Background: Mobile health interventions that utilize artificial intelligence may provide way for underserved populations to engage with healthcare. Purpose: Examine the policy considerations that must be deliberated when developing, regulating, implementing, and sustaining mHealth apps among historically underserved individuals. Methods: Reproductive Justice was used to investigate policy considerations for those with criminal legal system supervision who engage with mHealth apps. Three policy considerations resulted: 1) improving the legislative and regulatory landscape of digital technology, 2) enhancing comprehensive data protection legislation, 3) heightening privacy protections. Discussion: The need to bring awareness to policy protections on the local, institutional, state, federal, and global levels specific to mHealth apps among underserved groups with criminal legal supervision is required. Conclusion: These emerging advances in technology serve as an avenue for direct healthcare services to collaborate with other professions and organizations to implement ethical interventions that respect human rights and improve reproductive health equity.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019, commonly referred to as COVID-19, is responsible for one of the deadliest pandemics in human history. The direct, indirect and lasting repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic on individuals and public health, as well as health systems can still be observed, even today. In the midst of the initial chaos, the role of tobacco as a prognostic factor for unfavourable COVID-19 outcomes was largely neglected. As of 2023, numerous studies have confirmed that use of tobacco, a leading risk factor for cardiovascular and other diseases, is strongly associated with increased risks of severe COVID-19 complications (e.g., hospitalisation, ICU admission, need for mechanical ventilation, long COVID, etc.) and deaths from COVID-19. In addition, evidence suggests that COVID-19 directly affects multiple organs beyond the respiratory system, disproportionately impacting individuals with comorbidities. Notably, people living with cardiovascular disease are more prone to experiencing worse outcomes, as COVID-19 often inherently manifests as thrombotic cardiovascular complications. As such, the triad of tobacco, COVID-19 and cardiovascular disease constitutes a dangerous cocktail. The lockdowns and social distancing measures imposed by governments have also had adverse effects on our lifestyles (e.g., shifts in diets, physical activity, tobacco consumption patterns, etc.) and mental well-being, all of which affect cardiovascular health. In particular, vulnerable populations are especially susceptible to tobacco use, cardiovascular disease and the psychological fallout from the pandemic. Therefore, national pandemic responses need to consider health equity as well as the social determinants of health. The pandemic has also had catastrophic impacts on many health systems, bringing some to the brink of collapse. As a result, many health services, such as services for cardiovascular disease or tobacco cessation, were severely disrupted due to fears of transmission and redirection of resources for COVID-19 care. Unfortunately, the return to pre-pandemic levels of cardiovascular disease care activity has stagnated. Nevertheless, digital solutions, such as telemedicine and apps, have flourished, and may help reduce the gaps. Advancing tobacco control was especially challenging due to interference from the tobacco industry. The industry exploited lingering uncertainties to propagate misleading information on tobacco and COVID-19 in order to promote its products. Regrettably, the links between tobacco use and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection remain inconclusive. However, a robust body of evidence has, since then, demonstrated that tobacco use is associated with more severe COVID-19 illness and complications. Additionally, the tobacco industry also repeatedly attempted to forge partnerships with governments under the guise of corporate social responsibility. The implementation of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control could address many of the aforementioned challenges and alleviate the burden of tobacco, COVID-19, and cardiovascular disease. In particular, the implementation of Article 5.3 could protect public health policies from the vested interests of the industry. The world can learn from the COVID-19 pandemic to better prepare for future health emergencies of international concern. In light of the impact of tobacco on the COVID-19 pandemic, it is imperative that tobacco control remains a central component in pandemic preparedness and response plans.

Nicotine is universally recognized as the primary addictive substance fuelling the continued use of tobacco products, which are responsible for over 8 million deaths annually. In recent years, the popularity of newer recreational nicotine products has surged drastically in many countries, raising health and safety concerns. For decades, the tobacco industry has promoted the myth that nicotine is as harmless as caffeine. Nonetheless, evidence shows that nicotine is far from innocuous, even on its own. In fact, numerous studies have demonstrated that nicotine can harm multiple organs, including the respiratory and cardiovascular systems. Tobacco and recreational nicotine products are commercialized in various types and forms, delivering varying levels of nicotine along with other toxic compounds. These products deliver nicotine in profiles that can initiate and perpetuate addiction, especially in young populations. Notably, some electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) and heated tobacco products (HTP) can deliver concentrations of nicotine that are comparable to those of traditional cigarettes. Despite being regularly advertised as such, ENDS and HTP have demonstrated limited effectiveness as tobacco cessation aids in real-world settings. Furthermore, ENDS have also been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. In contrast, nicotine replacement therapies (NRT) are proven to be safe and effective medications for tobacco cessation. NRTs are designed to release nicotine in a slow and controlled manner, thereby minimizing the potential for abuse. Moreover, the long-term safety of NRTs has been extensively studied and documented. The vast majority of tobacco and nicotine products available in the market currently contain nicotine derived from tobacco leaves. However, advancements in the chemical synthesis of nicotine have introduced an economically viable alternative source. The tobacco industry has been exploiting synthetic nicotine to circumvent existing tobacco control laws and regulations. The emergence of newer tobacco and recreational nicotine products, along with synthetic nicotine, pose a tangible threat to established tobacco control policies. Nicotine regulations need to be responsive to address these evolving challenges. As such, governments should regulate all tobacco and non-medical nicotine products through a global, comprehensive, and consistent approach in order to safeguard tobacco control progress in past decades.

In the present systematic review, we summarize the feasibility, usability, efficacy, and effectiveness of mental health-related apps created by the Veterans Affairs (VA) or the Department of Defense (DoD). Twenty-two articles were identified, reporting on 8 of the 20 VA/DoD mental health self-management and treatment companion apps. Review inclusion criteria were studies that reported original data on the usability, acceptability, feasibility, efficacy, and effectiveness, or attitudes toward the app. We collected data from each article regarding type of study, sample size, participant population, follow-up period, measures/assessments, and summary of findings. The apps have been tested with patients seeking treatment, patients with elevated mental health symptoms, and clinicians. The strongest area of support for the apps is regarding evidence of their feasibility and acceptability. Research support for efficacy and effectiveness of the apps is scarce with exceptions for two apps (PTSD Coach, Virtual Hope Box). Until more evidence accumulates, clinicians should use their judgment and be careful not to overstate the potential benefits of the apps.

The under-representation of women in leadership in scientific fields presents a serious problem. Gender diversity is integral to innovation and productivity, and inequality leads to loss of gender talent in science including epidemiology. This policy brief summarizes some of the key dimensions and determinants contributing to gender-equity gaps in epidemiology and other scientific fields, relevant to developed countries where there is more published evidence. Women in scientific fields hold fewer positions on editorial boards, lack equal representation in speaking engagements at conferences, and are less likely to publish or receive top tier grant funding. Reasons for these inequities range from unconscious bias, biased promotion systems, and traditional norms in the division of family life and labor in our society leading to the attrition of women in academia. Addressing the problem of gender inequity, as a component of gender inequality, will provide an ethical basis to advance innovation. Data on gender equity in the field of epidemiology are sparse. We call on academic institutions, professional societies and associations, and editorial boards relevant to epidemiology (as well as other academic disciplines more broadly) to take meaningful action to build an evidence base as to the extent of gender inequities in epidemiologic research, teaching, policy, and practice. We outline some of the necessary steps required to achieve gender equity, such as career development and mentoring programs, institutional support, and programs to address bias.

