a key resource for peer reviewers and editors, aiding them in efficiently assessing the thoroughness and accuracy of survey reports. By providing consistent reporting criteria, G-SURE seeks to minimize confusion and irregularities, which are often encountered in the process of scientific publication.

Objectives: Surveillance reporting, which is integral to public health and safety, involves the systematic collection, analysis, and dissemination of data crucial for various health and security scenarios. Despite its importance, standardized Guidelines for Surveillance Reporting (G-SIRE) are lacking, leading to inconsistencies and affecting data reliability and comparability. To address this gap, this study aimed to develop the G-SIRE, tailored to improve the clarity, transparency, and consistency of surveillance reports, thereby increasing the accuracy and usability of surveillance data for better public health outcomes. Methods: The methodology adhered to the EQUATOR Network standards, employing a multidimensional approach with a diverse expert team. The process included forming a research committee of multidisciplinary experts, conducting a thorough literature review of recent surveillance report publications, reviewing existing reporting guidelines, and developing a new set of guidelines.Continuous updates and revisions are planned to keep the guidelines relevant and effective. Results: Significant progress has been made as of November 2023 in developing comprehensive reporting guidelines for surveillance reports. A detailed checklist and Explanation & Elaboration documents have been formulated, which are anticipated to be finalized and published by December 2023. Conclusion The G-SIRE guidelines signify a major advancement in standardizing surveillance.They provide a structured approach that increases scientific accuracy, transparency, and practical applicability in this domain. The guidelines are expected to improve the quality of surveillance reporting significantly, contributing to the advancement of public health research and discourse.

Objectives: Outbreak reports are essential for documenting the spread of and responses to disease outbreaks. However, there is a lack of standardized reporting guidelines that encompass broader perspectives on outbreaks. We aimed to develop a universal reporting guideline applicable to diverse outbreak reports and community epidemic interventions, the “Guidelines for Community Outbreak Investigation Reporting (G-CORE).” Methods: G-CORE is designed to address the challenges in documenting various outbreak scenarios, including infectious diseases and non-infectious environmental hazards. The development of G-CORE involved a structured process, including a comprehensive literature review of recent outbreak reports from leading journals and an analysis of existing reporting guidelines. The process also involved project registration with the EQUATOR Network and collaboration with experts in various fields. Following the initial drafting, an internal (team) review was conducted to evaluate the guidelines' robustness and relevance. Subsequently, the guidelines underwent revision based on feedback from external experts and potential users, including authors with experience in outbreak reporting. The project also includes plans for widespread dissemination and periodic revisions to adapt to developments and user feedback. Results: G-CORE will provide a structured framework for reporting outbreak investigations, comprising a detailed checklist and Explanation & Elaboration documents. Conclusion G-CORE establishes a new standard in outbreak reporting, facilitating comprehensive, clear, and actionable public health communications. Its development marks a significant advance in the documentation and management of public health outbreaks.

Background: This retrospective observational matched cohort study assessed the differences in critical infections caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARSCoV-2) during the omicron-predominant period of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We evaluated the vaccine effectiveness of bivalent mRNA vaccine compared to unvaccinated individuals. Methods: We collected COVID-19 case data from the Korean COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness cohort. We calculated the probability of critical COVID-19 cases by comparing the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. Results: The risk of being critically infected due to SAR-CoV-2 infection was 5.96 times higher (95% confidence interval, 5.63–6.38) among older individuals who were unvaccinated compared to those who received the bivalent COVID-19 vaccine. Conclusion Our findings indicate that the bivalent vaccine reduces the disease burden of the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant, particularly among the older population. Further studies are warranted to determine the effectiveness of booster doses of vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

OBJECTIVES: We estimated the population prevalence of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), including unreported infections, through a Korea Seroprevalence Study of Monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Retention and Transmission (K-SEROSMART) in 258 communities throughout Korea. METHODS: In August 2022, a survey was conducted among 10,000 household members aged 5 years and older, in households selected through two stage probability random sampling. During face-to-face household interviews, participants self-reported their health status, COVID-19 diagnosis and vaccination history, and general characteristics. Subsequently, participants visited a community health center or medical clinic for blood sampling. Blood samples were analyzed for the presence of antibodies to spike proteins (anti-S) and antibodies to nucleocapsid proteins (anti-N) SARS-CoV-2 proteins using an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. To estimate the population prevalence, the PROC SURVEYMEANS statistical procedure was employed, with weighting to reflect demographic data from July 2022. RESULTS: In total, 9,945 individuals from 5,041 households were surveyed across 258 communities, representing all basic local governments in Korea. The overall population-adjusted prevalence rates of anti-S and anti-N were 97.6% and 57.1%, respectively. Since the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency has reported a cumulative incidence of confirmed cases of 37.8% through July 31, 2022, the proportion of unreported infections among all COVID-19 infection was suggested to be 33.9%. CONCLUSIONS The K-SEROSMART represents the first nationwide, community-based seroepidemiologic survey of COVID-19, confirming that most individuals possess antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and that a significant number of unreported cases existed. Furthermore, this study lays the foundation for a surveillance system to continuously monitor transmission at the community level and the response to COVID-19.

Objective: and methods To investigate the correlation between temperature and heart rate, we retrospectively reviewed 249 febrile patients with documented COVID-19 patients. RB was defined as a rise in the heart rate from a basal heart rate of less than 10 beats/minute/°C rise in temperature. Results: In this study, the prevalence of RB in patients with COVID-19 was 60.6%. When the HR at peak temperatures for patients with COVID-19 was compared with reference valve (general temperature–heart rate response in infectious disease), our findings demonstrate a relatively lower heart rate at all peak temperatures recorded. Despite differences in heart rate response, there were not significant differences in clinical outcomes (pulmonary manifestation, intensive care unit admission, death). Conclusion Most patients with COVID-19 are associated with relative bradycardia, not related to clinical outcomes. RB in COVID-19 can be considered as the clinical features for differential diagnosis from other febrile conditions.

Objectives: As of March 3, 2020, the Shincheonji religious group accounted for the majority of Korean cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Nonetheless, the most likely cause of the broad spread of COVID-19 among members of the Shincheonji religious group remains largely unknown. Methods: We obtained data of laboratory-confirmed cases related to the Shincheonji religious group from press releases by Korean public health authorities and news reports. We measured the period from the date of illness onset to the date of COVID-19 confirmation. Results: We analysed data from 59 cases (median age, 30 years). The estimated median period between the date of symptom onset and the date of COVID-19 confirmation was 4 days (95% confidence interval, 1-12). Conclusions There was a delay in COVID-19 confirmation from the date of illness onset among the cases linked to the Shincheonji religious group. This delay likely contributed to the occurrence of many cases of COVID-19 in the group.

In epidemiology, the basic reproduction number (R0) is a term that describes the expected number of infections generated by 1 case in a susceptible population. At the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, R0 was frequently referenced by the public health community and the wider public. However, this metric is often misused or misinterpreted. Moreover, the complexity of the process of estimating R0 has caused difficulties for a substantial number of researchers. In this article, in order to increase the accessibility of this concept, we address several misconceptions related to the threshold characteristics of R0 and the effective reproduction number (Rt). Moreover, the appropriate interpretation of the metrics is discussed. R0 should be considered as a population-averaged value that pools the contact structure according to a stochastic transmission process. Furthermore, it is necessary to understand the unavoidable time lag for Rt due to the incubation period of the disease.