Evaluation of acceptance, attitude, and knowledge towards artificial intelligence and its application from the point of view of physicians and nurses: A provincial survey study in Iran: A cross‐sectional descriptive‐analytical study

Abstract Background and Aims The prospect of using artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare is bright and promising, and its use can have a significant impact on cost reduction and decrease the possibility of error and negligence among healthcare workers. This study aims to investigate the level of knowledge, attitude, and acceptance among Iranian physicians and nurses. Methods This cross‐sectional descriptive‐analytical study was conducted in eight public university hospitals located in Tehran on 400 physicians and nurses. To conduct the study, convenient sampling was used with the help of researcher‐made questionnaires. Statistical analysis was done by SPSS 21 The mean and standard deviation and Chi‐square and Fisher's exact tests were used. Results In this study, the level of knowledge among the research subjects was average (14.66 ± 4.53), the level of their attitude toward AI was relatively favorable (47.81 ± 6.74), and their level of acceptance of AI was average (103.19 ± 13.70). Moreover, from the participant's perspective, AI in medicine is most widely used in increasing the accuracy of diagnostic tests (86.5%), identifying drug interactions (82.75%), and helping to analyze medical tests and imaging (80%). There was a statistically significant relationship between the variable of acceptance of AI and the participant's level of education (p = 0.028), participation in an AI training course (p = 0.022), and the hospital department where they worked (p < 0.001). Conclusion In this study, both the knowledge and the acceptance of the participants towards AI were proved to be at an average level and the attitude towards AI was relatively favorable, which is in contrast with the very rapid and inevitable expansion of AI. Although our participants were aware of the growing use of AI in medicine, they had a cautious attitude toward this

Vaccination status and outcomes of COVID‐19 patients admitted to a tertiary hospital in Iran during the dominant Delta variant period

Abstract Background This study aimed to determine the characteristics, vaccination status, and outcomes of confidence interval (COVID‐19) patients, admitted to a tertiary hospital in Iran during the predominant severe acute respiratory syndrome‐coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) Delta variant period. Methods This retrospective study assessed the medical records of all hospitalized COVID‐19 patients, who were admitted to a tertiary hospital from July 10 to September 15, 2021. Adjusted binary logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine factors associated with poor outcomes. Results More than 25% of hospitalized patients received at least one vaccine dose of SARS‐CoV‐2. The Sinopharm BIBP vaccine (China) was the most commonly received vaccine (73.3%). After adjusting for age and comorbidities, the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for poor outcomes was significantly lower in hospitalized patients who received Remdesivir compared to those not receiving Remdesivir (AOR: 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.15, 0.78; p < .010). Besides, age ≥50 years (AOR: 2.51; 95% CI: 1.38, 4.59; p < .003), low educational level (AOR: 3.99; 95% CI: 1.17, 13.53; p < .027), work outside in the past year (AOR: 1.75; 95% CI: 1.02, 3.00; p < .041), and diabetes mellitus (AOR: 1.95; 95% CI: 1.66, 3.26; p = .011) were associated with more poor outcomes. Conclusion Based on the present results, the risk of mortality and the risk of poor outcomes were lower in patients who received Remdesivir compared to those not receiving Remdesivir. The number of vaccinated patients was smaller than the unvaccinated among hospitalized patients. It is important to emphasize that vaccination reduced the need for hospitalization and that only vaccinated patients with comorbidities required hospitalization

COVID-19 vaccination challenges: A mini-review

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 has led to the infection of many people across the globe, over six million deaths, and has placed an unprecedented burden on public health worldwide. The pandemic has led to the high-speed development and production of vaccines against the COVID-19, as vaccines can end the pandemic. At the beginning of the program, vaccinations were initially targeted only at high-risk groups, such as the elderly, those with comorbidities, or healthcare workers. Although most of the mentioned populations have received the two recommended doses, limited resources have left many authorities with an effective vaccine undersupply. Therefore, policies have been implemented to manage the available doses of the vaccines more efficiently. As there is no universally agreed consensus on this topic, we discuss the different recommendations and guidelines regarding the time interval between the two vaccine doses and explain the different scenarios for applying the two doses

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) Variant: A Challenge with COVID-19

Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there have been multiple peaks of the SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus virus 2) infection, mainly due to the emergence of new variants, each with a new set of mutations in the viral genome, which have led to changes in the pathogenicity, transmissibility, and morbidity. The Omicron variant is the most recent variant of concern (VOC) to emerge and was recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 26 November 2021. The Omicron lineage is phylogenetically distinct from earlier variants, including the previously dominant Delta SARS-CoV-2 variant. The reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT–PCR) test, rapid antigen assays, and chest computed tomography (CT) scans can help diagnose the Omicron variant. Furthermore, many agents are expected to have therapeutic benefits for those infected with the Omicron variant, including TriSb92, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir, and their combination, corticosteroids, and interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor blockers. Despite being milder than previous variants, the Omicron variant threatens many lives, particularly among the unvaccinated, due to its higher transmissibility, pathogenicity, and infectivity. Mounting evidence has reported the most common clinical manifestations of the Omicron variant to be fever, runny nose, sore throat, severe headache, and fatigue. This review summarizes the essential features of the Omicron variant, including its history, genome, transmissibility, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, management, and the effectiveness of existing vaccines against this VOC