This report is a product of the VA Evidence-based Synthesis Program. The purpose is to provide "timely and accurate syntheses of targeted healthcare topics …. to improve the health and healthcare of Veterans". The authors have made a comprehensive search and analysis of the literature and make recommendations to assist clinicians in dealing with veterans suffering from either traumatic brain injury (TBI) or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The report is timely and of great potential impact given the vigorous and lengthy debate among hyperbaric physicians and lay people determined to find an answer for the large numbers of veterans deeply affected with some combination of PTSD and post-concussion dysfunction. The authors lament the evidence on using hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) for TBI/PTSD has been "controversial, widely debated, and potentially confusing." Unfortunately, this report will not improve that situation. The report is as much a political document as it is evidence-based. That politics are involved is apparent from the outset with the statement "The ESP Coordinating Center is responding to a request from the Center for Compassionate Innovation (CCI)…" The report fails to further illuminate the situation than the many thousands of words already spent on summarising the evidence. Let me save you some time and get to the quick of this report. The authors (rightly) highlight the fact that uncontrolled case series and a randomised, controlled trial (RCT) without blinding or a sham control all suggest HBOT may be of benefit for these Veterans. Somewhat disappointingly, well-controlled, blinded RCTs using a sham exposure to 1.2 or 1.3 ATA breathing air fail to confirm any such benefit. While the conventional interpretation of these data is that there is no reliable evidence of an effect of HBOT, proponents have responded by postulating these control exposures are not 'sham' because they are clinically active. Any putative mechanism remains unknown and unproven outside the context of this clinical area. These exposures just happen to be about equipotent with true HBOT. With this accurate summary, the authors conclude that any effect of HBOT is as yet unclear. They suggest that in Veterans who have not responded to other therapeutic options, the use of HBOT is "reasonable". This conclusion allows for a similar recommendation for any unproven therapeutic option where there is no clearly effective treatment available and is, to this reviewer, unacceptable. While any putative mechanism for low-pressure air exposure owes more to magical thinking than physics, physiology or therapeutics, this is an argument the authors of this report seem to have accepted at some level. The proponents of HBOT have an obligation to both show the greater effectiveness of HBOT than a functional sham and to demonstrate a plausible mechanism. Until then, the strongest recommendation that should be made is that the 'sham' therapy can be used until the case is proven. It is not clear why the proponents of HBOT do not advocate this, given the 'efficacy' seems roughly equal with HBOT. Logic determines one cannot prove a negative. This reviewer agrees it is not possible to definitively prove trivial pressure exposures breathing air may have a comparable effectiveness in treating TBI/PTSD as true HBOT. Using the principle of Occam's razor it seems far more likely any apparent effectiveness is the result of a participation effect in both groups. In my view, the authors of this report have taken an easy option in allowing that HBOT use is reasonable. The tragedy is potentially the waste of time, money and hope this may bring to the very Veterans the authors are charged to serve. I have discussed this issue in more detail previously in the pages of this journal.

Developing a culture of safety is a core element of many efforts to improve patient safety and care quality. This systematic review identifies and assesses interventions used to promote safety culture or climate in acute care settings. The authors searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and EMBASE to identify relevant English-language studies published from January 2000 to October 2012. They selected studies that targeted health care workers practicing in inpatient settings and included data about change in patient safety culture or climate after a targeted intervention. Two raters independently screened 3679 abstracts (which yielded 33 eligible studies in 35 articles), extracted study data, and rated study quality and strength of evidence. Eight studies included executive walk rounds or interdisciplinary rounds; 8 evaluated multicomponent, unit-based interventions; and 20 included team training or communication initiatives. Twenty-nine studies reported some improvement in safety culture or patient outcomes, but measured outcomes were highly heterogeneous. Strength of evidence was low, and most studies were pre-post evaluations of low to moderate quality. Within these limits, evidence suggests that interventions can improve perceptions of safety culture and potentially reduce patient harm.

The social forces that affect individual health are powerful and yet poorly understood. For example, the health burden of asthma is especially large for residents of low-income, inner-city neighborhoods. At the same time, many inner-city residents face health challenges associated with high levels of violence in their communities. Recent work has linked exposure to community violence with worsening asthma symptoms in children, but the link has not been studied in adults. This Issue Brief summarizes a new study that tracks adults with moderate to severe asthma and explores the association between exposure to community violence and subsequent asthma-related emergency department (ED)visits and hospitalizations.

