Viral Outbreaks of SARS-CoV1, SARS-CoV2, MERS-CoV, Influenza H1N1, and Ebola in 21st Century; A Comparative Review of the Pathogenesis and Clinical Characteristics

 Throughout the past twenty years, humankind had its fair share of challenges with viral epidemics. In late December 2019, a zoonotic member of the coronaviruses was responsible for the COVID-19 outbreak of viral pneumonia in Wuhan, China. As a worldwide crisis, meanwhile, conclusive prevention or therapy has yet to be discovered, the death toll of COVID-19 has exceeded 278000 by May 11th, 2020. Alike other members of Coronavirus family such as MERS and SARS-CoV-1, SARS-CoV-2 provokes influenza-like syndrome which might further progress to the severe state of acute respiratory disease in some patients. Comparably, in 2009 the H1N1 influenza outbreak affected countless people by manifestations of respiratory system involvement. Additionally, Ebolavirus, as a member of the Filoviridae family, had also made a global catastrophe by causing hemorrhagic diseases in the past twenty years.  The unknown intrinsic nature of SARS-CoV-2, as a great missing piece of this pandemic puzzle, has had physicians to empirically test the possibly efficacious agents of the former viral epidemics on the COVID-19 cases. Here, the current knowledge in SARS-CoV-2 clinical features, transmissibility, and pathogenicity are all summed up as against the other emerging viruses in the last two decades, and the data crucially required for a better management of the illness has been spotlighted

World Addiction Medicine Reports : formation of the International Society of Addiction Medicine (ISAM) Global Expert Network (ISAM-GEN) and Its global surveys

Funding: All the infrastructure funding of this initiative is supported by the International Society of Addiction Medicine (ISAM). We will be open to fundraising for specific projects within the platform and future collaboration with external partners.Addiction medicine is a dynamic field that encompasses clinical practice and research in the context of societal, economic, and cultural factors at the local, national, regional, and global levels. This field has evolved profoundly during the past decades in terms of scopes and activities with the contribution of addiction medicine scientists and professionals globally. The dynamic nature of drug addiction at the global level has resulted in a crucial need for developing an international collaborative network of addiction societies, treatment programs and experts to monitor emerging national, regional, and global concerns. This protocol paper presents methodological details of running longitudinal surveys at national, regional, and global levels through the Global Expert Network of the International Society of Addiction Medicine (ISAM-GEN). The initial formation of the network with a recruitment phase and a round of snowball sampling provided 354 experts from 78 countries across the globe. In addition, 43 national/regional addiction societies/associations are also included in the database. The surveys will be developed by global experts in addiction medicine on treatment services, service coverage, co-occurring disorders, treatment standards and barriers, emerging addictions and/or dynamic changes in treatment needs worldwide. Survey participants in categories of (1) addiction societies/associations, (2) addiction treatment programs, (3) addiction experts/clinicians and (4) related stakeholders will respond to these global longitudinal surveys. The results will be analyzed and cross-examined with available data and peer-reviewed for publication.Peer reviewe

Predictors of Preventive Behaviors of Urinary Tract Infections Based on Health Belief Model among Pregnant Women in Zahedan

Objectives: Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) is one of the most common infections in women and the second most common complication after anemia during pregnancy that causes many complications in mothers as well as fetuses and since health behaviors have crucial role in development of UTI. This study was performed to determine predictors of preventive behaviors of the UTI in pregnant women in Zahedan based on health belief model (HBM) framework.  Methods: This was descriptive study conducted by a questionnaire based on HBM construct among 140 pregnant women in Zahedan in 2013. The data were analyzed usingSPSS16.0 software and statistical test as pearson correlation test, regression  Results:  finding showed that there was a low significant positive correlation between awareness, HBM constructs and UTI preventive behaviors. (p <0.05). Also self-efficacy had the greatest impact on the behavior which was statistically significant (β= 0.547). Conclusion: According to the results, the design of an educational program based on HBM, with an emphasis on the self-efficacy, can be effective in promoting preventive behaviors of UTI

