Anxiety among Adolescent Students and its Association with Socio Demographic Variables in a Rural Block of Haryana

Background: Anxiety is one of the most common psychological disorders in school-aged children and adolescents worldwide. Anxiety is associated with substantial negative effects on children’s social, emotional and academic success.Objectives: To find out the prevalence of anxiety among adolescent students and its association with sociodemographic factors in rural block Beri.Methods: It was a cross sectional study taking the sample size of 600 (300 males and 300 females) studying in class 8th to 12th. A pre-designed, pre-tested tool SCL 90 R containing 90 items was used to screen anxiety in these students. Anxiety is one of the psychiatric morbidities screened by this tool. Cut off point of estimated raw score of 1 was used to label as anxiety.Results: It was observed that nearly 18.5% adolescents suffered from anxiety. Anxiety was highest in 17-19 years age group (30.4%) followed by mid adolescence phase (13-16 years). Anxiety was maximum in 10th and 12th standard students which were 19.3% and 24% respectively. It was significantly high among females (23.7%) than males (13.7%). Anxiety was maximum in upper and lower socio-economic class of students with 24.1% and 22.3% respectively. It was more among students whose mothers were unemployed (19.5%) than those whose mothers were employed (14.6%).Conclusion: More than one – third (35%) of study subjects who were apparently healthy suffered from unnoticed anxiety. Appropriate counseling through school-based screening programme is the urgent need of the hour

Prevalence of stunting among under-five children in refugee and internally displaced communities: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundA pooled estimate of stunting prevalence in refugee and internally displaced under-five children can help quantify the problem and focus on the nutritional needs of these marginalized groups. We aimed to assess the pooled prevalence of stunting in refugees and internally displaced under-five children from different parts of the globe.MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, seven databases (Cochrane, EBSCOHost, EMBASE, ProQuest, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) along with “preprint servers” were searched systematically from the earliest available date to 14 February 2023. Refugee and internally displaced (IDP) under-five children were included, and study quality was assessed using “National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)” tools.ResultsA total of 776 abstracts (PubMed = 208, Scopus = 192, Cochrane = 1, Web of Science = 27, Embase = 8, EBSCOHost = 123, ProQuest = 5, Google Scholar = 209, and Preprints = 3) were retrieved, duplicates removed, and screened, among which 30 studies were found eligible for qualitative and quantitative synthesis. The pooled prevalence of stunting was 26% [95% confidence interval (CI): 21–31]. Heterogeneity was high (I2 = 99%, p < 0.01). A subgroup analysis of the type of study subjects revealed a pooled stunting prevalence of 37% (95% CI: 23–53) in internally displaced populations and 22% (95% CI: 18–28) among refugee children. Based on geographical distribution, the stunting was 32% (95% CI: 24–40) in the African region, 34% (95% CI: 24–46) in the South-East Asian region, and 14% (95% CI: 11–19) in Eastern Mediterranean region.ConclusionThe stunting rate is more in the internally displaced population than the refugee population and more in the South-East Asian and African regions. Our recommendation is to conduct further research to evaluate the determinants of undernutrition among under-five children of refugees and internally displaced populations from different regions so that international organizations and responsible stakeholders of that region can take effective remedial actions.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=387156, PROSPERO [CRD42023387156]

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome