Artigos

Conteúdo (article):

INTRODUCTION
Epidemiology is a fundamental discipline for Public Collective Health, with historically
focusing on the identifying ication of the causes of health-related events as its primary
objective, especially for epidemic control 1 . Currently, it is central to population in the
health of populations and relevant to achieving for the pursuit of a healthier society,
supporting the planning and monitoring of health actions 2 . Frerót et al. 3 mention that
Epidemiology has evolved alongsidewith the societal changes in recent decades. The
authors and aimed to identify compilethe definitions in the literature from 1978 to
2017, and. The authors found 102 different definitions, highlighting with 20 terms or
concepts highlighted. The five most frequent terms were “population”, “study”,
“disease”, “health”, and “distribution”.
Even Although there is no single definition offor Eepidemiology, there is a general
consensus it seems consensual that, through data production and systematic analysis,
this discipline is essential for understanding the health-disease process, identifying
inequities and more vulnerable groups, and for better understanding the risk and
protective factors associated with different health conditions 4 . Furthermore,
Epidemiology provides serves as a scientific basis for health decision-making. By
seeking to producinge robust evidence, itEpidemiology guides interventions and
efficient resource allocation. More recently, epidemiological studies have also been
recommended for evaluating the impact of health programs 5 .
The production of Brazilian Epidemiology production has been discussed since at least
the mid-2000s. Barreto 6 observed a 12-fold increase in Brazilian works published in the
MEDLINE/PubMed database between 1985 and 2004, and this increase was more
significant than that ofin other Latin American and Caribbean countries. In the same
studywork, the author observed an important diversification of the themes investigated,
with infectious diseases and the maternal and child healtharea predominant from 1985
to 1989 and, losing prominence from in the 2000 to -2004 period, also reflecting the
changes in the Brazilian epidemiological profile.
In addition to this growth, it is important to note we should highlight that Brazilian
Epidemiology is relevant and committed and, above all, a commitment to developing
the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS). While Brazilian Epidemiology has
expanded in importance and quality internationally, it is also presentfound in the daily
routine of health services, seeking to fulfill its role in addressing the health problems of
the Brazilian society 6 .
In 2020, forduring the 25 th anniversary issue of the JournalRevista Ciência & Saúde
Coletiva (C&SC), Silva and Peixoto 7 analyzed the scientific production in
Epidemiology-related scientific production in the journal in three periods (1996-2002,
2011, and 2019). The authors observed that the percentage of epidemiological articles
was 12.8% in the first period, 31.0% in the second period, and 55.3% in the third
period. Furthermore, they observed that the most studied topics were chronic
noncommunicable diseases (20.3%), Nnutritional eEpidemiology (12.2%), and
evaluation of health systems, policies, programs, and services (10.9%). The studies
were predominantly , with a predominance of descriptive and cross-sectional studies,
especially with adults, and there was awith greater participation of first authors from the
Southeast.
In 2025, we will reach 30 years of uninterrupted publication of C&SC will celebrate 30
years of continuous publication, establishingwhich has positioned itself as one of the
leading Brazilian Collective Health journals. GivenConsidering the importance of

