Customary Sources of International Humanitarian Law, Geneva Conventions and their Relationship with the Second Additional Protocol of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 Relating to the Protection of Victims in the Non- International Armed Conflicts

This paper will address the importance of customary humanitarian law as a source of international humanitarian law which is one of the main pillars in the protection of human rights and freedoms during the war. The focus of the paper is the importance of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the second additional protocol dealing with the protection of victims during non-international armed conflicts. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the actual role of the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II in providing legal protection to individuals in non-international armed conflicts. Article 3, is a common Article for all the Geneva Conventions of 1949, which aims to assist and serve as a mandatory norm in non-international armed conflicts. On the other hand, this Article is "assisted" by the second additional protocol which provides slightly more explanations separately from these conventions, regarding the protection of victims during armed conflicts of a non-international character. We are witnessing that the world is evolving more and more every day and armed conflicts are becoming more and more frequent due to different interests that certain social groups have. In this regard, it is necessary to draft more detailed norms with binding force for the parties to the conflict, in order to reduce or avoid consequences on people. The question raised in this paper is: why should the Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions be binding and enforceable along with the four 1949 Conventions? In this paper, the case of Kosovo will be addressed. In this paper are used the analysis, comparison, historical methods of research

Do health education initiatives assist socioeconomically disadvantaged populations? : a systematic review and meta-analyses

Background: Health education interventions are considered critical for the prevention and management of conditions of public health concern. Although the burden of these conditions is often greatest in socio-economically disadvantaged populations, the effectiveness of interventions that target these groups is unknown. We aimed to identify and synthesize evidence of the effectiveness of health-related educational interventions in adult disadvantaged populations. Methods: We pre-registered the study on Open Science Framework https://osf.io/ek5yg/. We searched Medline, Embase, Emcare, and the Cochrane Register from inception to 5/04/2022 to identify studies evaluating the effectiveness of health-related educational interventions delivered to adults in socio-economically disadvantaged populations. Our primary outcome was health related behaviour and our secondary outcome was a relevant biomarker. Two reviewers screened studies, extracted data and evaluated risk of bias. Our synthesis strategy involved random-effects meta-analyses and vote-counting. Results: We identified 8618 unique records, 96 met our criteria for inclusion – involving more than 57,000 participants from 22 countries. All studies had high or unclear risk of bias. For our primary outcome of behaviour, meta-analyses found a standardised mean effect of education on physical activity of 0.05 (95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.09–0.19), (5 studies, n = 1330) and on cancer screening of 0.29 (95% CI = 0.05–0.52), (5 studies, n = 2388). Considerable statistical heterogeneity was present. Sixty-seven of 81 studies with behavioural outcomes had point estimates favouring the intervention (83% (95% CI = 73%-90%), p < 0.001); 21 of 28 studies with biomarker outcomes showed benefit (75% (95%CI = 56%-88%), p = 0.002). When effectiveness was determined based on conclusions in the included studies, 47% of interventions were effective on behavioural outcomes, and 27% on biomarkers. Conclusions: Evidence does not demonstrate consistent, positive impacts of educational interventions on health behaviours or biomarkers in socio-economically disadvantaged populations. Continued investment in targeted approaches, coinciding with development of greater understanding of factors determining successful implementation and evaluation, are important to reduce inequalities in health

Diagnosing low back pain in an evidence-based way: How accurate are we?

Back pain is the leading cause of disability globally with 818,000 disability-adjusted life 51 years estimated to be lost annually due to work-related Low Back Pain (LBP) [1].&nbsp;</p