Questions have been raised about whether and how health care quality improvement (QI) initiatives ought to be reviewed to address possible ethical issues associated with them. These questions have focused primarily on whether some QI initiatives meet the regulatory criteria for human subject research and should therefore be regulated and reviewed as such. Based on surveys of health care system professionals conducting QI initiatives and hospital CEOs, this issue brief finds that QI initiatives are routinely reviewed by a variety of internal mechanisms prior to implementation, although rarely through an institutional review board or another independent body charged specifically with ethical oversight of QI initiatives. Further research, the authors say, is needed to achieve a better understanding of how review mechanisms for QI initiatives are structured, including information on who reviews these activities, how they are reviewed, and whether such processes include an ethical assessment of the proposed QI initiative.

Efforts to boost productivity in hospital wards will fail unless acute nurses and other key staff are involved from the beginning, suggests an RCN policy briefing.

Medicare payment disproportionately impacts rural physicians compared to urban. For example, 51% of rural physicians, compared to 44% of urban physicians, receive at least 38% of their payments from Medicare.1 Thus, the Medicare physician payment system is of significant rural interest. In this policy brief, we present the effects of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act (MMA) of 2003 on physician payment rates in rural areas. Specifically, we examine the impact of creating a floor of 1.00 in the geographic practice cost index (GPCI) for work expense. We also show the effects of the Medicare incentive payment (MIP) for providing services in shortage areas and of the bonus for practicing in a physician scarcity area. Our principal findings are the following: (1) Increases to the GPCI for work expense accounted for a substantial percentage of the two-year increases in total payment to physicians in rural payment areas. (2) Increases in the conversion factor (CF) (base payment) accounted for most of the increases in total payment in all but 6 of the 89 Medicare payment localities; in those 6 areas, the dominant factor was GPCI adjustment. (3) Bonus payments are a more direct means of targeting increased payments to physicians in specific areas than is a general increase in one part of the payment formula.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the evaluative research literature on the costs, quality and effectiveness of different locations of care for older patients. METHODS: A systematic review of evaluative research from 1988 using CRD4 guidelines. Twenty-five databases were searched, using processes developed specially for this review. Library OPACS, the Internet and research registers were also searched for relevant material. The final stage of the review was confined to randomised and pseudorandomised trials. Studies were selected for review by pairs of researchers working independently who then met to reach a decision. Analysis was predominantly descriptive; simple pooled odds ratios were used to explore some outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty-four papers from 45 trials were included. Firm conclusions were difficult to draw, except in relation to some outcomes for stroke units, early discharge schemes and geriatric assessment units. Few trials in this area have adequately addressed issues of patients' quality of life and costs to health services, social care providers, patients and their families. CONCLUSIONS: Despite considerable recent development of different forms of care for older patients, evidence about effectiveness and costs is weak. However, evidence is also weak for longer-standing care models. A substantial service evaluation agenda emerges from this review. This study also raises questions about the usefulness of systematic review techniques in the area of service delivery and organisation. [References: 60]

CONTEXT:Inteprofessional collaboration (IPC) between biomedically trained doctors (BMD) and traditional, complementary and alternative medicine practitioners (TCAMP) is an essential element in the development of successful integrative healthcare (IHC) services. This systematic review aims to identify organizational strategies that would facilitate this process.METHODS:We searched 4 international databases for qualitative studies on the theme of BMD-TCAMP IPC, supplemented with a purposive search of 31 health services and TCAM journals. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed using published checklist. Results of each included study were synthesized using a framework approach, with reference to the Structuration Model of Collaboration.FINDINGS:Thirty-seven studies of acceptable quality were included. The main driver for developing integrative healthcare was the demand for holistic care from patients. Integration can best be led by those trained in both paradigms. Bridge-building activities, positive promotion of partnership and co-location of practices are also beneficial for creating bonding between team members. In order to empower the participation of TCAMP, the perceived power differentials need to be reduced. Also, resources should be committed to supporting team building, collaborative initiatives and greater patient access. Leadership and funding from central authorities are needed to promote the use of condition-specific referral protocols and shared electronic health records. More mature IHC programs usually formalize their evaluation process around outcomes that are recognized both by BMD and TCAMP.CONCLUSIONS:The major themes emerging from our review suggest that successful collaborative relationships between BMD and TCAMP are similar to those between other health professionals, and interventions which improve the effectiveness of joint working in other healthcare teams with may well be transferable to promote better partnership between the paradigms. However, striking a balance between the different practices and preserving the epistemological stance of TCAM will remain the greatest challenge in successful integration.

