Julio Croda1,2,3*- 1Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, MS, Brazil
- 2Department of Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, United States
- 3Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Campo Grande, MS, Brazil
by Rodrigues, N. C. P., and Andrade, M. K. d. N. (2024). Front. Med. 11:1495428 doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1495428
Introduction
The study by Rodrigues and Andrade (1) aimed to investigate factors associated with post-COVID mortality among cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in Brazil from 2020 to 2023. Using retrospective cohort data from SIVEP-GRIPE, they applied multiple survival analysis models (Cox proportional hazards, mixed-effects Cox, and frailty Cox) to assess medium and long-term mortality risks.
Key findings included that COVID-19 vaccination reduced mortality by 8% in the medium term, but paradoxically, vaccination was associated with an almost two-fold increase in long-term mortality risk among those vaccinated with one or two doses. The study concluded that while vaccines offered protection within the first year after infection, this effect reversed thereafter.
Given the relevance of such findings for public health policy and vaccine confidence, it is essential to critically assess the methodological robustness of this study. This commentary identifies several key methodological flaws that limit the validity of the conclusions.
Subsections relevant for the subject
Database limitations
The study exclusively relied on the SIVEP-GRIPE database, which is primarily designed for surveillance of acute severe respiratory infections, not for longitudinal mortality tracking. This raises concerns regarding data completeness and accuracy, particularly in capturing deaths that occur after hospital discharge.
Moreover, common data entry errors in SIVEP-GRIPE, such as incorrect recording of dates, may explain the abrupt changes observed in mortality trends over time. For instance, misentries involving the year could erroneously classify early deaths as long-term events.
Integration with Brazil's Mortality Information System (SIM) through record linkage would enhance the validity of mortality data by providing a more complete and precise assessment of outcomes. The SIM database systematically captures death certificates and is recognized as the gold standard for mortality surveillance in Brazil (2).
Limited sample selection and biases
The study exclusively used data from the SIVEP-GRIPE database, selecting only individuals with a minimum interval of 3 months between COVID-19 symptom onset and death. This approach reduced the sample size to ~5,000 cases out of over 700,000 recorded deaths, introducing a significant selection bias and limiting the generalizability of the findings (1).
Additionally, survival bias, or immortal time bias, presents a significant challenge. High-risk individuals often die earlier, leaving healthier individuals for long-term analysis. This imbalance can result in the underestimation of mortality risks among unvaccinated individuals who survive longer, complicating the interpretation of outcomes (3).
Inadequate control of confounders
Although the study employed Cox regression models, it failed to adequately account for critical confounders, including disparities in healthcare access, specific comorbidities, and socioeconomic factors. These unaddressed confounders likely influenced the observed outcomes, undermining the study's validity (4).
Furthermore, the study's retrospective cohort design, which focused on hospitalized patients, is suboptimal for evaluating vaccine effectiveness. Population-based cohort studies or test-negative case-control designs are more robust alternatives for assessing vaccine effectiveness (5).
Speculative conclusions
The study hypothesized an increased long-term mortality risk among vaccinated individuals, attributing it to potential adverse events of vaccines or immune system impacts. However, these claims lack robust evidence and do not consider alternative explanations, such as preexisting comorbidities or unequal access to healthcare services (1). Additionally, the absence of detailed information on vaccine types and timing relative to hospitalization further weakens the analysis of causal relationships (2).
Discussion
The study raises an important question about long-term COVID-19 mortality risks but is constrained by significant methodological flaws. Selection and survival biases, database limitations, and inadequate confounder control reduce the reliability of its findings. The conclusions, particularly regarding vaccine-related risks, should therefore be interpreted with caution.
Future research should address these limitations by integrating comprehensive databases like SIM, rigorously validating statistical models, and employing robust study designs such as test-negative case-control studies (6). These approaches are essential for generating reliable evidence to inform public health policies.
Conclusion
This study highlights the need for further exploration of long-term mortality risks associated with COVID-19. However, addressing its methodological limitations will be crucial for advancing our understanding and improving the reliability of future research on vaccine safety and effectiveness.
Author contributions
JC: Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that no Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1. Rodrigues NCP, Andrade MKN. Evaluation of post-COVID mortality risk in cases classified as severe acute respiratory syndrome in Brazil: a longitudinal study for medium and long term. Front. Med. (2024) 11:1495428. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1495428
2. Ministry Ministry of Health, Brazil. SIM: Mortality Information System. (2022). Available online at: https://www.gov.br/saude/pt-br/composicao/svsa/sistemas-de-informacao/sim
3. Elwood JM. Critical Appraisal of Epidemiological Studies and Clinical Trials, 3rd Edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2017). doi: 10.1093/med/9780199682898.001.0001
4. Greenland S, Pearl J, Robins JM. Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research. Epidemiology. (2016) 10:37–48. Available online at: https://journals.lww.com/epidem/abstract/1999/01000/causal_diagrams_for_epidemiologic
5. Jackson ML, Nelson JC, Weiss NS. Case-control studies of the effectiveness of vaccination: validity and reliability. Am J Epidemiol. (2006) 163:870–6. doi: 10.1097/01.inf.0000109248.32907.1d
Keywords: vaccination, COVID-19, Brazil, mortality, confounders, biases, hospitalization
Citation: Croda J (2025) Commentary: Evaluation of post-COVID mortality risk in cases classified as severe acute respiratory syndrome in Brazil: a longitudinal study for medium and long term. Front. Med. 12:1557589. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1557589
Received: 08 January 2025; Accepted: 27 May 2025;
Published: 20 June 2025.
Edited by:
José Cesar Rosa Neto, University of São Paulo, BrazilReviewed by:
Helena Batatinha, University of Arizona, United StatesCopyright © 2025 Croda. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Julio Croda, anVsaW9jcm9kYUBnbWFpbC5jb20=