World Addiction Medicine Reports: Formation of the International Society of Addiction Medicine (ISAM) Global Expert Network (ISAM- GEN) and Its Global Surveys

Addiction medicine is a dynamic field that encompasses clinical practice and research in the context of societal, economic, and cultural factors at the local, national, regional, and global levels. This field has evolved profoundly during the past decades in terms of scopes and activities with the contribution of addiction medicine scientists and professionals globally. The dynamic nature of drug addiction at the global level has resulted in a crucial need for developing an international collaborative network of addiction societies, treatment programs and experts to monitor emerging concerns at national, regional, and global levels. In this protocol, methodological details of running longitudinal surveys at national, regional, and global levels through the Global Expert Network of the International Society of Addiction Medicine (ISAM-GEN) are presented. The surveys will be developed by global experts in addiction medicine on treatment services, service coverage, comorbidities, treatment standards and barriers, emerging drug addictions and/or dynamic changes in treatment needs across the world. Survey participants in categories of (1) addiction societies/associations, (2) addiction treatment programs, (3) addiction experts/clinicians and (4) related stakeholders will respond to these longitudinal global surveys. The results will be analyzed and cross-examined with available data and peer-reviewed for publication

World Addiction Medicine Reports:formation of the International Society of Addiction Medicine (ISAM) Global Expert Network (ISAM-GEN) and Its global surveys

Addiction medicine is a dynamic field that encompasses clinical practice and research in the context of societal, economic, and cultural factors at the local, national, regional, and global levels. This field has evolved profoundly during the past decades in terms of scopes and activities with the contribution of addiction medicine scientists and professionals globally. The dynamic nature of drug addiction at the global level has resulted in a crucial need for developing an international collaborative network of addiction societies, treatment programs and experts to monitor emerging national, regional, and global concerns. This protocol paper presents methodological details of running longitudinal surveys at national, regional, and global levels through the Global Expert Network of the International Society of Addiction Medicine (ISAM-GEN). The initial formation of the network with a recruitment phase and a round of snowball sampling provided 354 experts from 78 countries across the globe. In addition, 43 national/regional addiction societies/associations are also included in the database. The surveys will be developed by global experts in addiction medicine on treatment services, service coverage, co-occurring disorders, treatment standards and barriers, emerging addictions and/or dynamic changes in treatment needs worldwide. Survey participants in categories of (1) addiction societies/associations, (2) addiction treatment programs, (3) addiction experts/clinicians and (4) related stakeholders will respond to these global longitudinal surveys. The results will be analyzed and cross-examined with available data and peer-reviewed for publication.</p

Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases and Risks, 1990-2022

The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) is a multinational collaborative research study with >10,000 collaborators around the world. GBD generates a time series of summary measures of health, including prevalence, cause-specific mortality (CSMR), years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) to provide a comprehensive view of health burden for a wide range of stakeholders including clinicians, public and private health systems, ministries of health, and other policymakers. These estimates are produced for 371 causes of death and 88 risk factors according to mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive hierarchies of health conditions and risks. The study is led by a principal investigator and governed by a study protocol, with oversight from a Scientific Council, and an Independent Advisory Committee.1 GBD is performed in compliance with Guidelines for Accurate and Transparent Health Estimates Reporting (GATHER).2 GBD uses de-identified data, and the waiver of informed consent was reviewed and approved by the University of Washington Institutional Review Board (study number 9060). This almanac presents results for 18 cardiovascular diseases (CVD) and the CVD burden attributed to 15 risk factors (including an aggregate grouping of dietary risks) by GBD region. A summary of methods follows. Additional information can be found online at https://ghdx.healthdata.org/record/ihme-data/cvd-1990-2022, including:Funding was provided by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the American College of Cardiology Foundation. The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose. The contents and views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official views of the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Government, or the affiliated institutions