5
Epidemiology in the national and global contexts and , aligned with C&SC’s historical
moment and its contributions to the consolidating on of the SUS, this article aimed to
analyze C&SC’s scientific production in Epidemiology in 2024. These findings will be
compared with those the article published in the journal’s 25 th -anniversary issue (in
2020) in order to provide information for a better understanding of the state-of-the-art
regarding of Brazilian epidemiological studies.
METHODS
This is a bibliographic study of the C&SC journal’s collection of publications focused
on Epidemiology. The studyIt aimed to replicate the methodological procedures of the
article by Silva and Peixoto. 7 In March 2025, two authors (MRL and BHL) reviewed ad
all the titles and abstracts of original articles and systematic reviews, with or without
meta-analysis, published in C&SC in 2024. Editorials, commentaries, letters to the
editor, and reviews were not considered.
Twelve issues were considered, totaling 305 articles eligible for the study. If the title and
abstract were inconclusive regarding the article’s relationship to Epidemiology, the
methods were read for final classification. Subsequently, aAgreement between the two
reviewers was then verified, and any disagreement was resolved with a newby a third
author (SVP), who performed the final evaluation.
Based on the identification of epidemiological articles, we calculated the percentage of
participation of these articles in the total scientific production published in C&SC in
2024. The selected scientific production was Three authors (MRL, SVP, and BHL)
categorized the selected scientific productionby three authors (MRL, SVP, and BHL)
under the thematic classification adopted in the submission offor submitting abstracts of
works for the 11 th Brazilian Congress of Epidemiology of the Brazilian Collective
Health Association (ABRASCO), adding one category (COVID).
We selected Tthe thematic classification used in the aforementioned congress was
selected to employ the same classifications as in the previous article 7 . Moreover, tThe
following information was also verified: study type, population group studied, sampling
procedure type, sample size (classified as ≤ 100, 100-499, 500-999, 1000-4999, and ≥
1000), and place of work of the first author. The data wereWe compiled and analyzed
the data using Microsoft Office Excel®, from the Microsoft Office package, and IBM
SPSS version 26.0. We used, using descriptive statistics tools, such as simple and
relative frequencies, for the analysis.
RESULTS
Of the 305 eligible articles published in 2024, 125One hundred twenty-five (40.1%) of
the 305 eligible articles published in 2024 were classified under Epidemiology. In Table
1 shows that, the percentage of publications in C&SC focused on Epidemiology was
only 12.8% from the Journal’s inception in 1996 to 2002, only 12.8% of publications in
C&SC focused on Epidemiology. In 2011, tThis percentage rose significantly in 2011
(31.0%) and already covered just over half of the journal’s scientific output (55.3%)
byin 2019. Thus, in 2024, a small (numerical) drop was observed in 2024 compared to
the proportion of epidemiological articles against 2019.
INSERIR TABELA 1
Table 2 shows that, among the 125 articles published in 2024 focusing on
Epidemiology, the evaluations of health systems, policies, programs, and services
wereas the most prominent topic, accounting for 16.0% of the productionpublications.

6
Next, studiesworks on the Eepidemiology of accidents, violence, and physical injuries
accounted for 13.6% of C&SC’s scientific production output that yearin 2024. Studies
on epidemiology of adolescent health Epidemiology (9.6%), COVID-19 (8.8%), the
epidemiology of chronic noncommunicable diseases (8.8%), and nutritional
eEpidemiology (8.8%) also stood out in that year.
INSERIR TABELA 2
Regarding the study type, descriptive/cross-sectional studies predominated (56.0%),
followed by time-series trend studies (16.0%) and ecological studies (11.2%). As
forConsidering the study population, 24.2% included adults, 19.2% included “all”, and
15.8% included maternal and child populations. Concerning sampling, aAlmost half of
the studies (47.4%) studied examined the universe of eligible subjects, and regarding
sample size, almostnearly half (46.4%) of the studies had sample sizes of more than
5,000 subjects (Table 3).
INSERIR TABELA 3
Regarding the local institution of the linkaffiliation of the first author of each article, we
observed that all the Brazilian regions were represented by with at least five authors.
The Southeast had the most authors, and (40.8%) were from the Southeast, followed by
the Northeast (24.8%) and the South (16.8%). As for the The three Brazilian states, the
three states with the highest participation were in the Southeast: (São Paulo (14.4%),
Rio de Janeiro (13.6%), and Minas Gerais, respectively, with 14.4%, 13.6%, and
(11.2%). Rio Grande do Sul was the state withhad the fourth largest participation
(8.0%), followed by Mato Grosso do Sul (6.4%). Only four states (all in the Northern
region – Amapá, Rondônia, Roraima, and Tocantins) did not have a first author or
author). Three primary authors (2.4%) were not linked to Brazilian institutions and were
from Mexico, Chile, and Colombia.
INSERIR TABELA 4
DISCUSSION
Among tThe main findings of this work are as follows: a) In 2024, four out of every 10
articles published in the C&SC journal were epidemiological studies; b) Regarding the
thematic classification of the articles, great diversity was observed, with and the three
most prevalentsent categories being were “Evaluation of health systems, policies,
programs, and services”, “Epidemiology of aAccidents, violence and physical injuries
Epidemiology” and “Epidemiology ofA adolescent Hhealth Epidemiology”; c) Most of
the studies were descriptive/cross-sectional (56%); d) Adults were the more frequent
study population; e) The universe of eligible subjects was the most present frequent
sampling approach, and approximately half of the studies had more than 5,000five
thousand subjects; f) First authors were more frequently affiliated in institutions from
Tthe Southeast region, had the highest percentage of links of the first author of the
articles and only 2.4% of these authors were from other countries; g) Only three of the
27 federative units did not have any author as the first author ofin the epidemiological
articles published in the Revista C&SC in 2024.
Of One hundred twenty-five (40.1%) of the 305 articles eligible for evaluation, 125
(40.1%) were classified as epidemiological studies. The In the article by Silva and
Peixoto (2020) 7 , the percentages were 12.8% in the 1996-2002 period, 31% in 2011, and
55.3% in 2019, according to the article by Silva and Peixoto (2020) 7 . In other words, in
2019, the percentage in 2024 was higher than in the two initial periods evaluated in the
previous article, but lower than that observed in 2019. Part of thisThis result can partly

7
be explained by the special calls and thematic issues. In, considering that in 2024, the
following themes can be cited: “Science, Democracy, and Public Health: Interfaces,
Resistance, and Perspectives for Public Policies and the Unified Health System (SUS)”,
“Health of Indigenous Peoples: Environmental, Sociocultural and Epidemiological
Dimensions and Public Policy Scenarios”, “Health and Science in the Brazilian Military
Dictatorship (1964-1985)”, “Paulo Freire’s Legacy and Perspectives for Public Health”,
and “Qualitative Research in Health: Interdisciplinary Perspectives from Training to
Care”. Although epidemiological studies can obviously be conducted within these calls,
other types of studies seem appear to be have a greatermore prominentce.
One notable point worth highlighting is the strongclose connection betweenof some
articles andto the area of P planning, Ppolicy, and Mmanagement. In the thematic
classification of articles, “Evaluation of health systems, policies, programs, and
services” had the most significant largest number of articles (n=20, corresponding to or
16.0%). Considering the data from Of all articles analyzed by Silva and Peixoto 7 , this
figure was 10.9% fell under this category, making it the third-most prevalent theme
(behind “Epidemiology of nNoncommunicable Ddiseases Epidemiology” and
“Nutritional eEpidemiology”).
Traditionally, Brazilian Collective Health is basedgrounded on three pillarsa tripod of:
Epidemiology, Humanities, and Social Sciences in Health, and Policy, Planning, and
Management. These results may suggest a certain maturation of the field, given that we
consideras greater coordination between the its different areas of the fieldis highly
desirable. The increased effort to use apply epidemiological knowledge toin public
policy may be related to the pursuit of a more consequentialist eEpidemiology at the
expense to the detriment of a more deontological epidemiology.
Galea (2013) 8 argues that Epidemiology must extend beyond ceed the interest in
identifying causes and engage, engaging more rigorously with interventions, and
approaching implementation and translational science, for example. In Brazil, authors
such as Barreto (2002) 9 indicate that Epidemiology wasere crucial in developing the
SUS, mentioning that the SUS was an achievement only possible thanks to the
progressive Brazilian societaly sectors and that manya large portion of the country’s
epidemiologists are advocates for and share the challenge of developing the SUS.
In 2024, tThehe topic with the second mosthighest represented topication in 2024 was
“Epidemiology of accidents, violence, and physical injuries.” This area had already
been grown duringing in the period analyzed the previous analysis periodly, climbing
from 4.0% in thefrom 1996-2002 period to 7.7% in 2019. 7 Thus, the current data may
reflect a previouslyan observed increase already observed previously, consistent with
the importance of violence as a public health problem, 10 generating greater production in
the field of Epidemiology.
Another point that cannot be overlookednotable aspect is the vast diversity of themes
observed across the 19 different axescategories, which reinforces highlights the
Epidemiology’s breadth and complexity of Epidemiology. At times, classifying an
article into a single thematic axis was challenging, indicating suggesting that many
epidemiological studies have gone beyondexpanded beyong more traditional and
classical Epidemiology. Future studies could delve deeperinvestigate into this issue,
investigating how the themes interrelate within each article.
Regarding the study types, although despite the predominance of descriptive/cross-
sectional studies predominated (56.0%), compared to the previous study 7 , we observed a
significant reduction in this percentage compared to the previous study 7 , in which since,

8
at that time, 77.2% of the articles had this design. Furthermore, we should underscore
the growing time series trend studies, have grown from which represented only 2.7% 7
and hiked to 16.0% in 2024. This is possiblyincrease can be explained by the
strengthening of serial population-based surveys in Brazil, and the use of information
from health information systems, besidesand the consolidation of postgraduate
programs and research groups related to Epidemiology, which allowed for an expansion
of the study types.
These same factors mentioned in the previous paragraph possibly may help explain the
observed data regarding study sample sizes. While the previous study 7 observed that
17.7% of studies had more than 5,000 subjects, this percentage increased towas 46.4%
in 2024. Clearly, a large sample size does not guaranteeis not synonymous with the
quality ofin an epidemiological study, but for several research questions, having a large
sample is essential for achieving adequate with good statistical power is essential.
On the other handConversely, we identified studies with smaller sample sizes, and 19
studies had samples of fewer than 500 people. Three of these studies had fewer than 100
subjects. In these cases, we noted that particular groups were accessed, including
wheelchair users, 11 women deprived of liberty, 12 and Indigenous children up to one year
of age, 13 which adds to the literature in this field due to the scarcity of broader surveys
with such population strata. Notably, iIn addition to samplethe size, representativeness,
and method of selecting subjects, other quality factors of epidemiological studies must
be considered, such as the topic’s originality, the writing quality, and the work’s internal
coherence.
Similarly, we should mention the increase in the percentage of studies that covered the
entire population of eligible individuals, up rising from approximately 15% 7 to 47.4%.
Again, this issue This increase may be related to the greaterincreased use of secondary
data from the country’s several various information systems, which allow for the
inclusion of the entire population of records in the analyses.
Regarding the target study’s target population, we identified some found stability in
most groups, except for older adults, whose percentage ich declined (from 17.8% to
1.7%). This trend may seem inconsistent when , considering, for example, the increase
in scientific production inon healthy aging 14 and the growing elderly population
worldwide. However, we should consider the possibility that some studies have been
were classified under other themes (such as NCDs) and the lack of a thematic volumes
on this field of study field.
Regarding Considering the location of the institution where with which the first author
of each article is affiliated, we should underscoreit is important to note that all Brazilian
regions were represented. Of Regarding the Brazilian states and the Federal District,
only four were not represented, all of which and were from the North. This result also
reflects Epidemiology’sthe growth challenge of Epidemiology, orand more broadly, of
the Brazilian science, in this Brazilian region. On the other hand, noteworthy is the
numerical increase against the previous article is noteworthy (from 1.7% to 4.0%),
representing more thanover 100% growth. The Southeast was the one withhad the
highest percentage of leadmain authors, but experienced with a slight reduction (from
46.4%7 to 40.8%). T, and the Northeast surpassed the South forin second place (the
South decreased from had 20.6% 7 and fell to 16.8%, while the Northeast increased had
from 18.9% 7 and tohiked to 24.8%). The Midwest had nearly almost 100% growth
(from 6% 7 to 11.2%), although it still has remains with the second lowest proportion of
articles in the area.