OBJECTIVE:The objective of this systematic review was to identify the best available evidence for the effectiveness of university-based interprofessional education for health students.BACKGROUND:Currently, most health professional education is delivered in a traditional, discipline specific way. This approach is limited in its ability to equip graduates with the necessary knowledge, skills and attitudes for effective interprofessional collaboration and for working as part of a complex health care team. Interprofessional education is widely seen as a way to improve communication between health professionals, ultimately leading to improved patient outcomes.INCLUSION CRITERIA:The review included all randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies in which two or more undergraduate or post-graduate health professional groups are engaged in interprofessional education.REVIEW METHODS:A three-stage comprehensive search of ten electronic databases as well as grey literature was conducted. Two independent reviewers assessed each paper prior to inclusion using the standardised critical appraisal instruments for evidence of effectiveness developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute.RESULTS:Nine published studies consisting of three randomised controlled trials, five controlled before and after studies and one controlled longitudinal study were included in the review.CONCLUSION:Student's attitudes and perceptions towards interprofessional collaboration and clinical decision-making can be potentially enhanced through interprofessional education. However, the evidence for using interprofessional education to teach communication skills and clinical skills is inconclusive and requires further investigation.IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH:Future randomised controlled studies explicitly focused on interprofessional education with rigorous randomisation procedures, allocation concealment, larger sample sizes, and control groups, would improve the evidence base for interprofessional education.

OBJECTIVE: Financial incentives are effective in encouraging healthy behaviours, yet concerns about acceptability remain. We conducted a systematic review exploring acceptability of financial incentives for encouraging healthy behaviours. METHOD: Database, reference, and citation searches were conducted from the earliest available date to October 2014, to identify empirical studies and scholarly writing that: had an English language title, were published in a peer-reviewed journal, and explored acceptability of financial incentives for health behaviours in members of the public, potential recipients, potential practitioners or policy makers. Data was analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Eighty one papers were included: 59 pieces of scholarly writing and 22 empirical studies, primarily exploring acceptability to the public. Five themes were identified: fair exchange, design and delivery, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, recipients, and impact on individuals and wider society. Although there was consensus that if financial incentives are effective and cost effective they are likely to be considered acceptable, a number of other factors also influenced acceptability. CONCLUSION: Financial incentives tend to be acceptable to the public when they are effective and cost-effective. Programmes that benefit recipients and wider society; are considered fair; and are delivered to individuals deemed appropriate are likely to be considered more acceptable

Evidence for the use of structured education in diabetes management is accumulating and has shown positive influence in the management of Type-2 diabetes. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of structured education on glucose control and hypoglycaemia in the management of Type-2 diabetes. METHODS: A systematic review was done using Medline via Ovid and EMBASE databases of published English literature between 1980 and 2014. Included studies were randomized control trials that assessed the impact of structured education on glucose control and hypoglycaemia. RESULTS: Out of the 12,086 full text articles were identified, 36 full text articles were finally considered for this review after applying both inclusion and exclusion criteria, of which 34 were exclusively on the effect of structured diabetes education on glucose control whilst 2 were studies on the effects of structured diabetes education on glucose control and hypoglycaemia. Majority of the studies included a predominant Caucasian population. There was heterogeneity in the included studies such as intervention methods and intensity as well as follow up periods. Group based education was preferred over individual education by most studies. Overall, most of the studies showed a significant positive effect on glycaemic control compared with control groups. One study showed a significant impact of structured education on hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSION: Structured education has positive impact on glucose control and hypoglycaemia in Type-2 diabetes and must be incorporated in routine care. FUNDING: The study was funded by the authors.