9
These results are consistent with the distribution of the national Ppostgraduate
Pprograms in Collective Health. The, as the Midwest and North regionseast contributed
with only 6.2% of the programs each and , concentrated ing the smallest number ofthe
fewest dissertations and theses produced between 2017 and 2020 15 . In any case, this
“dynamic” is complex and depends on factors that are difficult to control, such as, for
example, the strengthening of more specific areas and , including the growth of
journals that address meet these specificities, ( whether national or international. Other
factors include), the increase or decrease in interest in certainsome themes, according to
social and epidemiological changes, among many others.
However, our findings seem to reinforce the broad scope of C&SC in the Brazilian
context. T, and there has is apparently been an increase in the relative participation of
authors from the Midwest and North, although the latter region still faces , particularly
in the latter, the growth challenges in this regard remains.
On the other hand, the participation of lead authors from other countries was low. Only
three articles were led by researchers not affiliated with a Brazilian institution, all of
them from Latin American countries (Mexico, Chile, and Colombia). In the previous
study, 26 (6.5%) 7 of a universe of 400 epidemiological articles analyzed had first
authors from foreign universities. In addition to the same countries found identified in
the present study, we identified found authors from the following countries: Portugal,
Spain, the United States, Canada, and Turkey. These data reinforce the challenge thatof
C&SC faces in “attracting” authors of other nationalities. However, it should be noted
that the present analysis was limited to just one year of the Journal’s production.
The study has several limitations. First include: a) T, the analysis was only conducted
after one year. Second; b) A, a more formal analysis of the quality of the studies was not
performed. Third, ; c) Tthe analysis was limited to published studies, andwith articles
rejected by the C&SC journal were not being analyzed. Fourth; d) T, the overlap of
subjects was not considered, and each article was classified under only one theme.
On the other handNevertheless, the findings of this study’s findings help to better
understand the importance of Epidemiology for C&SC. This is eEspecially evident in
from the comparison with the study that evaluated data from three periods (1996-2002;
2011, and 2019). Through this comparison, , we can identify some important changes
that seem to indicateindicating a maturation of the field. Such changes include,
including a better regional distribution of authors, an approximation with other areas of
the classic pillars“tripod” of Public Collective Health (, particularly regarding Policy/,
Planning/, and Management), an increase in the percentage of studies with non-
descriptive/cross-sectional designs (even though these still represent the majority), and
thea great diversity of the topics investigated. These findings , reinforceing the power
of Brazilian Epidemiology, which has historically been committed to the demands of
our society and seeks an approximation to collaborate with health services and policies.
This collaborating aims to critically use so that the epidemiological knowledge
produced serves as a basis for improvto improve ing health indicators for the Brazilian
population and reduces health inequities.

10

REFERENCES
1. Porta M (Editor). A dictionary of epidemiology. 5th Ed. New York: Oxford
University Press; 2008,
2. Galea S, Keyes KM. Epidemiology at the Heart of Population Health Science.
Am J Epidemiol 2019;188(5):883-885.
3. Frérot M, Lefebvre A, Aho S, Callier P, Astruc K, Aho Glélé LS. What is
epidemiology? Changing definitions of epidemiology 1978-2017. PLoS One
2018; 13(12):e0208442.
4. Krieger N. Epidemiology and the People\'s Health: Theory and Context. Second
Edition. New York: Oxford University Press; 2024.
5. Santos ISD, Victora CG. Serviços de saúde: epidemiologia, pesquisa e avaliação.
Cad Saúde Pública 2004; 20(Supl 2):S337-S341.
6. Barreto ML. Crescimento e tendência da produção científica da produção em
epidemiologia no Brasil. Rev Saúde Pública 2006; 40(N Esp):79-85.
7. Silva AAM, Peixoto SV. A produção científica em Epidemiologia na Revista
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. Cien Saude Colet 2020; 25(12):4693-4701.

11
8. Galea S. An argument for a consequentialist epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol
2013; 178(8):1185-91.
9. Barreto ML. Papel da epidemiologia no desenvolvimento do Sistema Único de
Saúde no Brasil: histórico, fundamentos e perspectivas. Rev Bras Epidemiol
2002; 5(Supl 1):4-17.
10. Cerqueira D, Bueno S, coordenadores. Atlas da violência 2020. Brasília: Ipea,
Fórum Brasileiro de Segurança Pública; 2020.
11. Curi, HT, Ferretti EC, Franco RC, Allegretti ALC, Peccin M L. Satisfação dos
usuários de cadeiras de rodas da Região Metropolitana da Baixada Santista. Cien
Saude Colet 2024; 29(2):e17552022.
12. Campelo ILB, Bezerra ADG, Guimarães JMX, Morais APP, Alburquerque GA,
Ferreira RGLA, Vieira-Meyer APGF. Acesso e cuidado a saúde de mulheres
privadas de liberdade na penitenciária cearense. Cien Saude Colet 2024;
29(2):e09172023.
13. Bresan D, Leite MS, Ferreira AA, Cury ERJ. Crescimento físico no primeiro
ano de vida de crianças Terena residentes em área urbana: um estudo
longitudinal. Cien Saude Colet 2024; 29(2):e07392024.
14. Zhang Y, Gu Z, Xu Y, He M, Gerber BS, Wang Z, Liu F, Peng C. Global
scientific trends in healthy aging in the early 21st century: A data-driven
scientometric and visualized analysis. Heliyon 2023; 10(1):e23405.
15. Ministério da Educação. Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal do Nível
Superior (CAPES). Documento de Área: Saúde Coletiva. Brasília: CAPES;
2025.