OBJECTIVE: To compare models of rehabilitation services for people with mental and/or physical disability in order to determine optimal models for therapy and interventions in low- to middle-income countries. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, Business Source Premier, HINARI, CEBHA and PubMed. STUDY SELECTION: Systematic reviews, randomized control trials and observational studies comparing >2 models of rehabilitation care in any language. Date extraction: Standardized forms were used. Methodological quality was assessed using AMSTAR and quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-four systematic reviews which included 578 studies and 202,307 participants were selected. In addition, four primary studies were included to complement the gaps in the systematic reviews. The studies were all done at various countries. Moderate- to high-quality evidence supports the following models of rehabilitation services: psychological intervention in primary care settings for people with major depression, admission into an inpatient, multidisciplinary, specialized rehabilitation unit for those with recent onset of a severe disabling condition; outpatient rehabilitation with multidisciplinary care in the community, hospital or home is recommended for less severe conditions; However, a model of rehabilitation service that includes early discharge is not recommended for elderly patients with severe stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hip fracture and total joints. CONCLUSION: Models of rehabilitation care in inpatient, multidisciplinary and specialized rehabilitation units are recommended for the treatment of severe conditions with recent onset, as they reduce mortality and the need for institutionalized care, especially among elderly patients, stroke patients, or those with chronic back pain. Results are expected to be generalizable for brain/spinal cord injury and complex fractures.

Background The number of caesarean sections (CS) is increasing globally, and repeat CS after a previous CS is a significant contributor to the overall CS rate. Vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) can be seen as a real and viable option for most women with previous CS. To achieve success, however, women need the support of their clinicians (obstetricians and midwives). The aim of this study was to evaluate clinician-centred interventions designed to increase the rate of VBAC. Methods The bibliographic databases of The Cochrane Library, PubMed, PsychINFO and CINAHL were searched for randomised controlled trials, including cluster randomised trials that evaluated the effectiveness of any intervention targeted directly at clinicians aimed at increasing VBAC rates. Included studies were appraised independently by two reviewers. Data were extracted independently by three reviewers. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the quality assessment tool, `Effective Public Health Practice Project inverted question mark. The primary outcome measure was VBAC rates.Results238 citations were screened, 255 were excluded by title and abstract. 11 full-text papers were reviewed; eight were excluded, resulting in three included papers. One study evaluated the effectiveness of antepartum x-ray pelvimetry (XRP) in 306 women with one previous CS. One study evaluated the effects of external peer review on CS birth in 45 hospitals, and the third evaluated opinion leader education and audit and feedback in 16 hospitals. The use of external peer review, audit and feedback had no significant effect on VBAC rates. An educational strategy delivered by an opinion leader significantly increased VBAC rates. The use of XRP significantly increased CS rates. Conclusions This systematic review indicates that few studies have evaluated the effects of clinician-centred interventions on VBAC rates, and interventions are of varying types which limited the ability to meta-analyse data. A further limitation is that the included studies were performed during the late 1980s-1990s. An opinion leader educational strategy confers benefit for increasing VBAC rates. This strategy should be further studied in different maternity care settings and with professionals other than physicians only.

Abstract Objectives: The objective of this review is to summarize and critically appraise existing evidence on the use of chart stimulated recall (CSR) and case-based discussion (CBD) as an assessment tool for medical trainees. Methods: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Educational Resources Information Centre (ERIC), Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for original articles on the use of CSR or CBD as an assessment method for trainees in all medical specialties. Results: Four qualitative and three observational non-comparative studies were eligible for this review. The number of patient-chart encounters needed to achieve sufficient reliability varied across studies. None of the included studies evaluated the content validity of the tool. Both trainees and assessors expressed high level of satisfaction with the tool; however, inadequate training, different interpretation of the scoring scales and skills needed to give feedback were addressed as limitations for conducting the assessment. Conclusion: There is still no compelling evidence for the use of patient's chart to evaluate medical trainees in the workplace. A body of evidence that is valid, reliable, and documents the educational effect in support of the use of patients' charts to assess medical trainees is needed